Kaaba at Jerusalem and not at Mecca

alpha97

Peace Noble,

I can imagine your frustration,

In best case, assuming that everybody in this discussion comes to same understanding then what is the achievment? What is the consequence of this hypothetical solution on the journey of our souls? Is it only question of quenching the curiosity? is it the expectation of finding a missing content from a puzzly form?

My understanding is that Content creates its suitable form, but form is unable to creat content!

For example walking the path of Faith, generates the prayer by itself. It becomes a natural necessity.
But prayer can not creat faith. because it is the effect of faith and not the cause of it.

There are many religiouse knowledge which only fogs the way, because it is aimed at form. It is a waste of time and energy.

peace.

noble

Peace alpha97,
If it were that easy. Unfortunately this is not for me to judge. I did not make this Universe, Allah, did, He created me.
And it is His rules, not mine, and not any other humans who will interpret to their heart's content, as they love to interpret.
By reading the Al Quran, Allah makes it clear that He created Mankind to worship Him. Then He goes on describing the ways to do it. It could be as small as the prayer He gave to Jonah, or as big as some assignments He gave to His Prophets (such as Moses to go to Pharaoh)...
The worship includes more than the ritual, but the ritual cannot be shrugged off as it is included too...
What I found frustrating is that people keep on splitting hair as to where and which this is or not. Whereas Allah told us that our decisions between us is shuura. So if a group (such as the sunnis) have agreed between themselves what they deduced from the Al Quran, through consultation, so be it... I do not look at them as being wrong, they have followed what Allah enjoined on them, which is Consultation, based on their understanding of the Al Quran...
Now there are points of contention regarding the Hadith, and these need to be addressed, but until the Muslims bring about a full system that is better than the one put in place by the Sunnis (or the Shiias), it is all vain talk...
A good start could be the material left by Mohammed (pbuh) when he organised the first islamic constitution in Medinah, at least there are documented records of what he did there...
One thing I am always aware of, is that rulers (politicians, kings, etc) are the ones who implement policies, practices and frameworks... Take the example of the metric system, or the calendar system... Decision makers got together and decided what and how these should be, but in order for any change, there has to be a will (Allah does not change a people, until they change what is in themselves (ie their Hearts))...
Salam

fabian

Peace Bro Layth

You might be thinking that you have wasted a lot of your effort trying to reason with Ahmed Bahgat, since you now find yourself dragged into Hadith, Sunnah, mind made up, and all the rest of it. That?s what I felt so first, then I suddenly realised what this guy is all about. It?s not in the details of his arguments, but it is rather in his stance. If you look at his unflinching stance, and then try to work out what it?s trying to convey, there is a fantastic truth coming from there. Some might mistake him for a Sunni, but don?t be that hasty. This guy will be anathema to the Sunnis, and take his word for it when he says that they have ejected, chased and severely threatened him.

The thing that Ahmed is trying to convey to us is the simplicity of faith. And this is a message of overriding importance. Reflect on it. He is absolutely right when he says that we can?t wipe the slate clean and start new. A lot of the Quranists think like this, thinking that, now that we have the blueprint (the Quran), along with the complete discrediting of tradition, it is incumbent on us to apply the blueprint and build afresh. But the Quran is not a blueprint, it is guidance. And whoever stipulated that we be architects of the universe and be given a blueprint to build? That would be the height of arrogance. No, the guidance is for us to extinguish all the misrepresentations of Satan, and thereby recover the Deen, which is still out there. When we come to a true interpretation of the Quran it shouldn?t feel like, ?Wow, I?ve crossed the seven seas to obtain the pearl of wisdom, and what a towering accomplishment it is!!!? No, instead it should feel like, ?What a fool I had been never to see the truth that was always right before my eyes.? God never decrees that we become scholars before we become Moslems. Witness these two verses.

?We made the Quran easy to learn. Do any of you wish to learn?? (5417)

?? GOD does not wish to make the religion difficult for you; He wishes to cleanse you and to perfect His blessing upon you, that you may be appreciative.? (56)

So the essence of the faith is the easiest thing for us to understand, and there are no difficulties placed within us at its practice. All we have to do is to get rid of all the lies of Satan that we have accepted. Admitted this is not easy, because there are so many. Ahmed is making this insistence. We have to be simple in the tenets of our faith. And it is also true that we have to have our minds made up beforehand. This sounds crazy and fanatic, but that is not how it?s meant. ?Having our minds made up? means that we are already with the Deen, and we are in full agreement with it, only that we don?t recognise it thanks to Satan. The Deen came to us along with the Ruhu that he breathed into us, and this Ruhu is an essence of God Himself.

?He shaped him and blew into him from His spirit (ruhu). And He gave you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brains; rarely are you thankful.? (932)

Ahmed is intolerant of every philosophical designs on the words of God, and he overcompensates, because every reading has a philosophical base, otherwise we would babbling nonsense. But when I stopped listening to his words I heard his tenacity, and this told me a different story. He wants to keep Islam simple, and his tenacity regarding this is a great message.

That which Brother Ayman and Brother Progod are proposing is very simple indeed. That the Qibla we face is towards the houses of God, plural, and not towards a singular stipulated location. Hajj is discussion, but to be carried out in the houses of God, and after the pilgrimage is made to it. Salat is ritual prayer, performed in the houses of God, or anywhere. But you have reservations to this. You protest that without a unique Qibla, and a singular location for Hajj, a lot of the verses in the Quran would not make sense. I add to this another complaint, that such a system is not observed in the present world, and we are only anticipating something that we want to build. Such a system is not here. It is only before the MIND?S eye, not on the physical plane, and this is a problem. We don?t say, after having discovered this system, ?I was a fool not to have seen it before.? Rather we say, ?Why didn?t I think of that before?? This fails our criterion, because the Deen is a tangible reality, not a philosophical concept. Jerusalem as Qibla also fails this test, because where have believers faced Jerusalem in the last 1400 years? It is just about impossible to instigate such a thing now. All these investigations won?t cut ice in the real world.

Now, what is the most ubiquitous institution and will be universally acknowledged as sacred? It is the home. In many cultures the home is described as a house of God. It?s four walls do indeed envelope the entire circular universe, and the hearth at it?s center, tended by the wife or the mother, is indeed the fire at the center, from which everything that makes us human does emerge. And the home is indeed a direction too. We say ?the home and the world? and these two are diametrically opposed directions. The world is called the dominion of Satan, but only when it is so far away from the home that it has descended into materialism. The present world is facing directly away from the home and is rushing towards the material world and thus are we much in the grip of Satan. Now if we try to imagine the greatest system of all, the way of God, wouldn?t we find that it is telling us to face towards the home, always wherever we are? Wouldn?t it thus be assuring us of the sanctity and security of this place? Wouldn?t it also be assuring us that it is a haven for humanity, and not just for the believers? Wouldn?t it be described as the first and most important foundation of all?

And wouldn?t it be the case that the same system will stipulate for us a test by providing us a temporary and alternative Qibla, one that is in the material world? We are told that it is a test for the first Ummah, but it is quite possible that it is a test for us yet. Do we ignore everything that goes on in the name of Islam and still insist on the physical Qibla, based on the most unreliable hearsay, and even though we are strictly forbidden to follow hearsay? And at the same time we are told to be wary of the majority. It is yet a test for us.

We are not told the first and second Qiblas, but we are told that the third is Masjidul Haram, which is understandable because the mention of the first two Qiblas would have left scope for contention. Tradition says the first is Jerusalem, and the second is most likely Mecca. But the third, and standing, one cannot be either of the two, not Jerusalm because we have never told that there is a reinstatement. We are told that Mohammed was looking towards the skies for a desirable Qibla before Masjidul Haram was chosen. He was desiring a Qibla not on the worldly plane?

Don?t misunderstand. I?m not saying brick houses should be bowed down to. Qibla does not appear in conjunction with the Salat anywhere in the Quran. The Qibla is our focus, our constant focus, not only during Salat. Otherwise Brother Ayman describes Salat and Hajj as I would do, with this added understanding.

Only remains to be seen if such a community of believers exists out there. Of course it does. The claws of organized religion has subjected everything, but there are still believers out there. Because Masjidul Haram is indeed a sanctuary from this den of sin. I look carefully and I see their focus of the real believer to be the home. The mosque or the church is attended, but they do not occupy the focus. The disbeliever, on the other hand, is excessively attached to the mosque or church while neglecting the home. Their stance is that of Abraham, so Maqam Ibrahim is in this house, and it is a clear sign, and there are many others. Yes, against all the odds there are still believers. The Deen is here, and we see it only if we are able to remove our blinkers. We don?t have to invent it. A simple faith, and no difficulty to come to.

Fabian

warner

Peace be upon you

Interesting reserach by Layth and Ayman.

37 137
Yusuf Ali Verily ye pass by their (sites) by day
Pickthall And Lo! ye verily pass by (the ruin of) them in the morning
Transliteration Wa in nakum latamur ru_na alaihim musbihin

37 138
Yusuf Ali And by night will ye not understand?
Pickthall And at night time; have ye then no sense?
Transliteration Wa bil lail afala_ taqilu_n

The above verses are used by Brother Layth among other evidence to prove that Muhammad lived near the dead sea where people of Lot were destroyed in the past.

But I noticed through out Quraan the expression will ye not understand/ have ye then no sense? is used to address man in general and not the prophet.

What is your opinion on this ?

Layth

Salam fabian,

The thing that Ahmed is trying to convey to us is the simplicity of faith. And this is a message of overriding importance. Reflect on it. He is absolutely right when he says that we can?t wipe the slate clean and start new. A lot of the Quranists think like this, thinking that, now that we have the blueprint (the Quran), along with the complete discrediting of tradition, it is incumbent on us to apply the blueprint and build afresh. But the Quran is not a blueprint, it is guidance. And whoever stipulated that we be architects of the universe and be given a blueprint to build? That would be the height of arrogance. No, the guidance is for us to extinguish all the misrepresentations of Satan, and thereby recover the Deen, which is still out there. When we come to a true interpretation of the Quran it shouldn?t feel like, ?Wow, I?ve crossed the seven seas to obtain the pearl of wisdom, and what a towering accomplishment it is!!!? No, instead it should feel like, ?What a fool I had been never to see the truth that was always right before my eyes.? God never decrees that we become scholars before we become Moslems. Witness these two verses.

?We made the Quran easy to learn. Do any of you wish to learn?? (5417)

?? GOD does not wish to make the religion difficult for you; He wishes to cleanse you and to perfect His blessing upon you, that you may be appreciative.? (56)

So the essence of the faith is the easiest thing for us to understand, and there are no difficulties placed within us at its practice. All we have to do is to get rid of all the lies of Satan that we have accepted. Admitted this is not easy, because there are so many. Ahmed is making this insistence. We have to be simple in the tenets of our faith. And it is also true that we have to have our minds made up beforehand. This sounds crazy and fanatic, but that is not how it?s meant. ?Having our minds made up? means that we are already with the Deen, and we are in full agreement with it, only that we don?t recognise it thanks to Satan. The Deen came to us along with the Ruhu that he breathed into us, and this Ruhu is an essence of God Himself.

No offence Fabian, but what you are saying is basically this

"And if they are told Follow that which God has sent down. They Say No, we will follow what we found our fathers doing. What if the devil had been leading them to the agony of Hell?" (3121)

This view that Satan could not have inflitrated our fathers and ancestors for all those centuries and misled them as drastically as I am claiming is the surest way to get trapped in the same flypaper they were trapped in (majority can`t all be wrong - or can they?).

What I find intersting with this approach is that if I tell you fine, then we will accept, if we are born in a Christian family that Jesus is God and is the son of God and is a trinity - since that is the simplest understanding for nearly 2,000 years accepted by the vast majority, you will shout NO! the Christian situation is different because the devil has misled them in their masses but they do not know.

Your rule and Ahmeds (if he follows the same one) is only there to protect the traditions that we have blindly followed for centuries while ignoring the clear verses that dispell all these notions as fabrications`.

Ahmed is intolerant of every philosophical designs on the words of God, and he overcompensates, because every reading has a philosophical base, otherwise we would babbling nonsense. But when I stopped listening to his words I heard his tenacity, and this told me a different story. He wants to keep Islam simple, and his tenacity regarding this is a great message.

My brother, you and Ahmed have all the right in the world to protect and preserve Sunnism and keep it simple, just don`t tell me this is Islam or that this is from the Quran (because it is not).

That which Brother Ayman and Brother Progod are proposing is very simple indeed. That the Qibla we face is towards the houses of God, plural, and not towards a singular stipulated location. Hajj is discussion, but to be carried out in the houses of God, and after the pilgrimage is made to it. Salat is ritual prayer, performed in the houses of God, or anywhere. But you have reservations to this. You protest that without a unique Qibla, and a singular location for Hajj, a lot of the verses in the Quran would not make sense. I add to this another complaint, that such a system is not observed in the present world, and we are only anticipating something that we want to build. Such a system is not here. It is only before the MIND?S eye, not on the physical plane, and this is a problem. We don?t say, after having discovered this system, ?I was a fool not to have seen it before.? Rather we say, ?Why didn?t I think of that before?? This fails our criterion, because the Deen is a tangible reality, not a philosophical concept. Jerusalem as Qibla also fails this test, because where have believers faced Jerusalem in the last 1400 years? It is just about impossible to instigate such a thing now. All these investigations won?t cut ice in the real world.

Since when has truth been linked to what the masses say or do?

If the entire world (as in the days of Noah) worshipped false gods and abondoned the system of the Almighty, does that mean that God no longer exists or His system has failed because only Noah and a handful of people still remember?

The obsession people have with the last 1,400 years is one of the worst obstacles I come across when discussing anything from the Quran (it isnt done this way, we didnt hear about it before, no one does it)...Ya akhi, is it not enough that God says it? Cant we simply hear & obeywithout bringing the history of the people before us (whom you have no idea what or where they are ending up)....Also, I find your choice of history to be selective to promote a viewpoint that you or Ahmed hold. Why do you stop today in 2006 and tell melook, they are all facing Meca?. why dont you backtrack to the days of AbdulMalik and read that he thought the pilgrimage to Jerusalem which is why he raised the Dome of the Rock structure (with no Mihraab, unlike any mosque)...why dont you read on the mosques which date back to the early days of the revelation and who were found with their Mihraab constructed not facing Mecca, but rather in approximation to Jerusalem? Why dont you tell me why the followers of the prophet went into a civil war where they were killed in the thousands and the original Quran was lost (or allegedly burned by Othman?)...this is what I mean about you being selective in your choice for what is real and what is not...You want to talk history, bring ALL the history and see if you will move forward one inch from all the mess.

I follow what God has revealed, as for those who passed before me

"That was a nation that has passed away; to them is what they have earned, and to you is what you have earned; and you will not be asked regarding what they did." (2134)

We are not told the first and second Qiblas, but we are told that the third is Masjidul Haram, which is understandable because the mention of the first two Qiblas would have left scope for contention. Tradition says the first is Jerusalem, and the second is most likely Mecca. But the third, and standing, one cannot be either of the two, not Jerusalm because we have never told that there is a reinstatement. We are told that Mohammed was looking towards the skies for a desirable Qibla before Masjidul Haram was chosen. He was desiring a Qibla not on the worldly plane?

Your 1&2 are from the hadith, your 3 is based on your own understanding which does not hold water with all the verses which tell us the Masjid Alharam is a physical place (it can be attacked and fought in, it is visited during pilgrimage, it is a source of revenue for its keepers, etc.).

Don?t misunderstand. I?m not saying brick houses should be bowed down to. Qibla does not appear in conjunction with the Salat anywhere in the Quran. The Qibla is our focus, our constant focus, not only during Salat. Otherwise Brother Ayman describes Salat and Hajj as I would do, with this added understanding.

1087 is sufficient proof for Qibla & Salat to be related...Also, I noticed that your whole talk in this post was about keeping it simple and that Satan could not have changed the deen for 1,400 years, yet now you are spinning ideas that come from neither the masses not from even their writings/history.

Finally, you say early on that God does not want us to be schoars, only to be simple Muslims...I disagree

"And it is not advisable for the believers to march out in their entirety. For every battalion that marches out, let a group remain to study the system, and warn their people when they return to them, perhaps they will be aware." (9122)

God encourages, in-fact, demands, that a group study the system and inform the others of what it says...Never does he tell us to follow the majority mentality or ro accept what is being peddled in His name...Only that we accept His word above all else as the truth and the most accurate history.

Layth

Peace Warner,

The above verses are used by Brother Layth among other evidence to prove that Muhammad lived near the dead sea where people of Lot were destroyed in the past.

But I noticed through out Quraan the expression will ye not understand/ have ye then no sense? is used to address man in general and not the prophet.

What is your opinion on this ?

That same expression afla taqiloon is used in various verses to adress various groups

Adressing Bani Israel 244
Bani Israel adressing their own people 276
Adressing Jews & Nazarines 365
Mohamed adressing his community 1016
Aad adressing his people 11

There are a few more example, but I am sure you can see that the word itself does not imply that mankind is always adressed, rather it is specific to the context/speaker/audience.

warner

Peace be upon you

Brother Layth

Thank you for the explanation.

I went through most of the verses the phrase is used but did not come across a situation in which is God is asking His messenger "Dont you understand or dont you have sense".

noble

Peace Bro warner
Like you, I never came across an ayat where the Prophet Muhammed was admonished for rejecting anything Allah was revealing to Him, not even arguing about any... There was a few cases where Allah admonished him on some small mistakes, but they were nothing to do with Aqida issues...
That being said, I tend to believe that "Don't you have sense?" is a rhetorical question to those passing by the area described (which include the Prophet and people of his community) emphasising the importance of pondering the fate of those who came before them, and who were destroyed for their disbeliefs.
Clearly it cannot be the whole of Mankind, because it addresses those who pass by the vicinity of that area, which are not all of Mankind!
Salam

Layth

Peace Warner,

I went through most of the verses the phrase is used but did not come across a situation in which is God is asking His messenger "Dont you understand or dont you have sense".

Why are you looking for a situation where God tells His prophet dont you have sence?. I have not seen such a situation and wonder what value it would have to your research.

warner

Peace Brother Layth

My point is, that this verse is not addressed to the Prophet since God never asks any of His prophets ?Don?t you have sense?? Therefore you can not use this verse as strong evidence to assume that Muhammad lived in Jerusalem and morning and evening, on his way to work and back, Muhammad was passing by the place where People of Lot met their end. This verse tells that the place in which the People of Lot met their end is very apparent to see for anyone passing by.

fabian

Salaam Layth

You yourself are a Moslem, but when exactly would you say you became a Moslem? Please don?t get me wrong, because this is not meant to be a personal question at all, and I only ask it because it is absolutely relevant to the point in question. Would you say that you became a Moslem after a certain level of understanding? Or would you call yourself Moslem from birth onwards?

My point is that there are Moslems out there, and have been always. Despite the externals of Islam having all gone wrong, and comprehensively wrong (meaning that NO ONE prayed in the right direction, and NO ONE performed the Hajj, only to mention two aspects), there were still Moslems. Or would you say there were no Moslems? No, I don?t think you would. Prophet Noah and his immediate kin were Moslems, were saved from the flood because of this, and the new beginning of humankind stemmed from them. Whatever truth be come to derive from the Quran, if it means that we cannot find a single Moslem who carries on the truth, but instead it all has to come from our thinking heads and the scripture, then that is a problem. If we indeed come to the truth of the Quran, then the truth will surely help to identify who the true Moslem is, and will not merely be anticipating a new Moslem community from scratch. Who is Moslem? Isn?t that the object of our search? What a Moslem should be? If we?re only left with this speculation?

Fabian

noble

Salam warner
Respectfully, I slightly disagree with part of your interpretation.
The verse in question addresses the community of Mohammed to whom he was preaching, how can he be preaching to them if he is not living with them?
However it is not enough evidence to prove that he was born in the area of Jerusalem.
And as Ahmed said, they might have been travellers from where Mohammed was born, and the majority at present accept it was Mecca.
I am very curious to know where he actually was just before he emigrated to Medinah/Yathrib...
Peace

noble

Peace
Even what I said does not hold water.
The way is was written is generalised to the community to whom Mohammed is preaching. The passing by the ruins by day and by night makes it a regular common occurence. This cannot happen occasionally for travellers, or better still the whole of Muhammed's community. They had to live by Jerusalem, it is inescapable, or better still travel for pilgrimage to Jerusalem!!!!...

Layth

Peace Fabian,

You yourself are a Moslem, but when exactly would you say you became a Moslem? Please don?t get me wrong, because this is not meant to be a personal question at all, and I only ask it because it is absolutely relevant to the point in question. Would you say that you became a Moslem after a certain level of understanding? Or would you call yourself Moslem from birth onwards?

I became a Muslim in 1997 when I submitted myself to God free of sectarian idols.

My point is that there are Moslems out there, and have been always. Despite the externals of Islam having all gone wrong, and comprehensively wrong (meaning that NO ONE prayed in the right direction, and NO ONE performed the Hajj, only to mention two aspects), there were still Moslems. Or would you say there were no Moslems? No, I don?t think you would. Prophet Noah and his immediate kin were Moslems, were saved from the flood because of this, and the new beginning of humankind stemmed from them. Whatever truth be come to derive from the Quran, if it means that we cannot find a single Moslem who carries on the truth, but instead it all has to come from our thinking heads and the scripture, then that is a problem. If we indeed come to the truth of the Quran, then the truth will surely help to identify who the true Moslem is, and will not merely be anticipating a new Moslem community from scratch. Who is Moslem? Isn?t that the object of our search? What a Moslem should be? If we?re only left with this speculation?

I am not with you on this line of thinking...A Muslim has been defined as any person who willingly submits himself/herself to the Lord of the words, free of idolatry. A Mumin is a higher rank and is a person who devotes his/her life, wealth and time to the service of the Lord.

We are discussing neither Muslim nor Mumin, but rather we are discussing the meanings found in the Scripture which has survived all those people who have come before us...

warner

Peace be upon you

Peace Layth

I quote below part of your article ?Where was Mohammed? (Part 5)? in the main board,

?The entire ?Abraham married his slave girl Hajar and then left her in the wilderness with Ismail based on the wishes of his wife Sarah? not only has no basis whatsoever in the Book of God, but also conflict greatly with the character of a Prophet who is devoted to God and who would never be pressured by any human into abandoning or harming another person(s). As far as we can ascertain, Abraham was married to one woman, the same woman who gave him Ismail and then, many years later, Isaac. We can also ascertain that Abraham lived near the area of the Temple (Jerusalem) and therefore would not have traveled many thousands of kilometers to carry out such an act of inhumanity.?

http//www.freeminds.org/articles/history/moh5.htm

The Quran says,

1439

Yusuf Ali "Praise be to Allah who hath granted unto me in old age Ismail and Isaac for truly my Lord is He the Hearer of Prayer!

Transliteration Al hamdu lilla_hil lazi wahaba li 'alal kibari isma_'ila wa isha_q(a), inna rabbi lasami'ud du'a_'(i).

Isn?t this verse contrary to your above assumption.

Layth

Peace,

The Quran says,

1439 Yusuf Ali "Praise be to Allah who hath granted unto me in old age Ismail and Isaac for truly my Lord is He the Hearer of Prayer!

Transliteration Al hamdu lilla_hil lazi wahaba li 'alal kibari isma_'ila wa isha_q(a), inna rabbi lasami'ud du'a_'(i).

Isn?t this verse contrary to your above assumption.

Here is the evidence that Ismail and Isaac were indeed many years apart

"And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob. She said O my!, how can I give birth while I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing! They said `Do you wonder at the decree of God? God?s Mercy and Blessings are upon you O people of the Sanctuary. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious." (1171-73)

warner

5 95

Yusuf Ali O ye who believe! kill not game while in the Sacred Precincts or in pilgrim garb. If any of you doth so intentionally the compensation is an offering brought to the Ka'ba of a domestic animal equivalent to the one he killed as adjudged by two just men among you; or by way of atonement the feeding of the indigent; or its equivalent in fasts that he may taste of the penalty of his deed. Allah forgives what is past for repetition Allah will exact from him the penalty for Allah is Exalted and Lord of Retribution.

Pickthall O ye who believe! Kill no wild game while ye are on the pilgrimage. Whoso of you killeth it of set purpose he shall pay its forfeit in the equivalent of that which he hath killed, of domestic animals, the judge to be two men among you known for justice; (the forfeit) to be brought as an offering to the Ka'bah; or, for expiation, he shall feed poor persons, or the equivalent thereof in fasting, that he may taste the evil consequences of his deed. Allah forgiveth whatever (of this kind) may have happened in the past, but whoso relapseth, Allah will take retribution from him. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong).

As far as I know the offering/sacrifice is not brought to the Ka?bah and it does not reach the Ka?bah in Mecca ( I guess the sacrifice is done in Mina) , but the sacrifice (Korbanot) was done in the Temple mount , Jerusalem from the ancient times.

Can anyone give any possible explanations ?

warner

22 33

Yusuf Ali In them ye have benefits for a term appointed in the end their place of sacrifice is near the Ancient House.

Pickthall Therein are benefits for you for an appointed term; and afterward they are brought for sacrifice unto the ancient House.

Transliteration Lakum fiha_ mana_fi'u ila_ ajalim musam man sum ma mahil luha_ ilal baitil 'atiq

This verse suggests that the sacrifice is near the Ancient House which is normally believed to be the Ka?bah. But like I said previously, the sacrifice actually does not reach and does not take place at the ka?bah in Mecca during present day hajj.

Any explanations ?

unknownuser

O ye who believe! kill not game while in the Sacred Precincts or in pilgrim garb.

I don't agree with this translation of the verse {595}. I believe here it's talking about prohibiting the hunting of wild land animals during the 4 restructed months. It has nothing to do with the pilgrimage.

The verse directly after it {596} makes it clear.

595
596

Here it's saying that it's OK to catch and eat fish during "ihram" (ie the 4 restricted months ), but NOT OK to hunt land mammals.

What does this have to do with pilgrimage?? ???

I believe that God has placed a restriction on the hunting of land mamals during these 4 months. Also, these 4 months must come at a fixed time ( season ) every year, and not shift back 11 days eac year as they do now.

But the Muslims during the dark ages ( Ummayyad period and UNTIL NOW ) , due to their ignorance, have completely ignored this truth.

warner

Peace be upon you

Peace Pazuzu

The verse 596 says ?game? referring to hunting, so I guess there is no problem in the translation.

The restriction to hunt is only in the sacred precincts during the sacred/forbidden 4 months which is the period of the pilgrimage according to what I understood from the Quraan.

I guess the restriction on hunting during this period can be because of the seasons, like you suggested (and I have seen some articles referring to mating habits of animals during the seasons) and also maybe to control the large number of pilgrims from hunting in the sacred vicinity and thereby affecting the livelihood of the people living in the area.

About the fishing, did you notice the contradiction in allowing fishing during the sacred months whereas it was supposed to be banned on Sabbath for Jews. I wish people give more thought to Aymans article on Companions of Sabbath.