Exposing The 3 Salaat Theory
-
Peace upon all,
I have been watching this 'debate' quit some time. And still i haven't seen convincing thoughts on both sides. As the debate on 1778 is a bit useless, as it says to salaat from sun up to sun down, it doesn't matter if you believe it is from the zenith or to the going down of the sun beyond the horizon, as it is not logical it refers to prayer, as it directly says to salaat all that time, so it can't refer to 3 times as it doesn't distuingish 3 times, but says do salaatd between sun up to sun down without any stops between, it says to salaat between those sun points without any stops. So to believe this verse refers to contact-prayer is in my eyes not logical. One important meaning of salaat is ignorant with these debates, that salaat also means 'following closely' as in following the Quran, which by itself says following the laws of the Quran=estabilish the laws in your surroundings.
When we approach this use of salaat in 1778 it becomes more logical, as it then clearly says that we must follow the Quran/create the Divine system from sun up to sun down constantly. But this is my view, it is of course gonna be ridiculed, and we know by who .
Al-Khidr, i read your article this afternoon and i saw you still haven't corrected your mistake which arnoldyasin pointed out for you, about the 7 times of the nubians. You said that they performed 7 and 2 were optional, which is wrong as the author clearly doesn't say this at all. He says that the nubians performed 7 times, and the followers of muhammed performed 5 with 2 extra optional. So to say the nubians prayed 7 with 2 optional is wrong. I recommend you correct this
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=6028.msg93214#msg93214
Also the 5 pillars is in my eyes a non-quranic label, and so to say this islam is a nutshell is wrong, as the most important part of the message of the quran, which is to defend human-rights should be after the shahada, this is why i believe the 5 pillars are a wrong label of islam in a nutshell.
As for youre articles Al-khidr, even though you have a good approach to it all. Your personal attacks to people show your are not a mature person. I don't say you have to be nice and send them flowers in your debate, but you go to the other extreme and judge people fake muslim and what all, while only God may do that. Your points would be taken much more serious if you learn to keep the personal comments out of your discussions. This is not professional, and it is non-quranic behaviour, as it resembles arrogance, even though this was not your purpose. The debate on the other forum you showed with wakas, had one interresting comment which indeed was your articles in a 'nutshell'
Salaam all,
Since I am not a Qur'an aloner, I did not feel a need to read the article. However, since you asked I read it. I would say that his strongest point is how he understood "Lidulooki Ashamsi Ila Ghasaqi Allayli" as the period of time between noon and night rather than specific time of prayer. I agree wholeheartedly with that understanding. However, there are several weaknesses in the article, at least to my taste
1- He attacks his opponents and not their ideas.
2- He ridicules others including Sunnis and what so ever.
3- He jumps around a lot. It would have been more helpful to move on in a logical manner rather than stopping every now and then and responding to the others. He could have written an article that is well circumscribed and then ended with a rebuttal to the other opinions.
4- While claiming to be Qur'an aloner, he jumped to code 19 as his proof. However, the code 19 has certain disputes about it.
5- While claiming to be a refuser of the hadeeth because they are "corrupted", he jumps and brings evidence from the Nubian culture. Now, this evidence has to be sketchy at best and with many conclusions that may not be supported by facts of archeological finds and so forth. I find this stance very hypocritical. If one wants to talk Qur'an alone, then they should leave out all things that are outside the Qur'an, including the Nubians.
6- Other Qur'an aloners will still have linguistic tools to rebut him, and in this lies the biggest problem of the Qur'an alone movement, you nearly cannot prove nor disprove a lot, especially when it comes to Salat.Take care and have a great day
Hussein
I recommend you to keep the personal comments out of your debates, as this is not about your feelings. The truth doesn't need your personal comments. I hope in time you will learn that.
Peace to all
-
As Salaamu Alaykum
You have said this
?So to believe this verse refers to contact-prayer is in my eyes not logical. One important meaning of salaat is ignorant with these debates, that salaat also means 'following closely' as in following the Quran, which by itself says following the laws of the Quran=estabilish the laws in your surroundings.?
You said, ?Salaat also means ?following closely? as in following the Qur?an, which by itself says following the laws of the Qur?an=establish the laws in your surroundings?. That?s fine if you want to bring that up, but I was addressing the common meaning and practice of Salaat, like praying 5 times a day, reciting the Faatihah etc.
You have said this
?Al-Khidr, i read your article this afternoon and i saw you still haven't corrected your mistake which arnoldyasin pointed out for you, about the 7 times of the nubians.?
I?m glad you brought that up. For your understanding, I am want to cross reference some other resources and when I make a major revision, thus I will know how to address that issue. But one thing is a fact 5 or 7 Salaat is definitely not 3.
You have said this
?When we approach this use of salaat in 1778 it becomes more logical, as it then clearly says that we must follow the Quran/create the Divine system from sun up to sun down constantly. But this is my view, it is of course gonna be ridiculed, and we know by who?
If I am not mistaken it sounds like you are saying that this verse 1778 means to follow Qur?aan/create the Divine system from sun up to sun down constantly. I want to know where are you getting this part from ?to follow Qur?aan?? I would like to leave you with this link addressing 1778 and more
http//www.freewebs.com/suprememathematics/grabbingforstraws.htm
Also the debate that Wakas had on 1778 with Zee and hlatif clearly proved that it represented the ranges of Salaat that I highlighted in that link
We have another die hard
?Also the 5 pillars is in my eyes a non-quranic label, and so to say this islam is a nutshell is wrong, as the most important part of the message of the quran, which is to defend human-rights should be after the shahada, this is why i believe the 5 pillars are a wrong label of islam in a nutshell.?
What you are presenting here are your opinions and that is cool and I have no problems with that but until you can provide a verse from Al Qur?aan to prove that using the 5 Pillars Of Faith to explain Islaam in a nutshell is a violation of Al Qur?aan, then you do not have an argument to stand on. You just have your opinion and every one is entitled to their opinion. However I?m not really moved by dogmatic opinions that stem from sectarian notions.
Your opinion again about my approach is only your opinion. However there are many who have rallied and supported my strong stand against falsehood. I call a spade a spade and can back it up and I can careless if you like it or not. Some may use that ask the smoke screen. But again you may not like it but the real question is can you refute my arguments in my article, that the real question.
One of the quotes that you highlighted in your post, which I?m sure you stand by
?While claiming to be a refuser of the hadeeth because they are "corrupted", he jumps and brings evidence from the Nubian culture. Now, this evidence has to be sketchy at best and with many conclusions that may not be supported by facts of archeological finds and so forth. I find this stance very hypocritical. If one wants to talk Qur'an alone, then they should leave out all things that are outside the Qur'an, including the Nubians.?
Another thing I do not know why the proponents of hadiyth always insinuate that a person who follow Qur?aan alone should not read and examine information out side the Qur?aan such as the Nubian History and more. That right there does not make any sense. We will never limit our growth to knowledge to only reading Al Qur?aan. Allah says His signs are also in the Universe. The whole world is here for us to study and examine. That is totally different from some Sunni who not just reads hadiyth but apply hadiyth as part of the Deen when Allah clearly has condemned hadiyth by name. The negative thoughts that you hold with me going into African History is only a smoke screen that many racist holds who hate the fact of one tapping into the that knowledge base but we are not moved by that. For some reason the world has swept (African History/The African Presence and contributions to the world) under the carpet. That element of my article was well received by many and we can care less about what you feel about that. Racism exist in Christianity and in Islaam (even though the Qur?aan do not support racism). But I am a free man and a free Muslim and I am not the one who submits to ignorant suggestions of leaving information like that out when it was very much practical. That history predates hadiyth and many racist in Islaam re-wrote the history of Islaam and wrote the Black man?s role out of it and white-washed everything. This even went to the point of White Arab Supremist writing hadiyth that state Muhammad is white. Insha Allah I will deal with those false satanic innovations in the future to come to expose the racism and the false hadiyth portraying Muhammad as a white man.
Brain1, you wrote an emotional post but the facts remain is this, you nor any body has refuted the arguments that Allah authorized 5 Salaat in Al Qur?aan. That?s the real issue at hand and what you feel about my approach is just your bias opinion, which has been concluded here.
Brain1 which side do you stand on 5 or 3 Salaat?
Salaam
Peace upon all,
I have been watching this 'debate' quit some time. And still i haven't seen convincing thoughts on both sides. As the debate on 1778 is a bit useless, as it says to salaat from sun up to sun down, it doesn't matter if you believe it is from the zenith or to the going down of the sun beyond the horizon, as it is not logical it refers to prayer, as it directly says to salaat all that time, so it can't refer to 3 times as it doesn't distuingish 3 times, but says do salaatd between sun up to sun down without any stops between, it says to salaat between those sun points without any stops. So to believe this verse refers to contact-prayer is in my eyes not logical. One important meaning of salaat is ignorant with these debates, that salaat also means 'following closely' as in following the Quran, which by itself says following the laws of the Quran=estabilish the laws in your surroundings.
When we approach this use of salaat in 1778 it becomes more logical, as it then clearly says that we must follow the Quran/create the Divine system from sun up to sun down constantly. But this is my view, it is of course gonna be ridiculed, and we know by who ).
Al-Khidr, i read your article this afternoon and i saw you still haven't corrected your mistake which arnoldyasin pointed out for you, about the 7 times of the nubians. You said that they performed 7 and 2 were optional, which is wrong as the author clearly doesn't say this at all. He says that the nubians performed 7 times, and the followers of muhammed performed 5 with 2 extra optional. So to say the nubians prayed 7 with 2 optional is wrong. I recommend you correct this
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=6028.msg93214#msg93214
Also the 5 pillars is in my eyes a non-quranic label, and so to say this islam is a nutshell is wrong, as the most important part of the message of the quran, which is to defend human-rights should be after the shahada, this is why i believe the 5 pillars are a wrong label of islam in a nutshell.
As for youre articles Al-khidr, even though you have a good approach to it all. Your personal attacks to people show your are not a mature person. I don't say you have to be nice and send them flowers in your debate, but you go to the other extreme and judge people fake muslim and what all, while only God may do that. Your points would be taken much more serious if you learn to keep the personal comments out of your discussions. This is not professional, and it is non-quranic behaviour, as it resembles arrogance, even though this was not your purpose. The debate on the other forum you showed with wakas, had one interresting comment which indeed was your articles in a 'nutshell'
Salaam all,
Since I am not a Qur'an aloner, I did not feel a need to read the article. However, since you asked I read it. I would say that his strongest point is how he understood "Lidulooki Ashamsi Ila Ghasaqi Allayli" as the period of time between noon and night rather than specific time of prayer. I agree wholeheartedly with that understanding. However, there are several weaknesses in the article, at least to my taste
1- He attacks his opponents and not their ideas.
2- He ridicules others including Sunnis and what so ever.
3- He jumps around a lot. It would have been more helpful to move on in a logical manner rather than stopping every now and then and responding to the others. He could have written an article that is well circumscribed and then ended with a rebuttal to the other opinions.
4- While claiming to be Qur'an aloner, he jumped to code 19 as his proof. However, the code 19 has certain disputes about it.
5- While claiming to be a refuser of the hadeeth because they are "corrupted", he jumps and brings evidence from the Nubian culture. Now, this evidence has to be sketchy at best and with many conclusions that may not be supported by facts of archeological finds and so forth. I find this stance very hypocritical. If one wants to talk Qur'an alone, then they should leave out all things that are outside the Qur'an, including the Nubians.
6- Other Qur'an aloners will still have linguistic tools to rebut him, and in this lies the biggest problem of the Qur'an alone movement, you nearly cannot prove nor disprove a lot, especially when it comes to Salat.Take care and have a great day
Hussein
I recommend you to keep the personal comments out of your debates, as this is not about your feelings. The truth doesn't need your personal comments. I hope in time you will learn that.
Peace to all
-
Peace,
My post is full of emotion? You are blind, so blind. Your articles are so full with emotions, you have to swim through them before you reach any Quranic arguments.
I hope you correct your claim there as the author clearly doesn't mention 7 with 2 optional. And as others has pointed out, 7 is also not 5. To say it is more close to 7 is ignorant. When will your eyes open and see that the nubians are not any use in the times-debate. It is not a crime to study history. But you include your struggle for the true history of Africa ,which has indeed been mistreated, in an article which has nothing to do with it.
I see by your response you still need to grow up. You say i call a spade a spade, i say, let that spade be spade. the truth doesn't need your quotes. But like i said, it will take time.
As for 3 or 5, it is not of your business. You act like Bush, you are with us or against us....
Peace bro, i hope you will learn in time
-
Al Khidr,
Another thing when you said the debate ended in stalemate that is something that you conjured up.
Just like you conjured up that I got "annhilated"?
I reiterate for other forum members
I would also recommend forum members to read it so they can see your level of judgement by using "annhilated". I believe this will serve as a reminder for the future.
peace.
-
Salaam
There are people out here who manipulate Allah's words and those people do not need to be patted on the back.
some people complain that they do not like Khidr's style or approach but what I do not see is those same people who believe in 3 Salaat refuting brother Al Khidr's research. I think that point within itself says a lot.
on a personal note I see the wisdom behind men like Al Khidr who stretegicaly break down the opponent and also the doctrine they uphold. I have seen a lot of great scholars use the same strategy or technique and there is nothing wrong with it. Some people just need to get over it and focus on refuting his research if they can and not worry about his approach.
Brother Al Khidr you have done a great job and there are a lot of people who respect your approach. I know a lot of people who have seen your research proving that there is 5 Salaat and they all loved it and also how you came your opponents. If some people don't like it then its a personal problem.
And I also reviewed the debate Wakas had and your right brother Al Khidr he got annhilated.
-
As Salaamu Alaykum brain1
You are so hypocritical because you complain about my approach with my opponents and try to indicate that I should not say this or that and look at your words here
?You are blind, so blind?
Look at the selection of words that you used; look at your language. How can I respect your comments about me in my approach to my opponents when you do not lead by example. At least I am not hypocritical, thus people do respect directness and consistency. I will not complain to some one?s approach and how they use language and then turn around and use the same level of language. That?s why I keep doing what I am doing. Some people just hide behind the emotions and say they do not like my approach when in actuality the real reason is because the foundation of their belief was skillfully removed.
You miss understood what I meant when I said that I want to cross reference with some sources. Note the sources was plural and it was not just his book. But again what we do not see is 3 Salaat at all and that is the real point.
Brain1 (or no brainer) said
?You act like Bush, you are with us or against us....?
Now that right there is childish. I laughed to see you equate me with Bush. There are people who will say just about anything to avoid the real question at hand. Did Allah authorize 5 or 3 Salaat. Well I presented my research, if you stand on the 3 Salaat, then refute my arguments because I can care less about the image or approach that you think I should follow. And also about this statement of yours, ?You act like Bush, you are with us or against us?? remember ?no brainer?, we did not pick this fight; We did not start this issue first. It was the proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? who started this by attacking the 5 Salaat positon. We had to endure their attacks, their articles, their websites, their forums attacking the 5 Salaat position, so we Muslims got tired of it and we done something about it. We are not the aggressors here but now that we have stood up the proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? they are acquiescing and getting emotional and crying saying that I or we should not say these things. Its funny to see now the tides are on the other side. So on this issue we are standing up and we are coming strong. I have mentioned on my website where my rebuttal ?Exposing The 3 Salaat? exist that we are ready for battle. It is the duty of Muslims to represent and spread True or Pure Islaam. And we do not exercise control and try to tell someone how they should speak or deliver truth or approach matters because truth is going to dominate regardless and that is how you handle or settle your differences. We believe in using the sword of intellect, which is symbolic for the mind to resolve our differences.
I have asked you what position do you stand on 5 or 3 Salaat and this is what you have said
?As for 3 or 5, it is not of your business?
Now if any one wants to raise the question about someone being childish or immature or operating on emotions, you need to develop self-awareness. Why would you say ?it is not your business?, have your emotion raised to the point to where you are taking this personal and especially when you personally do not know me or know who I am. We all are hear for the truth and you respond by saying ?it is not your business? and at the same time you are trying to tell me what a scholar should be.
One thing I am hearing is how people are getting tired of people responding with personal opinions and not really dissecting the arguments at hand and presenting substance to the subject matter. The real issue is not my approach or style but the real issue at hand is can you refute my research that is if you stand on the 3 Salaat position. Us Muslims who follow 5 Salaat had to endure all the attacks and literature writing by proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? and now one of the children of the slaves deciding to put an end to it and I came hard and now they (the proponents of the 3 Salaat Theory) are licking their wombs and crying but not dealing with the subject matter head on. No one is moved by emotions, we all are moved by facts and so far the proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? have not and cannot bring forth any sound evidence from Al Qur?aan. This is a triumph for TRUTH and a triumph for the proponents who believe in Pure Islaam and not sectarian notions such as the ?3 Salaat Theory?. Can anyone in here tell me who invented this ?3 Salaat Theory? because it was not the shia, some of them not all observe 5 Salaat in three periods, so they still observe 5 Salaat and not 3.
Salaam
-
Salaam Alaikum no_shirk ..
you've got great perception that enables you to catch exactly what people wanna hide ;D
and that analogy of bush was superb!
-
As Salaamu Alaykum to all brothers and sisters
I'm finally back. Below is the link to my rebuttal to Tanvweer post in response to my rebuttal "Exposing The 3 Salaat Theory"
http//www.freewebs.com/suprememathematics/grabbingforstraws.htm
Salaam
Wa'Salaam brother al-Khidr
Again, this link is brilliant. I've saved it for sending it around to everyone in my mailing list, like I did with the previous one. I am sure it will be just as greatly appreciated by them as your original article on this topic.The 'warriors' have run out of steam. It's now "all quiet on the western front"
Keep up the great work al-Khidr bravo and no, this isn't cheerleading, it's an honest statement.
BTW .. I'll send you the info I gathered on Yuksel from my Turkish friend.
Peace to all
-
you said
"Your articles are so full with emotions"
Correction my article, "Exposing The 3 Salaat Theory" was based on passion, which is something different then emotions.
Salaam
Yes .. there's a huge difference between emotion and passion. It's quite simple to discern yet some are unable to do so. Actually this is a common blunder out here. My committment to my cause has also been construed as "being emotional" in the past.
peace
-
One thing I am hearing is how people are getting tired of people responding with personal opinions and not really dissecting the arguments at hand and presenting substance to the subject matter. The real issue is not my approach or style but the real issue at hand is can you refute my research that is if you stand on the 3 Salaat position. Us Muslims who follow 5 Salaat had to endure all the attacks and literature writing by proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? and now one of the children of the slaves deciding to put an end to it and I came hard and now they (the proponents of the 3 Salaat Theory) are licking their wombs and crying but not dealing with the subject matter head on. No one is moved by emotions, we all are moved by facts and so far the proponents of the ?3 Salaat Theory? have not and cannot bring forth any sound evidence from Al Qur?aan. This is a triumph for TRUTH and a triumph for the proponents who believe in Pure Islaam and not sectarian notions such as the ?3 Salaat Theory?. Can anyone in here tell me who invented this ?3 Salaat Theory? because it was not the shia, some of them not all observe 5 Salaat in three periods, so they still observe 5 Salaat and not 3.
and what about the evidence Layth and Tanveermd posted?
-
peace
Also, Al Khidr, it seems like you're only defending the 5 salat thing because the ancient africans used to pray 5 times a day.
It would be nice if you would leave the race issues out of this. Just because a person says that 5 prayers isn't mentioned in the Quran doesn't mean they are racist.
And, in your articles, you attack the people more than you attack their arguments. You treat everyone who doesn't agree with you like they are liars and hypocrites and are trying to mislead others.
Let me make it clear to you that no one here is doing that. We are trying to gain a better understanding of the Quran. If the hadith have corrupted most things in the Quran, why not the concept of salat. That's why we need to revisit everything and get a better understanding if we can.
So no matter where we end up (whether with 5 or 3 or 2), we will know that that is the correct understanding.It would also be nice if you stop treating yourself as "the warrior of truth" and others as "dirty lying kafirs." Please drop the "I am right and everyone else is wrong" attitude, because people don't like it. And if people don't like it, they don't read anything you post. So you're left talking to the walls.
And, again, I think we need to figure out what SALAT is before we go into what times are given. I disagree with you that Salat=worship or prayer.
-
Peace,
Please note that in the course of reviewing
The Message,I have managed to re-write the Salat article in a better light of understanding.As such, this article represents my current views on the subject.
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/salat.htm
-
Salaam all
the five times 2238; 4103; 11114; 1778; 2458
- The Dawn Prayer (Fajr) given in 11114, 2458
(2) The Noon Prayer (Zuhr), given in 1778 and 3018
(3) The Afternoon Prayer (Asr), given in 2238
(4) The sunset Prayer (Maghrib), given in 11114
(5) The Night Prayer (Isha), given in 2458
Virtually every translation, except the one on this site, interperts the above verses as 5 prayers (or whatever name anyone wishes to give).
As there seems to be disagreement on whether all the above means 3 or 5, could we perhaps rely little bit on history (although I am usualy very sceptical on relying on history-I think as you may appreciate an exception might be ok in this case).
Was there not a man named Mohammed to whom the Quran was revealed and how did this man Mohammed interpert the above. My understanding (from history i am afraid) that Mohammed interperted the above as 5 prayers and hence all his followers understood this meant that the Quran (although for some there was never such a book -it is apparently called the message) meant 5 prayers. Now i could be completely wrong and Mohammed interperted the above as 3 and some deviant at some stage in Muslim history changed it to 5. Can someone please tell me exactly when this occured in during the last 1400 yr period.
If we accept that historically Mohammed prayed 5times daily then how is that God did not choose to correct him.
regards - The Dawn Prayer (Fajr) given in 11114, 2458
-
Peace,
For one, in the earliest sources it is told they prayed 3, and only later on 5. See Ibn Ishaq and Tabari. And when and who did this, who changed it? The persians who wanted to take over the arabic empire as a revenge for the destruction of theirs. Most hadith rules comes form the persians, as well as the ritual prayer rules
Zoroastrian Namaz
Posted By Boom Solang
Date Saturday, 30 October 2004, at 312 p.m.
This is how a Sunni prays,
Ritual Prayer In Zoroastrianism
Master sequence of prayers
First, take a bath, or wash the hands and feet and face. With a cap or scarf on your head, and facing the sun or light, remove the Kusti from your waist. Then pray the Ashem, Yatha, Kemna Mazda, start tying Kusti, AhuraMazda Khodae, (finish tying Kusti), Mazdayasno ahmi, Sarosh Baj, Ahmai Raeshcha, Hazangrem, Jasemeavanghe Mazda, Kefreh Mazda, then the appropriate Geh, then the Farajyat (compulsary) prayers like Khorshed and Meher Nyaishes (only in the first three Gehs), Atash Niyaesh, Hormuzd Yasht, and then Ardibehest Yasht.
A detailed guideline for each Geh follows. Note that the most prayers are recommended in the first Geh, Havan, and this includes the Ardibehest Yasht. The Havan Geh is therefore the best time to pray this Yasht.
Havan Geh (Sunrise to 1240 PM)
Getting up before sunrise, pray the Hoshbam. When the sun rises, start the master sequence above. Continue with Khorshed, Meher Nyaishes, Vispa Humata, Atash Niyaesh, Hormuzd Yasht. If possible, also pray the Big Haptan Yasht, Ardibehest Yasht, Sarosh Yasht Hadokht and Vanant Yasht. Then the Doa Nam Sataishne, Char Dishano Namaskar, Duva Tandorosti, and Din-no-kalmo.
Rapithavan Geh (1240 to 340 PM)
Start the master sequence above. If possible, continue with Sarosh Baj, Rapithavan Geh, Khorshed, Meher, Atash Niyaeshes, Doa Nam Sataishne, Char Dishano Namaskar, Duva Tandorosti, and Din-no-kalmo.
Ujiren Geh (340 PM to sunset)
Start the master sequence above. If possible, continue with Sarosh Baj, Ujiren Geh, Khorshed, Meher, Ava Ardvisur and Atash Nyaishes, Doa Nam Sataishne, Sarosh Yasht Hadokht, Char Dishano Namaskar, Duva Tandorosti, and Din-no-kalmo.
Aiwisuthrem Geh (sunset to 1240 AM)
Start the master sequence above. IF POSSIBLE, continue with Sarosh Baj, Aiwisuthrem Geh, Cheragno Namaskar (homage to the lamps), Mah Bokhtar (homage to the moon), Atash Niyaesh, Sarosh Yasht Vadi, Doa Nam Sataishne, Duva Tandorosti, and Din-no-kalmo.
Ushahin Geh (1240 AM to Sunrise)
Start the master sequence above. IF HEALTH ALLOWS, continue with Sarosh Baj, Ushahin Geh, Atash Niyaesh, Doa Nam Sataishne, and if possible Hormuzd Yasht, Ardibehest Yasht, Sarosh Yasht Hadokht, Duva Tandorosti, and Din-no-kalmo.
Notes
Ava Yasht - if not possible daily, then pray on these days every month Asfandarmad, Ava, Din, Ashishvangh, Marespand.
Atash Niyaesh - if not possible daily, pray on these days Hormuz, Ardibehest, Ader, Sarosh, Behram roj.
From the first month of Farvardin to the month of Meher, the first roj Hormuz to the last roj Aneran of these months, pray the Rapithavan Geh in its time slot. But from the Month Ava to the Vahistohist Gatha day, ie. 5 months 5 days, pray the Havan Geh instead.
Also note that Khorshed and Meher Nyaishes are to be recited during the Havan, Rapithven and Uziren Geh only, Vispa Humata during Havan Geh only, Mah Bokhtar Niyaesh during Aiwisuthrem Geh, and during any Geh of the day. Nemaz-i-chehar-disa during Havan, Rapithven and Ujiren. Ardvisur Niyaesh during Havan, Rapithven and Ujiren. Sarosh Yasht Hadokht during Havan, Ujiren and Ushahin. Sarosh Yasht Vadi during Aiwisuthrem Geh only. Patet Pashamani and Stom Karta during any Geh.
Interessante informatie van een iraanse site gehaald
Dear all,
It would be appropriate if we can discuss the startling similarities between practices of Islam and Zoroastrianism.These parallels go beyond the normal ones of both being monotheistic faiths which have been revealed to mankind by charismatic leaders.I will endeavour to enumerate a few here- Requirements of prayers Islam enjoins its followers to pray 5 times a day and is called by the Muezzin to his prayers.These prayers are at a) Dawn b) Noon c) Afternoon d) Sunset e) NIght.
Zoroastrianism also enjoins prayers 5 times a day and are called "Geh".The devotee is summoned by the ringing of a bell in the AtashBehram / Agiary.These prayers are also at the same time as in Islam and their respective names are
Time Islamic Zoraastrianism
Dawn Fajar Havaan
Noon Zohar Rapithwan
Afternoon Assar Uziren
Evening Mazreem Aiwisuthrem
Nightime Ishaan Ushaen. - Pre-requisites of prayer On entering the mosque and prior to commencing prayers a Muslim has to cover his head and wash his face and limbs.Similarly a Zoroastrian one entering the Agiary will cover his head,wash his face and limbs, perform the Padyaab Kusti before commencing his prayers.
- The Prayers Prayers in Islam are in Arabic only,though translations/transliterations are available.The liturgy has to be conducted in Arabic only.In Zoroastrianism too,prayers have to be recited in Avesta or in Pazend only.Infact in Aveatan prayers Pazend portions have to be recited in an undertone so as no to break the seamless flow of Avestan Manthravani.
- Sanctum Sanctorum and its venerationThe holiest spot in a Mosque is the wall facing Mecca and is called the Kiblah.In the Atashbehram/Agiary the room where the Atash Padshah is enthroned is also called the Keblaah.
A Muslim will perform the Sijdaah in front of the Kiblah and so also will the Zoroastrian perform the Sezdaah before his Keblaah.Both involve kneeling down and touching the forehead to the ground. - A holy month In Islam Ramzan is the holy month in which all Muslims are required to fast in the day and only break their fast after sunset.In Zoroastrianism the month of Bahman has similiar connotations-wherein all are requested to particularly abstain from flesh.Perhaps in the age of the Sassanian dynasty the month of Bahman was observed as Ramzan is now.
- Ascent into heaven The hagiography of Islam assures us that Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven from Jerusalem on the mythical beast Barak.He crossed the 7 spheres,exchanged greetings with the patriarchs and beheld the glory of God.
The Dinkard tells us that at the entreaties of Asho Zarthustra Bahman Ameshaspand transcendentally elevated his consciousness to the realm of heaven wherein Asho Zarthustra looked at the reflugent majesty of God.A similiar journey was attributed to the virtous Ardaviraf who visited hell,purgatory and heaven during his spiritual journey.Of course Ardaviraf couldnot look at God directly.
The above similarities are obvious,a more careful research would reveal more parallels.However even these points are to close to be dismissed as mere coincidences.This means Zoroastrianism has had an enormous impact on Islam,which is not acknowledged.Everyone agrees Islam owes a lot to Judaism and Christianity but I feel that the scholars of Islam borrowed very heavily from Iran and this can be perhaps attributed to that shadowy figure of Dastur Dinyar ( Salman Farsi).This debt is so impressive that it had to be consistently downgraded and later denied.Afterall if Islam is supposedly directly inspired by God it cannot be seen to be acknowledging any debt to an older faith,specially the faith of a nation which Islam has defeated.This may perhaps explain the ferocity of the persecuton Islam directed at Zoroastrianism-to do away with an embarassing history of its origin.
Chinvat Bridge
CHINVAT BRIDGE According to ancient Persian myth, when a person dies, the soul remains by the body for three days. On the fourth, it travels to Chinvat Bridge (the Bridge of the Separator, also call Al-Sirat), accompanied by gods of protection. The bridge is "finer than a hair and sharper than a sword" and spans a deep chasm teeming with monsters. On the other side of the bridge is the gateway to paradise.
DEMONS guard the foot of the bridge and argue with the gods over the soul's fate. The actions of the dead person, both good and bad, are weighed, and the soul is either allowed to cross or denied access to the bridge. Spirits whose evil outweighs their good fall into the demon-infested pit to face eternal torment. In this abyss of the damned, each soul is tortured by a GHOUL that represents its sins in life. Once fallen into the gulf, no soul can escape the horrors of hell through its own power.
Zoroaster, a sixth-century B.C. religious leader, had warned his followers of this obstacle to heaven but promised to lead his flock safely across. The ancient manuscript Gathas (Songs of Zoroaster) explains that the Bridge of the Separator "becomes narrow for the wicked," whereas the holy can easily pass unharmed. (In Gathas, the fair god Rashnu is named as the judge who helps determine who is worthy of salvation and who must be damned.) All infidels (nonbelievers) fall into hell, which the prophet says has been created especially for the "followers of the lie."
The legends are sketchy but assert that Chinvat Bridge is located somewhere in the far north. It is a place of filth where the damned endure physical tortures and spiritual agony. Souls who are unsuccessful in crossing the Chinvat Bridge suffer these torments until AHRIMAN, the evil god of ZOROASTRIANISM, is destroyed by the good god Orzmahd during the LAST JUDGMENT. As this time, lost spirits are restored to the truth since "the lie" as been eradicated, or they face final ANNIHILATION. (o)
Notice the similarity? So you guys are actually pagan stone and sun worshippers, correct?
Salaam BooM.
Who Contrived Namaz?
Posted By Dr. Shabbir
Date Monday, 10 January 2005, at 429 p.m.
Please review this post first about the Zoroastrian Namaz
http//64.227.163.32/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl?read=24651
I will try to be brief.
There was not one single man who introduced the NAMAZ deception into Islam. No one man could. Such conspiracies have to be state-sponsored in order to get hold of the masses.
Think of the history of Christianity for a moment. The Pauline doctrine was not canonized until Emperor Constantine supported it at the Conference of Nicea in 325 CE.
In case of NAMAZ, the Persian Imams of the time got strong support from the Persian Zoroastrian mother of Khalifa Haroon Rashid, KHAIZRAAN (died 789 CE). Khaizran, was, in turn, vehemently helped by Haroon's Zoroastrian viziers, the BARAMIKA.
So, it was she who "canonized" NAMAZ according to the desires of the Criminal Imams in 153 A.H. (773 CE). Her main philosopher was Imam Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad Tabrezi, the first ever writer of Arabic to Persian dictionary, AL-'AIN.
Now, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal is reported to have been flogged by Khalifa Haroon and later by his son Khalifa Mamun - For, Hanbal supposedly insisted that the Qur'an was GHAIR MAKHLOOQ (non-creation). Nay, Sir! That wasn't it. It was too trivial a debate. Hanbal got flogged because he saw and opposed the Persian NAMAZ (GEH) being incorporated into Islam.
Another point of interest KHAIZRAAN spent a fortune on her project and distributed one million gold coins and 165 million coins of pure silver among her subjects to propagate the 'canonized' NAMAZ.
My first job after medical internship at Jinnah Postdraduate Medical Center in Karachi was at B.M.H. Parsi General Hospital in Karachi beginning in 1969. That afforded me a first hand opportunity to become familiar with the Parsi community, their culture and religion.
Now some of the relevant references about Khaizran, Baramikah, the "Imams" and the contriving of today's NAMAZ- "Haroon wa Baramikatil Faras" (Arabic) by Sheikhul Ifta Salman bin Abu Qasim Baghdadi. Vol 1 pg 31-55
- "Meezan-il-Faris" (Persian) by Hujjatullah Abdul Qadir Ali Al-Moosvi pg 249-261
- "Takmilatil Lughatal 'Ain" 'Urfa (Arabic) by Al-Ustaz Jalaluddin Al-Ash'ari on Imam Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad Tabrezi vol 2 pg 3-5
- "Mujahid Al-Munafiq Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal" (Arabic) by Mullah Ali Al-Qari, pg 67-135
A life-long student, - Shabbir
- Requirements of prayers Islam enjoins its followers to pray 5 times a day and is called by the Muezzin to his prayers.These prayers are at a) Dawn b) Noon c) Afternoon d) Sunset e) NIght.
-
Salaam Pheonix1
I read your post and you have approached this with bias feelings. You need to read the post in this thread after I post my original rebuttal. I will not waste time for you and re-quote them. Some where negative and some did not like the fact of me taking Islaam back to the Mother Land Africa and some did not like how I exposed their mistranlations where they covered up how Allah said the original man is Black, etc. etc. etc. I did not bring race into this, race became an issue through some peoples arrogance and also racist mentalities. Truth is not racism but there are many who will even mistranslate Al Qur'aan on the bases of racism and more. But if you do not like it then that is your personal problem. But I am not going to sit back here and bow down to those who displays resistence to that part of my research. A perfect example is brian1 who quote somethng negative about me using the Nubian History. Do you question why they have such a negatiave out look on someone bringing forth African History which is directly related to this subject? Did you bother to read that section, my points was well taken. Obviously you don't and that is why I can't take what you are trying to convey, with importance. If I would have came with the tradition garbage of the white-washed history of the present rulers of Arabia then every body would be fine. However like I told brain there are many many many people who appreciated that information and felt that it was very very much needed. I am not here to please any body, I am here to present truth and the premise of my research addressed the fact that Allah authorized 5 Salaat in Al Qur'aan and not 3. Like I have told others, its your personal problem if you do not like my approach, I am not here to please you nor any one else. However as a result of this thread you nor any body in here has been successful in refuting my arguments, again this says a lot. All the people are getting statements of emotions like yourself but not really getting down inside Al Qur'aan to address the subject matter. The only one who attempted this feat was tanvweermd.
You said this
"It would also be nice if you stop treating yourself as "the warrior of truth" and others as "dirty lying kafirs." Please drop the "I am right and everyone else is wrong" attitude, because people don't like it. And if people don't like it, they don't read anything you post. So you're left talking to the walls."
You have commented on me treating my self as a warrior of truth again the only way that you can shut my mouth is destroy my arguments and prove that Allah authorized 3 Salaat but if you can't and I know you can't then don't worry about the strong position that I have taken on this subject matter. I am not moved by your emotions nor anybody else, I am moved through FACTS/EVIDENCE. If someone can disprove my arguments I will be the first to submit to the truth. But the way you personally feel, your emotions, your crying etc. etc. I'm not moved by. And you also committed on that I am right and everyone is wrong. Well I have announced earlier on in this thread that I do not have all the knowledge and I will also acccept the truth if some one can disprove my arguments. But what you see from me is not arrogance, what you see is some one who has confidence in the truth that he represents. Even Layth commented with a positive remark of my strong position in regards to that even though he disagree with my posisition. You see some people have stronger characters then others and Layth on the other hand can respect that. I am sure that you would also look at great worriors such as Malcolm X, Ahmed Deedat, Rashad Khalfia, Farrakhan, Khallid Muhammad just to name a few because they are worriors indeed who take the same strong position of truth and never bit their tongue and who also speek stronger than myself. I am a light weight when it comes their fiery tongue of those worriars, its only the weak heart that cannot digest.
also to with your emotions is that you said that people wont read my post, again that is only your emotional state, there has been tons and tons of people who read my rebuttal refuting the false claim of 3 Salaat, where have you been? I have received tons of great responses. There are people who appreciate honesty and directness and consitency then those who like to speak a watered down truth.
Salaam
-
Peace,
Al-khidr do what you feel is best. And don't forget to look up in the dictionary what emotions come with being passionate. And again in your last post to phoenix, you say people and me didn't like it that you 'brought it back to mother Africa'. For one, i don't care which country it is, it is about if it has any use in the discussion. I'm black myself my friend. See how you misuse this argument? You misuse racism, as an excuse to slander people. Make their comments less. Stop doing this. You have accused people for racism while it was never their idea to slander the idea that we have a long history of advanced civilations. Their purpose was only to show that it was not proof for the 5-times. I hope in time brother you will grow up.
It is true few have commented on the arabic, which is not good. I myself believe in 5. But then still, your way is not a humble way....
Peace upon all...
-
Salaam Arnold
You have said this
"For one, in the earliest sources it is told they prayed 3, and only later on 5. See Ibn Ishaq and Tabari. And when and who did this, who changed it? The persians who wanted to take over the arabic empire as a revenge for the destruction of theirs. Most hadith rules comes form the persians, as well as the ritual prayer rules"
I am glad that I went into the history of ancient Africa and highlighted the Salaat observance of the Nubians, which was either 5 or 7 and not 3. The Nubians of antiquity documented this and it well known but they did not observe 3 Salaat and this historical data predates the so-called hadiyth. Arnold this is what Allah says about your hadiyth
Qur'aan 7750
Which hadiyth, other than this, do they believe?In a previous thread you have commented on that we need to resolve this in Al Qur'aan. The premise of my rebuttal to A. Muhammad was focused on Al Qur'aan ALONE. The arguments has been resolved there are 5 Salaat and not 3.
Salaam
-
Peace,
Al-khidr, is was not meant as to prove 5 or 3, you misunderstood me. Stillearning said that the earliest sources on Muhammed says he prayed, which is not true, that is why i posted it. To show we cannot use history. Only the Quran. And he wanted to know who would have done the change, which i also answered, if there was any criminal, it were the persians.
