Bacon on my cheeseburger
-
Normally I do not share my writing on this topic as, it is for me, very personal. But I enjoyed writing this essay so much I felt like sharing it.
Cheers.
Bacon on my cheeseburger
The road to an epiphanyA Note from the Author
Peace,
To the best of my knowledge all the information contained in this essay is accurate, and represents my understanding of the subject matter it covers as of October 13, 2006. It should be noted as well, that I am by know means an ?Islamic scholar?, just someone who seeks a better understanding of an important subject to him. And lastly, I would encourage any readers of this essay ?Do not simply take my word for it. Always independently verify what you read or hear. ?
Part 1
Recently, I revisited the memory of an encounter I had about a year and a half after converting to Sunni Islam. I was in a hair salon in the city of Kalamazoo, Michigan, in the United Sates (where I?m originally from), when I found myself seated next to this Egyptian woman getting her hair quaffed.
She was most probably in her early sixties, with hair died jet-black. I imagine that in her youth she had the kind of beauty that required a little sophistication to appreciate, a fine balance between inner and outer. The whole time she was there, in a manner that made the disgusting habit look glamorous, she puffed on a cigarette. And, perhaps it was just the naivet? of a twenty-four year old ?white boy? from Middle America, but there was something about this woman that was quite impressive. She had a commanding presence, the likes of which I have only come across maybe once or twice since.
As we conversed, I discovered that her husband (deceased for a few years at that time) had been attached to the local university. And, he had also once been the Imam of the very same community Masque where I had taken my Sunni declaration of faith (shahadah). After learning this, I informed her how I had recently converted to Islam to marry a Muslim from Malaysia who had been studying at the university, and that I was still in the process of learning the intricacies of the faith. I then related, that while I had not indulged in it since I had converted, I really missed eating pork, especially bacon on my cheeseburger.
She took a drag on her cigarette, exhaled it, and replied ?Darling, the prohibition on pork was made two thousand years ago to keep people from getting worms. So by all means, go ahead and have some bacon on your cheeseburger?.
That moment has stuck in my head vividly ever since.
My conversion to Sunni Islam (in 1989), for me, was done as a technicality to marry someone I was in love with. At that time in my life I had no real religious convictions. As a youth my Grandparents took me to church every Sunday, but it had been several years prior since I had stepped into a Christian House of Worship for anything other than a wedding or funeral.
During the first few years after my conversion, I learned very little about Islam. My wife and I lived in Middle America, and were exposed to hardly any other Muslims. Furthermore, my wife did not really practice her faith during this period either. So there was no imputes for me to learn about Islam. In fact, the only Islamic dictate that my wife insisted on was not eating pork.
Eventually, we moved to the country of Malaysia. Where, due to pressure from my wife and in-laws, I started to learn and practice Sunni Islam in earnest. The odd thing is, while I was always under pressure to learn and perform the rituals of Sunni Islam, I was never asked to read the Qur?an. That, was something I took upon myself.
An avid reader, that enjoys non-fiction as much as a good novel, I was in the bookstore one day looking for something interesting. When, on impulse, I picked up a paperback copy of Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall?s English translation of the Qur?an ?The Meaning of the Glorious Qur?an?. A book that today sits on my shelf, falling to pieces from being read incessantly.
Reading the Qur?an was a major awaking for me. I was taken aback by how different Sunni Islam was from the Qur?an. Or perhaps more correctly, how many things Sunni Muslims held as Islamic that were not in the Book. It was also during this first reading of the Qur?an that I came upon an impression that I carry with me till this day, that the Qur?an is indeed from a Higher Power, and that the Qur?an is inclusive.
After reading it the first time, I immediately read the book a second time, slowly and taking notes. I also did some things that some may consider sacrilege I took a highlighting pen to the book, and I started asking questions.
To my amazement, in a country where sixty percent of the population identify themselves as Muslim, and Islam is part of the school curriculum; I had great difficulty in finding anyone who had actually read the Qur?an. None of my in-laws (and there are a lot of them) had ever read the Qur?an. It?s considered taboo to read the Qur?an by Malaysian Muslims. For them you can only recite it, and only in Arabic (a language they do not comprehend). Only qualified experts (scholars) are supposed to read the Qur?an. Because, if you do not have the proper training and education before hand, you cannot possibly understand the Qur?an; and, you can easily be misled by it.
Being raised as a Christian, where reading and studying your Holy book is of immense importance (even if your view of what it says differs from your fellow man); the Sunni Muslim conviction of not reading and studying your Holy book seemed absurd. And being from America, it is part of my culture to question both political and religious authority, as corruption often goes hand in hand with both. So placing blind faith in any religious authority (especially one that promotes not reading your Holy Book), without some mechanism to proof what they teach & preach, seemed equally absurd to me. It is perhaps this cultural mistrust of authority that pushed me down a different path towards learning Islam than those born and raised Muslims.
Now craving the information needed to rectify the discrepancies between the Qur?an and Sunni Islam, I started to read more. Not so much the Qur?an, but many other books on the subject of Islam. I read books on Hadith (non-Qur?anic narrations of the life of the Prophet Mohammed and his companions), books on Sunnah (the ?way? of the Prophet Mohammed, which is related through Hadith), and books on Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence based on the Qur?an and Hadith). For a time I actually thought I carried some level of knowledge on the subject of Islam. But there was a problem with all those books, a problem that took me some time to realize.
While Malaysia is a rather modern and liberal country (with a relatively free press), when it comes to the subject of Islam, only literature that conforms to the Malaysian concept of Sunni Islam is allowed into the country. Anything beyond that concept is banned. This is due in large part to curb the spread of radical Islamic teachings. But in today?s world it takes more than banning books, to stop the flow of information to the people.
I was in a silk store with my wife and daughters just before the start of the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan. The store itself being located in the Indian Muslim (or Little India) section of downtown Kuala Lumpur, one of my favourites areas of the city. As the ladies of my life searched through the vibrant colours looking for just the right patterns for tailoring new holiday dresses, I found myself also wandering through the myriad of spools. As I held the material between my fingers, I could only but appreciate its beauty. It was at this moment that I thought to myself, ?Too bad silk is haram (forbidden) for Muslim men, because I would love to have a shirt made out of this stuff?. That thought hounded me for the rest of the day.
Knowing full well that the Qur?an never forbids silk, upon returning home, I logged on to the Internet to look up the hadith (narration) where the Prophet Mohammed prohibits silk for men. I typed into the search engine the keywords ?hadith, silk, men, haram?. One of the search results near the top of the results list said (if memory serves me) ?The Prophet Mohammed never forbade silk?. Out of curiosity I clicked it. Where that click led me, nearly changed my life as much as reading the Qur?an for the first time.
It was a page from a website dedicated to the works of the (deceased) late 20th century Islamic scholar Rashad Khalifah, and his concept of Islam being based on the Qur?an alone. As I poured through this website I was duly impressed. Here was a scholar pointing out the specifics of what the Qur?an said. And, using those specifics, he showed how the Qur?an does not support the use of anything beyond the Qur?an as a source of Islam (unlike Sunni Muslims that use Hadith books besides the Qur?an). I had always felt that the Qur?an was all encompassing, but it never accrued to me to ask the question ?Does the Qur?an even support the use of Hadith??
Though, while I was initially impressed by Rashad Khalifah?s arguments (I even downloaded and read his English translation of the Qur?an), I have always been suspicious of information found on the Internet. And, after researching the man and some of his non-Qur?anic assertion, I became uncomfortable with his work.
Rashad Khalifah had claimed that he was a messenger of God, sent to deliver the English translation of the Qur?an. Also, he claimed through the use of some obscure mathematical code he devised called ?Code 19?, that two verses from the Qur?an where artificially inserted after the Prophet Mohammed?s death. For which he posthumously deleted them. ?So much for God?s promise to protect the Qur?an,? I thought. Even his English translation of the Qur?an seemed overly interpretive, to the point of being questionable. So I stopped reading his work soon after discovering it. That said; Rashad Khalifah?s arguments started me down a road for which I could never return.
Subsequently, I began to study Hadith meticulously. For those who are unfamiliar Hadith (ahadith pl.) are non-Qur?anic narrations of the life of the Prophet Mohammed. Through these narrations is related the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet Mohammed, Sunnah being considered the second source of Islamic law (Shariah) by the majority of the worlds Muslims. Sunnah is the method by which the Prophet supposedly (as Sunni Muslims believe) lived and administered the religion of Al-Islam (The Submission to God) by Gods leave. But as Hadith transmits it, you cannot have Sunnah without Hadith.
These ahadith (narrations) are compiled into a series of six commonly used (and a few less so) collections called Hadith (narration) books. The study of these traditions is called ?The science of Hadith?. It is also fair to say that the majority of Sunni Muslim religious practices come from these non-Qur?anic sources. Everything from the way they pray, to women?s dress code, to circumcision, can only be found in Hadith books.
Not being fluent in Arabic, I was somewhat restricted in the volume of ahadith (narrations) available. But the full works of two of the most renowned Hadith scholars (Bukhari and Muslim) were available fully translated into English on the Internet. After reading them, I went away with a singular impression ?Rashad Khalifah was sure right about one thing, Hadith are a crock of shit!?
Having read the Qur?an several times, and then looking at all the problems facing contemporary Muslim societies (illiteracy, poverty, war, oppression, terrorism, etc.), I was always under the impression that those problems originated from someplace other than the Qur?an. The Qur?an, while at times somewhat obscure, is basically straightforward in relating the foundations of moral conduct and human rights. So, I believed that those problems Muslims faced originated from the use of Hadith, the books that Muslims use besides the Qur?an. And, after reading a few of those books I no longer believed; I was convinced.
What astonished me most about those Hadith (narration) books was the large number of these narrations that contradicted one another, that contradicted the Qur?an, and contradicted common sense. Astonishing me even more was that a major religion was based on these narrations. There is no way that these books represented any sort of true picture of the Prophet Mohammed, or even his companions. Hadith painted a picture of a Prophet who constantly contradicted and overrode the Holy Book he was sent to deliver.
But, even after reading these books, I was still not convinced enough to abandon Sunni Islam. I just didn?t feel I had enough knowledge to make such a leap. So I started researching, and researching, and researching about Islam. It became an obsession. I studied papers and arguments from all sides, as well as expanding the number of English translations of the Qur?an I read (so far I have read seven). During this period I also started writing on the subject of the Qur?an, and began work on a contextual version of the English translation of the Qur?an ?The Message? (still under construction). This is also a point at which I started to garner a few feelings I perhaps should not have had.
While I was slowly moving toward rejection of Sunni Islam, I had always been a little defensive of it. Many Qur?an Alone (or God Alone) Muslims spend a great deal of time attacking the misrepresentation of the Qur?an that Sunni Islam is based on, which is indeed necessary. But at times they come across as contemptuous of this religion (Shia Islam well). Even though Sunni Muslims are no guiltier of doing the same thing Jews and Christians had done before them (corrupt scripture), Qur?an Alone Muslims never went after Jews and Christians (or any other religion) with the same zeal as traditional Muslims. Much good does come out of Sunni Islam, as it does out of Christianity and Judaism. It was only after I started to write a comprehensive refutation to the Sunni position on Islam that I began to feel a little of this contempt as well.
In my studies I had come across a very thorough paper1 that outlined the Sunni Qur?anic (and over all) argument for the use of Sunnah (the ?way? of the Prophet Mohammed) in Islam. It had been written by some scholar in an attempt to disprove the Qur?an Alone position that the Qur?an is inclusive. This paper detailed every verse within the Qur?an that supposedly validated the use of Sunnah (and Hadith that relate it) as an Islamic supplement to the Qur?an. This scholar was trying to show how Sunnah & Hadith met Al-Furqaan.
You see; one of the things the Qur?an says it contains is Al-Furqaan (The Criterion). So, for Sunnah & Hadith to be applicable as a source of Islam, they must first meat The Criterion laid out in the Qur?an by God for judging all things. Not an easy task.
The truth be told though, I was initially a bit intimidated as I undertook writing my refutation. This scholar was good. He knew every Qur?anic verse, and exactly how to present them with impressive arguments. But as I pored over this paper, and cross-referenced it with the Qur?an, I started to feel a little insulted. Even lied to.
Soon after starting work on this refutation I had to rethink a misconception I had; that the Sunni Islamic argument is derived from an interpretation of the Qur?an. That it is derived from a corrupt reading of the Qur?anic command to ?follow (ittibaa)? and ?obey (itaa?ah)? the messenger. A mistake both Sunnis, and their detractors, make.
Interpretations are understandable, and the Qur?an leaves plenty of room for them. But I believe the Sunni Islamic argument originated from outside of the Qur?an, at a time (2nd century A.H.2) not long after the passing of the Prophet Mohammed?s contemporaries, those most knowledgeable in the Qur?an?s application. A time when there were still very few written (or human memorized) copies of the Qur?an available to both scholars and the masses for study. The very large numbers of narrations collected by these 2nd & 3rd century A.H. scholars that contradict the Qur?an are a testament to their lack of knowledge of the book.
Sunni Islam revolves around the concept that Islam is about the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet Mohammed, and less so the Qur?an. For them the Qur?an is viewed as an incomprehensible (or incomplete) scripture that the Prophet Mohammed needed to explain. And, without this explanation the Qur?an is useless. Basically the Qur?an is of less importance than the explanation. This opinion was almost certainly, once again, derived from a lack of knowledge of the book; because, nowhere does the Qur?an validate this assertion. There is not a single verse (ayat) in the Qur?an that states the Prophet is to explain the Book. As a matter of fact, that assertion contradicts the Qur?an. In numerous verses the Qur?an states that it is ?a clarifying Scripture?. It also states
??And We (God) have sent down to you the Scripture as a clarification for all things,? (1689)
Sunnis also think they are to emulate every minuet detail of the Prophets persona. This is because they believe everything he did or said was either divine inspiration, or based on revelations from God (both in and out of the Qur?an). They believe this, even though this is unsupported by the Qur?an. Six times within the Qur?an God corrects the Prophet Mohammed for making mistakes, and affirms that he was capable of sin (481-2). Sunnis ignore those verses because those verse raise questions ?How can someone, who?s every word and action is divine inspiration or based on revelations from God, commit any sins or mistakes? Would God be inspiring sins and mistakes to his Prophet?? Furthermore, by the Qur?an stating that the Mohammed was capable of sins and mistakes?, it can be said that anything he said or did outside of the Book could be a sin or a mistake. Which brings up another question ?Would God ask us to follow a sin or a mistake??
So, to make the Qur?an fit this external philosophy, the Sunni argument is forced (out of necessity) into the gutting of verses from the book that undermine it. And, then twists a handful of verses massively out of context. It runs ruff shot, right over some of the Qur?ans most basic assertions and clearest declarations
� Mohammed is but a messenger (3142, 3340)
� The messenger is only to deliver (599, 6412)
� The messenger?s message is the Qur?an only (223, 619, 6940-47)
� The Qur?an is fully detailed (54
� The Qur?an is complete (6115)
� The Qur?an is a clarification of all things (1689)
� The Qur?an contains a degree for every matter of wisdom (444)
� The Qur?an is the only source of Islamic Law (548, 6114)
� Be devoted to the Qur?an only (379)
� The Qur?an is the only words a believer needs (7185, 456, 7750)It is the forced nature of the Sunni Qur?anic argument that leads me to believe that the Sunni Islam does not originate from the Qur?an. But only later, when it was required to, it latched onto the verse that say to ?follow & obey? the messenger. Never minding what God (in the Qur?an) tells Mohammed to ?follow & obey?. The Qur?an.
Follow what was sent down to you (the Qur?an) all from your Lord, and do not follow besides Him (God) any supporters. Little do you remember! (72)
While going over this scholar?s paper, I was bewildered a bit by, what seemed to be, the deliberate misquoting of Qur?anic verses. I had to ask myself ?How can a scholar who knows the Qur?an so well quote verses about the Prophet Moses, and then say they are about the Prophet Mohammed? Or quote verses about the Angel Gabriel, and then say they are about the Prophet Mohammed? He knew the Qur?an to well to make those mistakes by accident, or did he?? And this was not the first time I had come across Sunni scholars doing this. The answer to these questions came when I got to the section detailing ?The Science of Hadith?, and started doing the supportive research on it.
A major problem for Hadith is the issue of authenticity. While it is almost certainly historically true that some of these narrations were written down during the lifetime of the Prophet Mohammed, there is every indication that the he himself disapproved of this practice.
Ibn Saeed Al-Khudry reported that the messenger of God had said
"Do not write anything from me except Qur?an. Anyone who wrote anything other than the Qur?an shall erase it."
From Ibn Hanbal
Zayd Ibn Thabit (The Prophet's closest revelation writer) visited the Khalifa Mu'aawiyah (more than 30 years after the Prophet's death), and told him a story about the Prophet. Mu'aawiyah liked the story and ordered someone to write it down. But Zayd said. " The messenger of God ordered us never to write anything of his hadith."
Narrations such as those (and there are more) aside, the bottom line is, there are no written narrations that exist from the lifetime of the Prophet Mohammed. They were all passed on orally for nearly a century after the Prophet Mohammed?s death before collection of them in the written form began under an edict by the Khalifa Omar Ibn Abdel-Aziz meant to stem the rising tide of false narrations3. And, it took yet another century for them to start being collected in a comprehensive manner using (what can only loosely be called) proofing methods, the birth of ?The Science of Hadith?. And it was studying this science that pushed me to the height of my contempt for Sunni Islam and my rejection of it.
End Part 1
-
Bacon on my cheeseburger
The road to an epiphanyBy Timothy Rowen
Part 2
It?s ridiculous to the point of reducing the image of Sunni Islamic scholarship to a farcical status. The science of Hadith (narration) employs methods of proofing these narrations authentic that defy rational thought. With a lack of written narrations from the lifetime of the Prophet Mohammed, proving any given narration authentic (sahih) is dependent on the solidness of its chain of narrators (its isnad). These chains often stretch orally, 200 or more years, and upwards of seven individuals, back to a person (or persons) that supposedly witnessed the Prophet Mohammed say or do something.
One of the most important proofing methods for the solidness of a hadith?s chain of narrators, requires proofing the memory capacity of every individual within the chain. Which bares the question ?How the hell do you test the memory of someone who is dead? And not just dead for a few years, but centuries!? The science also checks every individual in the chain of narrators to make sure they are of high moral standards. Considering that this checking process did not begin until nearly two centuries after the death of the Prophet Mohammed, one can only scratch ones head and wonder ?How the hell do you do a background check, on someone?s morals, that lived and died centuries before?? And this does not even address the question of ?Who checked the morals of the person that did the checking of everyone else?s morals?? Really, you have to question the intelligence of any individual that would consider methods like those scientific.
Oddly enough, the one criterion that you would imagine to be the first one that should be employed to check the authenticity of these narrations is not even used. The Qur?an, for Muslims, is supposed to be the truth from God that no Muslim may dispute. Yet despite this, checking a hadith against the Qur?an to see if it is harmony with the book is not part of the process.
Mathematically, this so called science is a sham as well. In the first two-three centuries after the Prophet Mohammed?s death, upwards of 700,000 thousand of these narrations were collected. Out of which, nearly 99% of those were deemed as fabrications (pure lies) by early scholars who thought they could weed through truth and falsehood. Anybody who knows math can tell you, that any system that deals with numbers as large as 700,000 and produces a 99% false result is unreliable. And, will produce a 99% false result in the remaining 1%.
The most noted of these early hadith scholars, and the first to put together a comprehensive collection implementing the science of hadith, was Imam Bukhari. He was born nearly two hundred years after the death of the Prophet Mohammed. And, according to his own words, he collected around 600,000 narrations, memorizing over 100,000. After implementation of the science of hadith, he threw out all but 7,257 narrations as fabrications (almost 99%). He did all this, once again according to his own words, over the course of sixteen years while traveling around the Middle East.
Now ask yourself ?How long, using the thorough proofing methods that Bukhari was supposed to have used on these narrations, would it take to ascertain any single hadith authentic, a week maybe?? ?How about, with a few assistants, a day?? ?Using a computer, maybe an hour or two??
For Imam Bukhari to do what he claimed to have done, amass and evaluate 600,000 narrations in sixteen years, he would have spent (on average) 14 minutes on each narration. And that?s only if he never slept or stopped to eat. Factor in travel time (back then on Camelback), collection time, and even if he threw out half of those 600,000 without evaluating them, Bukhari could not have done what he said he did in sixteen years. Either he lied about how many narrations he collected, or lied about how many years it took, or lied about the evaluation process. Any way you look at it, Bukhari lied. Yet, for Sunni Muslims, Bukhari?s collection (book) of narrations is second only to the Qur?an in status, with Bukhari considered as a saint.
So, being educated in the manner of Sunni scholarship, it was no wonder that the scholar (who?s paper I was refuting) found it so easy to misrepresent the Qur?an, because Sunni scholarship in itself is massively flawed. Perhaps even corrupt? It was at this point that I had to reject Sunni Islam in all its forms. I cannot follow any religion that knowingly incorporates corruption.
More so, all authenticity issues aside, the Qur?an simply does not support the usage of Hadith. To make my point; the Qur?an states
?God has sent down the best hadith, a Scripture (the Qur?an) that is similar with two paths.? (3923)
And then asks
?So in which hadith after this one (the Qur?an) will they believe?? (7185)
?In which hadith other than God and His revelations (the Qur?an) do they believe?" (456)
Myself, I could not answer those questions with other than ?None.?
Still, coming to this conclusion seemed to place a weight on my heart. Sunni Islam was something that I had devoted myself to for several years. I felt betrayed. And this in turn made me angry with Sunnis in general. Worse, I had no one to talk to about it. Trying to discuss such matters with my wife and in-laws only brought confrontation. To them, because I?m not a scholar, I knew nothing. And because I was not a scholar, questioning the status quo was sheer arrogance on my part. Trying to discuss this with my family back home in the US was a no go as well. They would only misconstrued this as me starting to comeback to Christianity. And for me, the Christian argument has just as many holes in it as Sunni Islam.
I suppose I could have turned to the Internet, and discussed things with other Qur?an Alone advocates online. But for me, there is nothing like sitting down with a human being (or a few), and having a substantive debate on divergent points of philosophical view. In the west this is commonplace. But I no longer lived in the west. I lived in Malaysia, where those types of discussions are generally not to be had. Especially when it comes to Sunni Islam. So as therapy I threw myself back into studying the Qur?an, and my writing.
Rejecting the use Sunnah & Hadith in Islam is easy enough. The Qur?an does not even remotely support their usage in an honest argument. But once you take Sunnah & Hadith away, you are left with the Qur?an alone, and some serious questions. Questions that Sunni Muslims always used narrations to answer. These are generally in regards to the structured details of performing Qur?anic obligations.
Many Qur?an Alone Muslims argue that those details are indeed in the Qur?an if you only look hard enough. But most of the arguments in support of that assertion are highly speculative. Qur?an Alone Muslims employ a method of deduction that functions similar to If you take verse (A) and then put it next to verse (G) and then cross-reference it with verse (Y) and using common sense you can deduce conclusion (X). This method does definitely work on many levels, but it does not answer all the detail oriented Questions that arise when one reads the Qur?an. Some of the details that cannot be answered by the Qur?an, without major external intervention (regardless of form) from outside the book, are as such
(A) The Qur?an tells believers to face the Restricted Temple (Masjid Al-Haram) when they observe their bond (salat) with God. They are also told to do their obligatory (at least once in their lifetime) Pilgrimage to the Restricted Temple. The problem is, the Qur?an never tells where the Restricted Temple is. Traditionally the Restricted Temple has been held to be the Kebah in Mecca, but this assertion is unsupported by both the Qur?an and recorded history.
For millennia before the Prophet Mohammed, both concurring armies and trading merchants had been plying their way across the area of where Mecca exists today, leaving behind both detailed maps and records with no mention of the city. At best it can be argued that Mecca did come into existence until the 3rd century A.D., which is a far cry from the Sunni position of Mecca being a center of trade and commerce since the time of the Prophet Abraham.
It is much more likely that the Restricted Temple is, in fact, the sight of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. History supports a pilgrimage to it, and one can make a circumstantial argument for it in the Qur?an, although not a definitive one.
(B) Believers are commanded in the Qur?an to observe the month of Ramadan (when the Qur?an was descended to the Prophet Mohammed), as well as fast within the month. The problem is in accreting when the month is.
The traditional Sunni method for accreting its position during the calendar year cannot possibly be correct, as they use a lunar calendar sending the month of Ramadan flying through the seasons. But the Qur?an uses both the setting places of the sun and the cycles of the moon to count the years. It uses a combined solar/lunar calendar.
But while it is easy enough to say the traditional Muslim lunar calendar is wrong, and that the Qur?an uses a solar/lunar calendar, the Qur?an gives no details about this calendar; details such as the placement of the New Year or which lunar cycle should be considered the month of Ramadan. These details do not exist in the Qur?an, regardless of how reasonable the speculative arguments some Qur?an alone Muslims come up with. At some point they still have to guess.
(C) There are certain dictates within the Qur?an to observe certain events at very specific times during the day. A believer is commanded to observe his bond with God at both dusk and dawn on a daily basis. But to observe these specifically timed Qur?anic dictates on a global scale is impossible. And Islam is supposed to be a global religion meant for all of mankind.
If you live in the extreme northern hemisphere near the Artic circle, and people do live there, for nearly six months out of the year it is either day or night. There is no dusk or dawn. While the people of the Middle East 1,400 years ago had no clue as to this fact, surely God did.
Now, some may argue that the way around these quandaries is to use the Qur?anic command to resolve differences though mutual consultation, to build a consensus. That?s fine, but for the life of me I can?t see any true consensus coming out the above questions other than ?To each his own?. However, it was through pondering such questions, that I began to realize something.
Here I was, reading and re-reading the Qur?an, studying every detail of the Book so that I could have a respectable command of it. But the more of those details I learned, the less happy I seemed to be. The knowledge of these Qur?anic details was making me arrogant. And being around Sunnis, who constantly talk about ?Islam?, yet have no clue as to what their own holy book says, only enhanced this arrogance. The truth is, the more details of the Qur?an I learned, the farther away I seemed to get from the essence of the Book. The essence that seemed to stick out so sharply to me the very first time I read the Qur?an.
It was at this point that I had to go back and reconsider a verse in the Qur?an that I had long ago memorized, and thought that I understood
He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture, from which there are governing verses; they are the essence of the Scripture; and others that are allegorical. As for those who have disease in their hearts, they will follow what is allegorical from it seeking to confuse, and seeking to derive an interpretation. But none know its interpretation except God; and those who are well founded in knowledge, they Say ?We believe in it, all is from our Lord.? And none will remember except the people of understanding. (37)
For over fourteen centuries scholars have been debating which verses in the Qur?an are ?allegorical? and which verses are ?governing?. The first few times I read the Qur?an I took as ?allegorical? the verses that covered stories that are scientifically unsound, like the story of Noah and the whole world flooding. Eventually, because more literal translations of (37) use ?obscure/similar? instead of ?allegorical?, I shifted my opinion. I started looking at verse (37), when referring to verses that are ?obscure/similar?, as referring to the obscure verses in the Qur?an that on their own make no sense. The verses that leave people asking, ?What does this mean?? the verses that Sunni?s exploited to justify the use of Sunnah & Hadith. And indeed I still believe they do. But perhaps verses that are ?allegorical? carry much farther a field than I had originally envisioned?
I had never considered the possibility that the verses the Qur?an deemed as ?allegorical?, may perhaps extend to verses that appear to lay down the foundation of a structured religion. A perfect system from God, with set laws that cover issues like divorce, trade, inheritance, etc, etc. Just like a modern constitution. In fact, some Qur?an alone Muslims have even fashioned such a constitution based on these verses, because the structured details of many topics are well covered within the Qur?an. Many Qur?an Alone Muslims even define religion as a ?system?.
But then again, there are the dictates within the Qur?an that appear to be part of this ?system?, yet are less than fully detailed (such as A, B, & C previously covered) and throw the whole concept of a ?system? into question. One only needs to review some of the Qur?an Alone debates (regardless of how cordial) to see, that regardless of how much consensus is built, there will always be valid questions raised about this ?system?.
Even if you start cutting off the frayed edges of this ?system? to strengthen its more detailed dictates, it doesn?t take long for the edges to become frayed again; just like a peace of cloth. Many of these topics that seem to be very detailed, subjects such a divorce and business contracts, are highly susceptible to technical ?What if? arguments. There is a reason common law books come in volumes, to deal with ?extended circumstances?; where as the Qur?an is around three hundred pages (in English), with perhaps fifty dedicated to structured details.
?But, that?s where common sense comes in. The common sense, wisdom, and guidance derived from reading the Qur?an?, some may counter.
?Common sense? Wisdom? Guidance??? Terms like these I too often come across Qur?an Alone Muslims using in conjunction with their understanding of the Qur?an as derived from their reading of the Qur?an. Especially when it comes to conclusions they have garnered from the Book that show how previous generations of Muslims screwed up the ?system?. As if those previous generations did not apply the same terms to their understanding of the Qur?an while making their mistakes. But the real problem with those terms, particularly when applying them to sorting out to the ?system?, is they are subjective. What is ?common sense, wisdom, and guidance? to one person, can be ?shear stupidity? to some one else. More so, Qur?an Alone Muslims regularly confuse their best of intentions with an indulgence in conjecture. Regardless of how much ?common sense, wisdom, and guidance? you think you have derived from the Qur?an you cannot convert conjecture into fact. Or for that matter, use those terms to introduce conjecture into the ?system?.
??And conjecture is no replacement for the truth?? (5329)
So perhaps those verses that seem to outline a structured religion (a ?system?) within the Qur?an, are in fact also verses that are ?allegorical?? The verses that ?those who have disease in their hearts, they will follow?. More so, theses verse can hardly be called, as verse (37) puts it, ?governing verses?, because they are hardly ?the essence of the Scripture?. And there in lies the key to understanding, which verses are ?governing?, and which are ?allegorical?.
?He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture, from which there are governing verses; they are the essence of the Scripture?? (37)
So to ascertain what verses the Qur?an deems as ?governing verses?, we have to ask the question ?What is the essence of the Scripture??
One of the things that have always amazed me about the Qur?an is its consistency. The Bible is no comparison to it. The Qur?an is massively focused when it comes to its core message, and never fluctuates. Over, and over again, it conveys to the reader there is only One God, do not make equals with the One God, you are responsible for your own actions, do not take the life that God has made sacred without just cause; to be peaceful, tolerant, repentant, patient, balanced, forgiving, merciful, honest, polite, humble, just, charitable, and supportive of your parents and those in need. The Qur?an refers to it as ?A straight path?. But are these verses ?the essences of the Scripture??
Let?s do a comparison of verses to see if we can gain some perspective
A) And for he who is patient and forgives, then that is an indication of strength. (4243)
B) ?He (God) has only forbidden for you what is already dead, and the blood, and the meat of pig?? (2173)
Certainly the first of theses two verses is much closer to ?the essence of the Scripture?, than the second. What does not eating pork have to with moral conduct?
And this brought me back to the words of that Egyptian woman sixteen years ago ?Darling, the prohibition on pork was made two thousand years ago to keep people from getting worms. So by all means, go ahead and have some bacon on your cheeseburger?.
The Qur?ans revelation took place over fourteen centuries ago, given to a man and people who lived and functioned in an era that no longer exists. Many of the Qur?ans dictates are obviously aimed at that era and those people. Things like the pagan Arab practice of burying their newborn daughters alive, or divorcing a woman by simply saying she is as your mother. The Qur?anic dictates in these regards are not relevant in the global multi-cultural world that Islam functions in today, beyond being a lesson for us to learn from. And it is that lesson(s) (zikr) that is most important.
So could it be, that all of those verses that seem to be laying down a structured religion (or a ?system?) were meant for a people nearly fifteen centuries past, and today we are only meant to take a lesson from them? ?See how ignorant the people were, that God actually had to tell them not to bury their newborn daughters alive?. Are they just part of the story of the Prophet Mohammed, and hence allegorical? Are they no different than the verses that detail the stories of previous prophets like Jesus, Abraham, or Moses? Are they only part of the lesson(s) within the Qur?an?
And it is at this point that I came upon an epiphany.
?The Qur?an is not meant to be taken literally?!
Once you start taking the Qur?an literally, you have to start implementing the structured religion, the ?system?, that the Book seems to outline. And then you have to defend that position. You have to find a way to fill in the blanks, to answer the questions that God deliberately put into the Qur?an (?No, God did not leave anything out of the Book as Sunni?s claim, but God certainly did insert a few blanks?).
For traditional Muslims, answering those questions means the incorporation of corrupt Hadith books. For many Qur?an Alone Muslims, answering those questions means the incorporation of conjecture. In truth, saying, ?The Qur?an is not meant to be taken literally? is also conjecture. But that position is much easier to defend than, taking the Qur?an literally. If you take the Qur?an literally; at some point, you have to defend the structured religion it seems to outlay, and its details.
These details are also the ones that people are most willing to fight and kill over, because it is how they define their religion. Just look at Sunni & Shia Muslims (let alone Jews, Christians, and Muslims). They worship the same God, and share the same Scripture, teaching the same set of morals. Yet many Sunni & Shia Muslims are willing to throw their morals out the window to defend their perception of the details, their ?system?.
So, are the details of the Qur?an (or any scripture) really ?the essence of the Scripture??
For me, I believe that God defines ?the essence of the Scripture?, and the religion of Islam, in a single verse.
There is no compulsion in the religion; the proper way has been made clear from the wrong way. Whoever rejects evil, and believes in God; then he has grasped the most solid branch that will never break. God is Hearer, Knower. (2256)
This one verse contains everything that God says is in the Qur?an ?The Wisdom?, ?The Balance?, ?The Clarity?, and ?The Criterion?. It fulfills God?s word when God says the Qur?an is ?Fully detailed? and ?A clarification of all things?. It allows for divergent beliefs by saying ?There is no compulsion in the religion?, and articulates what should be a universal concept, ?rejection of evil?. And, when it comes to God, it only asks us to ?believe in God?, to believe in a Higher Power than ourselves. If you can just reject evil, and believe in a Higher Power than yourself, then ?You have grasped the most solid branch that will never break?. This branch is one that almost anyone can grasp on to, regardless of access to a Scripture.
So there in lays my personal beliefs, my ?religion?, summed up. I know that for many people they will never be able to accept this opinion as Islamic, or even a religion. And I am always going to come under attack for this view from some corner. It?s just too simple. But in coming to this point I feel for the first time, in a long time, free.
It should be noted though, that this opinion is only my own. I may very well be wrong; it?s not like it would be the first time. And, I am in no way advocating reading one verse, or an article such as this, and not reading the Qur?an. The Qur?an is a book that must be read, and re-read, and contemplated. Its lessons are never ending. But then again, I know people that have never read the Qur?an, yet still understand ?its essence? better than some who are 90 years of age having recited the Book every day since youth. It?s all depends on what beats inside your chest.
Now, going back one last time to the Egyptian woman I met so many years ago, and her statement ?Darling, the prohibition on pork was made two thousand years ago to keep people from getting worms. So by all means, go ahead and have some bacon on your cheeseburger?.
She was right. It just took me sixteen years to realize it.
?Mmmmmmmmmmm baby, real bacon on my cheeseburger! Turkey bacon?s just not the same. And I want some ham on my Pizza, chili cheese hot dogs from the ?Root Beer Stand?, Baby back BBQ ribs, and oh yah? Grandma?s biscuits ?n? gravy with sausage gravy!?
Praise God!
The End.
-
Peace BuDaddy,
I'm from mid-America as well, and I've been down pretty much the same path as you.... (---Funny I didn't see you along the way. Oh, yeah, how could I forget, I was on the women's side! P)---and I'm with you, on most every point, although I would not feel 'comfy' downing a pork bacon cheeseburger, as I do believe that there are ayat to be taken literally. Thanks for the great post though! bravo
-
Peace,
thanks for sharing !
For some time now, after nearly 20 years of abstinence regarding pork, i'm reconsidering the question. Have not yet gotten back to egg and bacon though , but your article brought me further again.
So true, what is the essence of this scripture, and in what does not eating pork contribute to the betterment of oneself or society ?
elke
-
peace
I'm thinking maybe the "not eating pork" command is not literal.
I mean, there aren't any proven ill effects of pork that aren't true of other foods that the quran never mentions. And why doesn't the quran ever mention the stuff that will kill you if you eat it?
there are two possibilities-
either the quran is imperfect, and the pork thing comes from the writer's bias or bad knowledge. Or it's just that at the time and place, eating pork wasn't the best thing. But again, why not mention other things?
-
it is not supposed to be taken literally and we should look for a deeper meaning. Maybe it means something else.
-
-
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=2074.0
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4347.0
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4031.0
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4171.0
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4277.0
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4172.0
There are more threads if one wishes to search for them.
-
Maybe we should drink blood becouse maybe, just maybe we shouldnt take it literally, or eat dead animals or....Maybe not killing people is not meant to be taken literally....
From thousand and thousands of animals that live on Earth we are asked not to eat just one of them, just one - PIG. You can eat anything else you like just don't eat pig, and yet we try to find a way to bypass that order.I wonder what would your answer be if asked by GOD, why did you eat the only animal meat I asked you not to.
Sometimes you people sound like lawyers. rotfl
-
^I'm a law student -[
Alright BuDaddy, nice story. But it just doesn't cut it. You state that the Quran is complete, but in the same breath, you also say that it doesnt have everything we need to make a perfect system. You're wrong. Allah does give clear right and wrong. Read the following FULL verses. He is CLEARLY talking to those who believe not to be willfully disobedient or transgress against Him. Yet, you choose to take this non-literal? We can't pick and choose what is clear and what is not.
2172 O ye who believe!
Eat of the good things
The we have provided for you
And be grateful to Aallah
If it is Him ye worship2173 He hath only forbidden you
Dead meat and
blood
and the flesh of swine
and that on which
Any other name hath been invoked
besides that of Allah
But if one is forced by necessity
without willful disobedience,
Nor transgressing due limits
then it is guiltless
For Allah is oft-forgiving,
Most MercifulAllah does not state whether this is a prohibition with limits. You just can't eat pig. And that includes bacon, my friend.
-
Peace!
If the message is summed up in this one ayat "There is no compulsion in the religion; the proper way has been made clear from the wrong way. Whoever rejects evil, and believes in God; then he has grasped the most solid branch that will never break. God is Hearer, Knower. (2256)" then why did Allah need to reveal everything else?
Such a big book to with so many lines to say 'just allegorical'?
How do I make sure whether the Ayat you referred to, viz., "He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture, from which there are governing verses; they are the essence of the Scripture; and others that are allegorical. As for those who have disease in their hearts, they will follow what is allegorical from it seeking to confuse, and seeking to derive an interpretation. But none know its interpretation except God; and those who are well founded in knowledge, they Say ?We believe in it, all is from our Lord.? And none will remember except the people of understanding. (37)"
Is it to be taken literally? If so, on what basis?
If Allah would mean just this Ayat and all the characteristics you mentioned about the Straight Path, then why reveal so many other Ayat? To guide only people 1400 years ago? Then 1400 years from now the level and standards of Morality would change, for example, today, most people think there is nothing wrong in seeing or being a girl with a mini skirt on - no modesty!
Please take a look at the ayat you quoted - especially the part "Whoever rejects evil" (2256), how do we define evil? Wearing a miniskirt is not 'evil' for a model, but it is 'evil' for me and my wife. If Allah leaves 'evil' to our random guesses, likes, concensus etc., then the Quran cannot be the 'Furqan' (the criterion) and if it is so, then in what sense? Also, it would make the Quran very unclear, but the Quran says that it is clear.
There are too many things in discussion here. Instead of putting all the points, I suggest that you study the Quran in Arabic, if not, then, though its kind of irritating to read it, please study the translation by Dr. Taqiud-din-Hilali and Dr. Muhsin Khan. They are staunch Sunni translators, but one good thing is that they leave the key words untranslated in their translation. For example, 22, "This is the Book (the Qur'?n), whereof there is no doubt, a guidance to those who are Al-Muttaq?n."
He even retains words such as 'Fasiqun' and 'T?gh?t', which is the word that is translated as 'evil' in 2256. A study of this translation, does clarify a lot of things.
-
Peace Tim,
thanks for sharing !
For some time now, after nearly 20 years of abstinence regarding pork, I'm reconsidering the question. Have not yet gotten back to egg and bacon though , but your article brought me further again.
So true, what is the essence of this scripture, and in what does not eating pork contribute to the betterment of oneself or society ?
elke
Wow, 20 yrs.
The truth be told, I actually have not eaten any pork. I put that in there as more of a joke, and to see the responce it would generate. While I don't have a problem with it, my wife does. So not eating pork is a small price to pay for peace.
-
^I'm a law student -[
Alright BuDaddy, nice story. But it just doesn't cut it. You state that the Quran is complete, but in the same breath, you also say that it doesnt have everything we need to make a perfect system. You're wrong. Allah does give clear right and wrong. Read the following FULL verses. He is CLEARLY talking to those who believe not to be willfully disobedient or transgress against Him. Yet, you choose to take this non-literal? We can't pick and choose what is clear and what is not.
Peace Deena.
I'm not a lawyer, but I hire them from time to time. Although, you may say that sometimes I get hired to play the role of advocate. You need to go back and play "Devil's Advocate" to you own argument. Once you do that, my counter should become obvious. If this was biznass, your unthought out reply would have cost you client a lot of money.
Cheers
-
Peace BuDaddy
Thank you for an excellent read on a beautiful Sunday morning D
I'm actually considering sending this article to my hard-core Sunni brother. Although I think some of your opinions towards the end would be too much for him to handle at this point ...
I agree with you on many points. However, how do we have a "deen" (way of life) if everything is not to be taken literally? And how do we reach the consensus you believe we all need to attain? If all the verses were allegorical, we'd still have just as many holes in people's interpretations.
I'd have to agree with Zenje that there are literal and allegorical meanings included in each verse.
Life is a journey for us. What I believed a sura meant when I was 20 is not the same as today. I think in there lies the beauty of the quran. You can't capture it in a still-frame photo and say that's what it is . Its meanings and nuances and grey areas grow as we grow. It all depends on what stage we're in as of now. Perhaps nobody will ever fully understand what the Quran is all about. And perhaps we weren't meant to in a lifetime. Maybe we are only measured by where we end up in this life journey - how far our jihad took us in understanding God's Truth. If that is the measurement, then I would say you're doing better than me ;D
-
Peace BuDaddy,
You're a talented writer handshake
The only caveat I would add, and one that I currently abide to, is if an ayah in question is to be rendered as allegorical, then we must certainly identify the guidance the allegory points to. In the case of pork, I understand both sides of the argument, but I see no allegorical correlation. Yes, there is very little proof to support the fact that pork is "bad". But, lack of evidence does not equal evidence of lacking.
So, for me personally, when I've come to an understanding of, for argument's sake, 95% of the scripture and identified within it the essence and the allegory, I subsequently confirm to myself that the author is ceratinly divine. Thus, the remaining 5% that I cannot categorize as either essential or allegorical, I lean towards the literal as erring on the side of caution and infinitely greater wisdom than my own.
In short, I don't know why we can't eat pork. The fact is that pigs are certainly dirty scavenging animals, but so are many other sanctioned animals. So, that in itself is not a strong enough argument. The only alternatives left, imo, is either the meat is has not been studied enough(or perhaps studies have been subdued due to lobbying pressure) or the word "khanzeer" does not mean "pork". Neither stance is conclusive at this point, and I'm already used to not eating it, so I just don't eat it.
That's not to say that I believe this prohibition to be nearly as important as Sunnis make it out to be, and it does not add to the "essence".
Anyway, thanks for sharing your article.
Peace,
Tay -
Maybe we should drink blood becouse maybe, just maybe we shouldnt take it literally, or eat dead animals or....Maybe not killing people is not meant to be taken literally....
From thousand and thousands of animals that live on Earth we are asked not to eat just one of them, just one - PIG. You can eat anything else you like just don't eat pig, and yet we try to find a way to bypass that order.peace
I forgot I had posted on this thread.
The thing is, who's "order" are we following? why should we follow it? If the quran only forbids what is bad for us, and it's complete, why doesn't it prohibit the eating of other animals that will kill you instantly? It doesn't make sense.And BOOST, the quran says quite a few times that God's message is explained in parables. And just because verses aren't literal doesn't mean the quran isn't pointing toward a way of life that we should live.
And Tay pointed to a new possibility, that khanzeer doesn't mean "pork". Forgot that one.
-
Peace Deena.
I'm not a lawyer, but I hire them from time to time. Although, you may say that sometimes I get hired to play the role of advocate. You need to go back and play "Devil's Advocate" to you own argument. Once you do that, my counter should become obvious. If this was biznass, your unthought out reply would have cost you client a lot of money.
Cheers
I'm not a lawyer, either. I havent even finished first year.
But does it even matter if your argument or my argument is obvious? At the end of the day, we stick to our convinctions regardless of how we came to it. This is why we're here at free minds, isn't it? I personally think that the Quran is 100% complete (based on the stated verses). It is clear that we need to stay away from those things unless we are forced to. Without willful disregard or transgression on our part. You're counter is should we take this literally? I think it's clear enough to be taken literally. YOu have your own views, I respect that. So I guess I can play the devil's advocate here to justify why I should eat bacon?? Not me, but you can go ahead and do that.
-
At the end of the day, we stick to our convinctions regardless of how we came to it.
Nice catch Deena, I didn't want to mention this before, because I thought it would be too one-sided. In any case, I've seen members here use quran to convince others (and themselves) that homosexuality is allowed. If you want it bad enough, you can make it happen.PS - I hope the thread subject doesn't change to homosexuality now. )
-
Peace be with you
Quote Budaddy
There is not a single verse (ayat) in the Qur?an that states the Prophet is to explain the Book
I agree with you that obey the messenger does not mean to imitate him on information compiled after 200 years. But how about the following verses?
2 129
"Our Lord! send amongst them an Apostle of their own who shall rehearse Thy Signs to them and instruct them in Scripture and Wisdom and sanctify them; for Thou art the Exalted in Might the Wise."
16 64
And We sent down the Book to thee for the express purpose that thou shouldst make clear to them those things in which they differ and that it should be a guide and a mercy to those who believe.
62 2
He it is Who hath sent among the unlettered ones a messenger of their own, to recite unto them His revelations and to make them grow, and to teach them the Scripture and Wisdom, though heretofore they were indeed in error manifest,
I liked your writing and admire your efforts in search of knowledge but in your answer to Dion and Deena you have shown no difference from the sunni scholar in your artcle who distorts the Quraan knowingly or unknowingly and flee from the subject and the argument put forward.
It is easy to say every verse is not literal and hide inside the safety of allegorical. Saying most of the Quraan should not be taken literally is saying it is not real but its ?clear magic?. May be the Egyptian lady was not talking literally.
It doesn?t get simple than this. Adam was told not to eat from the tree but he disobeyed. Remember the consequences for Adam. The evil one deceived him. Sometimes some of
intentionally or unintentionally sell dreams to deceive others to commit acts prohibited by God. May Allah protect us .Also, from 37 ?? and those who are well founded in knowledge, they Say ?We believe in it, all is from our Lord.? And none will remember except the people of understanding.?
Maybe we are not people of understanding or at least maybe not still. So we must read and research the Quraan more. And believe and be righteous, so Allah might guide us and give us knowledge and wisdom to understand His revelations. Since any amount of knowledge and reading is not going to help unless if Allah guides us.
20 114
High above all is Allah the King the Truth! Be not in haste with the Qur'an before its revelation to thee is completed but say "O my Lord! advance me in knowledge."
-
Peace Tim,
thanks for sharing !
For some time now, after nearly 20 years of abstinence regarding pork, i'm reconsidering the question. Have not yet gotten back to egg and bacon though , but your article brought me further again.
So true, what is the essence of this scripture, and in what does not eating pork contribute to the betterment of oneself or society ?
elke
Elkes exemption clause to obeying commands of God
God, I will obey your commands only if it meets the criteria that it should ?contribute to the betterment of oneself or society?.
From when is God bound by man's commands