STILL DEBATING SALAT?!?
-
he speaks!!!
Peace
Please see what this site says about quraan alonr organization
http//www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/QD/QD_1_01_06.htm
Home
The Namaaz -Prayer- of Allah's Messenger (s)
by G. A. Parwez
translated by Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque
The mode of Namaaz (Prayer) with a specific sequence has not come to pass in the Quran. The Messenger of Allah (S) had suggested this method. It is vividly apparent that the Messenger (S) offered Namaaz for the whole of his life and made his companions offer it. This process is infiltrating with consistency in the Ummah till today.Consequently, it ought to have the same mode of offering Namaaz perpetuated in the entire Ummah. But we are looking that there are disagreements in the details of Namaaz among the various outfits and every one asserts that the way it is offering the Namaaz was exactly the way of the Messenger of Allah (S). Think over it. Is it worth accepting that each method out of the present different methods is of the Messenger of Allah (S)? It is said that the Messenger (S) offered Namaaz by one method and then by one the other method. In this way all these different methods come to be the methods of the Messenger of Allah (S). First of all it ought to be understood that when the Messenger of Allah (S) set aside his first method, and opted for the second method, then obeying this second method from within would be the obedience to the Sunnah for the Ummah. The first method was annulled. Then any faction?s keeping on following the first method and going on denominating it as the obedience to the Sunnah is an erroneous errand. Secondly, if the varying methods prevalent among the various outfits are all of the Messenger of Allah (S), then why is there racking of brains among the varying factions in the disagreement of those methods? Their ?racking of each other?s brains? extends to such an extent, with such an intensity that if the Muslim of one sect offers Namaaz in its own manner in the mosque of the Muslims of another sect, the people of this mosque scrub the very floor of their mosque (and in some places it is reported that they dug up the floor even). It is plain that in the view of these factions Namaaz of every other faction is not the Namaaz of the Messenger of Allah (S).
AHL-E-HADITH AND AHL-E-QURAN
Regarding the Namaaz-offering-method, the altercation between the faction of Ahl-e-Hadith and Ahl-e-Quran is very interesting. The objection of Ahl-e-Hadith is if we accept the Quran alone and reject the Hadith, then how we should offer Namaaz; it is because there is no detail given in the Quran. Responding to it, the Ahl-e-Quran say dilate upon this phenomenon as to how we should offer Namaaz that may be in line with the method given in Ahadith. It is because no one definite form of Namaaz come by Ahadith -leave aside one form of the entire Namaaz -even contradictory Ahadith are found in each and every detail of Namaaz.
We have received a brief pamphlet entitled NAMAAZ. Its writer is Faiz Rahmani. Mataba Rahman, Buhawal Pur, published it. We do not know as to which faction the writer belongs to. Anyhow, he writes in the beginning of this pamphlet
It ought to be known that the Namaaz-offering-method of Ahl-e-Sunnat wal Jamaat proves the process of consistency and the Quran and the Sunnah verify it.
DISAGREEMENTS OF NAMAAZ
But after it, he writes that such details of Namaaz are found in Ahadith (the sequence of which culminates to the worthy companions and associates of the Messenger of Allah (S) and reporters of which are stated to be valid and reliable) which do not conform to each other. For Example
-
There is a tradition in Tirmzi The Messenger of Allah (S) used to raise his hands up to his shoulder at the time of Takbeer Tehreema. The tradition in Abu Daood is The Messenger of Allah (S) used to raise hands to the lobule of the ears.
-
The tradition in Muslim is The Messenger of Allah (S) used to begin his Namaaz from Al hamdo lilla he rabb il aala meen after Takbeer Tahreema. The tradition in Bukhari is After Takbeer Tahreema, the Messenger of Allah (S) used to recite the benediction of alla humma Baa id bainee before reciting Fateha Surah. A tradition in Abu Daud says that after Takbeer Tahreema, the Messenger of Allah (S) used to recite aaoozo billahe minushai ta nira jeem before reciting Surah Fateh. A tradition in Nissee says that the Messenger of Allah (S), after Takbeer Tehreema but before Surah Fateh, used to recite the verse of inna sala tee wa no so ke ?. There is another tradition in Nisaaee that says the Messenger of Allah (S), after Takbeer Tahreema, but before Surah Fateh, used to recite the verse of innee wajjah to waj he lilla ze?... There is tradition in Tirmzi and Ibne Maja that the exalted Messenger of Allah (S), after Takbeer Tahreema, but before Surah Fateha, used to recite Sana sub hana kalla humma.
-
There is tradition in Termzi, Abu Daood and Nisaai The Messenger of Allah (S) raised hand up to the ears at the time of Takbeer Tahreema and then did not do Rafa?a yadain in the entire Namaaz. There is another tradition in Bukhari and Muslim that the Messenger of Allah (S) used to raise his both hands up to shoulders at the time of starting Namaaz and even after Rak?u he used to do Rafa?a yadain.
-
There is tradition in Sanan Imam Shaf?ee and Masnad Ahmed bin Hanbal that the Messenger of Allah (S) used to tie hands on the chest while standing in Namaaz. A tradition in Imam Mauta says that the Messenger of Allah (S) used to offer Namaaz leaving his hands straight down.
-
There is tradition in Tirmzi, Nasaaee and Abu Daood. The Messenger of Allah (S) said Whoever do not remember anything from the Quran, he may do raku after reciting only sub haa nalla and laa-e-laa ha ill lalla while standing in Namaaz. This is enough for him. A tradition in Mauta, Ibne Maja, Bukhari Muslim says that the Messenger of Allah (S) told without reciting Fateha, the Namaaz is unsound.
-
There is tradition in Mauta that the recitation of Fateha in the congregation of Namaaz behind the Imam is prohibited whether it is Namaaz Jehree or Siri. There is another tradition in Mauta that the recitation of Fateha in the congregation of Jehree Namaaz behind the Imam is prohibited. Still another tradition of Bukhari and Muslim says that the recitation of Fateha in the congregation of Namaaz Jehri or Sirri, behind the Imam is obligatory.
-
A tradition in Mauta says that Aameen bil jehra was in vogue in the beginning of Islam, then it was quitted and repealed. A tradition in Abu Daood says that after reciting Fateha, Aameen bil sirr should be uttered softly, whether it is Namaaz with congregation or individual. The tradition in Bukhari and Muslim says After reciting Fateha, Aameen bil jehra and bil sirr should be uttered in Jehri Namaaz and Sirri Namaaz respectively, whether it is Namaaz with congregation or individual.
-
A tradition in Bukhari says that the Messenger of Allah (S) taught this Tashhad for the sitting (Q?ada) of Namaaz
attehyato lilla he wassala wato wattayai bato assala mo elaika ayyo hanna biyyo wa rah mat ulla he wa bara ka to hoo assa laa mo elaina wa ala ebaa dilla he assa le heen. Asha ha do an la ela ha ill lalla ho wa ash ha anna Muhammada Dun ab do hoo wa rasoo lo hoo.
There is tradition in Muslim that says the Messenger of Allah (S) used to teach this tashhad for the Qa?da (sitting) of Namaaz
atteh ya to ul ba ra ka to assa la to ut tayye ba to lilla he assa la mo elai ka ayya hanna biyyo wa rah ma ta ho wa ba ra ka to hoo assalamo elaina wa ala ibad-illa-he-us-saa le hanna. Ashhado an lae laa he ill lallaho wa ash ha do anna Muhammad dan rasool ullah.
There is tradition in Nisaaee that says the Messenger of Allah (S) taught this tashhad for the Q?ada (sitting) of Namaaz
bis milla he wa billahe atteh ya to lillahe wassala wa to uttayye ba to assa lamic elaika ayyo hanna biyyo wa rah mat ullahe wa ba ra kato hoo-us-salamo elaina wa ala ibadillahe-us-saleheena ash ha do an lae laha ill lallaho wa ash hado anna Muhammad an ab do hoo wa rasoola hoo-us aal-ullaha-ul-jamma ta wa aoozo bil llahe min-unar.
A tradition in Mauta says that Abdullah bin Umar used to recite this tashhad in Qa?da (sitting)
bis milla he-ut-tah yato lilla he-us-sala wa to lilla he-uz-za kiya to lillahe-us sala mo ala-una-biyye wa rah ma to hoo wa ba ra ka to hoo-us-sala mo alaina wa ala ibad illahe-us-sale heen. Sha hid to am lla ila ha ill lallaho shahid to anna Muhammad an rasool-ullahe.
Still there is third tradition in Mauta that says Hazra Aaisha used to recite this tashhad in the Qa?da of Namaaz
atteh ya to-ut-tayye ba to-us-sala wato-uz-za ke ya to lilla he, ash ha do an la ila he ill lallaho la shareeka la hoo wa anna Muhammad an ab do hullllahe wa rasoolo hoo-us-sala mo elaika ayyo han na biyyowa rah matullahe wa ba ra ka to ho-us-salamo elaina wa ala iba dillahe-us-sale heenun.
After jotting down these contradictory traditions, he writes
Now who will decide which one of these traditions is correct? Instead of conducting cross-examination and cross-questioning on the narrators and the contiguity to the sequence of authority etc, these traditions ought to be judged in the light of the Quran.
EXAMPLE OF ARGUMENT FROM THE QURAN
How has these traditions been judged in the light of the Quran? The following example given by him will help you to oversee this phenomenon
The verses pertaining to the elements and recitals of Namaaz are also found in the Quran, through which the Ahadith can be rectified, for nobility. All the Ahadith narrated in contradiction to the Quran are all coined definitely, for example the traditions (Ahadith) pertaining to ?leaving hands straight down in the standing position (Qayaam) during Namaaz? or ?tying hands down to the umbilicus? are against the teaching of the Quran. Hazart Moses (God bless him) was ordained to put his hand in the collar. Us look ya da fee jai be ka (28 32). Simultaneously there was another order with one hand, catch the other. Waz mum elai ka jana ha ka min-ur-rah be (28 32). Tie hands on your breast in such a way that you may keep on catching one hand well dressed with the other.
Did you dilate upon, which verse of the Quran has been used for ?corroborating the tying of hands on the breast during the Namaaz?? ? From that verse which has nothing to do with Salaat. This is the verse of Surah Qasas where Moses (God bless him) has been told
Osluk yadaka fee jaybika takhruj baydaa min ghayri soo-in waodmum ilayka janahaka mina alrrahbi fathanika burhanani min rabbika ila firAAawna wamala-ihi innahum kanoo qawman fasiqeena (2832)
Its literal translation is ?put your hand in your collar. It will come out whitened without any defect and press to thee thy arm to be out of fear. These two are the vivid reason from thy Rabb to Pharaoh and his chiefs; thy are surely a transgressing people.? Deducing from this verse that God has ordained the Muslims to tie-up their hands on the breast is (God forbid) jesting with the Quran. (The Ahl-e-Quran faction usually puts this reason forth and if we are not mistaken, Maulana Abdullah Chakralvi (deceased) gushed forth this very reason).
It is factual reality that neither has the Quran mentioned the details of Salaat, not can any single form of Namaaz be determined according to the Ahadith. If this could have been done there would have been no disagreement in the details of Namaaz among our various sects though all the religious outfits produce Ahadith as a proof of their details; and every one of them judge their Ahadith as correct and those of other?s as weak. There is no way of disposing of these differences and disagreements today. There is only one alternative the caliphate-at-the-pattern-of-the-Messengerhood based on the safeguarded and immutable constitution of the Quran is reconstructed. It would be the prerogative of that system to inculcate again, after deciding the disagreement among the Ummah, the same harmony of thought and action which prevailed during the era of Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (S) and his companions (who conformed their action to that of their Nourisher). Till this is done, the ways and means coming down to us are sustained as these are. Bringing any change in them would cause further factionalism in the Ummah and the factionalism, according to the Quran, is polytheism ? ascribing plurality to the Deity.
This is the same invitation and the same call of Tolu-e-Islam. (1959)
-
-
Perhaps I am replying to this thread a bit late, but everything SHM has said really struck a chord with me. I joined this forum just about 4 years ago when I started college, I graduated about 5 months ago. So four years roughly. I was a sunni that prayed 5 times a day, read the Quran in english, believed in the 5 pillars. I never really cared for the Hadith too much, but didn't think they were all false. Anyways, long story short, convinced by the arguments on the forum and on the website that nearly everything about traditional Islam was fabricated, I dropped it all. I stopped praying because I no longer knew exactly how to pray or what was involved in prayer. I kept reading the many threads and 'discussions' here, but all it did was confuse me more. After a while I got so sick of it all that I just stopped visiting these forums. There was no unity, no consensus, no furthering of any knowledge here. People, especially the mods SHM mentioned, were extremely judgmental. What were they basing their opinions on? Their own whims apparently. FM and many of the people here act as if Islam was created in a void, just poof and it happened. No context. No history. Nothing. It is what it is and nothing else. Any sane person would realize that that just isn't what happened. You can't just create new meanings to majidal haram and other things/places without first providing proof that the new interpretation is based in reality. Replacing prayer with Connection is an example. Frankly, it makes no sense, and further increases this confusion.
The point is that SHM is 110% right. This place has done nothing but created division, and after four years reached no solid consensus on anything. I don't believe that orthodox Sunni Islam is a 100% right in its tradition, rituals, and historical narrations, but what they have goes back to the very early 8th century at least. Sunni practices are recorded by Muslims and non-Muslims from the very early period. The battles between the Muslims are recorded by both as well. If you are going to argue against any of these, then your theory MUST fit within reality and within historical context. Was Muhammad originally from Mecca? Maybe he wasn't, but if you are going to argue that then you MUST bring evidence(historical, archaelogical, textual) which will place the theory in reality. Randomly quoting verses from the Quran doesn't count. People have been brainwashed into terrorism using the same technique.
With all that said, I am still suspicious of the traditional Hajj and all its rituals because it is so far off from what is in the Quran. I don't believe Mecca was ever Becca or that Abraham visited there. So yes, I still am under the impression that something strange happened in the 60-70 years following the death of Muhammad. However, I don't think it matters whether or not the Kaba was once a shrine to a pagan goddess or if Abraham didn't build it. God still asked us to pray towards it. It is God's now and has been His for ~1400 years.
You can refer to the following book for many examples of early Muslim practice documented by non-Muslims which are in total consensus with modern practices.
"Seeing Islam as Others Saw It A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam"And here is one on pre-Islamic Arabia.
"Arabia and the Arabs From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam" -
peace Riz,
Sorry you feel that way but here are a few points to consider. I will try to keep it brief and skip over some of your unevidenced remarks
convinced by the arguments on the forum and on the website that nearly everything about traditional Islam was fabricated, I dropped it all.
No-one here asked you to drop anything, let alone all of it. One should gradually refine their understanding and practice as they go in their journey.
I kept reading the many threads and 'discussions' here, but all it did was confuse me more.
Confusion is no bad thing, in fact some might say it is a necessary part of the process.
After a while I got so sick of it all that I just stopped visiting these forums.
Taking a time-out can be a good thing. Allows us to reflect, experience and prioritise etc.
There was no unity, no consensus...
It seems you were under a false impression as to what a forum is a place to discuss, exchange ideas etc. Rather than being frustrated and wanting the security and comfort of numbers, which you have already rejected, why not apply 3918?
Was Muhammad originally from Mecca? Maybe he wasn't, but if you are going to argue that then you MUST bring evidence(historical, archaelogical, textual) which will place the theory in reality.
The article by brother Ayman used physical scripts, so I assume you are referring to something/someone else.
God still asked us to pray towards it.
This has been discussed before, but I cannot recall sufficient evidence for the above. Can you link me to it? Thanks.
-
peace Riz,
Sorry you feel that way but here are a few points to consider. I will try to keep it brief and skip over some of your unevidenced remarks
No-one here asked you to drop anything, let alone all of it. One should gradually refine their understanding and practice as they go in their journey.
Confusion is no bad thing, in fact some might say it is a necessary part of the process.
Taking a time-out can be a good thing. Allows us to reflect, experience and prioritise etc.
It seems you were under a false impression as to what a forum is a place to discuss, exchange ideas etc. Rather than being frustrated and wanting the security and comfort of numbers, which you have already rejected, why not apply 3918?
The article by brother Ayman used physical scripts, so I assume you are referring to something/someone else.
This has been discussed before, but I cannot recall sufficient evidence for the above. Can you link me to it? Thanks.
I think as far as Koran is concerned its pretty obvious to me its three salat thats mentioned. Fajr, maghrib and Isha. However that still leaves the question of how to pray. Does anyone know where in the Koran it talks about rika'a?
-
That is the problem. If everyone is using "the koran only", how come no consensus on one of the basic essences of Islam, Salat? How come PM/Free-minds actually created more divisions on this issue which blatantly contradicts the verse you quoted? That is the question and the real problem.
I have my answer though.
The koran says
To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety so judge between them by what God hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to God; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute; Surah 5 Verse 48
The Koran also say
If any do deeds of righteousness,- be they male or female - and have faith, they will enter Heaven, and not the least injustice will be done to them 4.124
And say
And there are, certainly, among the people of the Scripture, those who believe in God and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before God. They do not sell the Verses of God for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, God is Swift in account. 3199
And
Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Scripture stand for the right, they recite the Verses of God during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin good and forbid wrong; and they hasten in good works; and they are among the righteous. And whatever good they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those who are God fearing. 3113-115
And also say
Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve . 262
4.160. For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from God's Way;-
4.161. That they took usury, though they were forbidden; and that they devoured men's substance wrongfully;- we have prepared for those among them who reject faith a grievous punishment.But then say
4.162. But those among them who are well-grounded in knowledge, and the believers, believe in what hath been revealed to thee and what was revealed before thee And (especially) those who establish regular prayer and practise regular charity and believe in God and in the Last Day To them shall We soon give a great reward.
So there is nothing specific. We are different Ummahs but we are only better than anyone else by the criteria of faith and deeds. There are many ways people prostrate and bow abd pray and give charity and od the good deeds. As far as its for God and is supported by the good deeds, its all accepted. The koran also say
Say "O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord, If only they had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course But many of them follow a course that is evil. (5,68-69)
Let the People of the Gospel judge by what God hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what God hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. (5,47)
But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) Law before them?- Therein is the (plain) command of God; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) people of faith. (Surah 5, Maida, verse 43)
-
to me those you say there are only three salat mention in the Koran do this on basic of those salat being given a specific title. however, there are many things to me in the quran we are commanded to do and obsevre that doesnt have a specific titled. So is the title of a salat the only sufficient justification to claim there is only three salat?
and also, if you have time - Should I be ban from free-minds forum?
-
Salat is not a title....its a word.
When I talk about reading, I have to use the word "reading" because that is the clearest and easiest way to explain the action.
The reason people get more than two salat times is because they read the quran with the assumption that salat refers to a physical ritual with bowing and prostrating and glorifying god, and the assumption that there are several times for the ritual during the day, and they think that whenever those words are mentioned, it must be talking about salat, or they try to fit 5 times into the quran and manipulate the meaning of those words to fit their idea of salat. -
Salat is not a title....its a word.
When I talk about reading, I have to use the word "reading" because that is the clearest and easiest way to explain the action.
The reason people get more than two salat times is because they read the quran with the assumption that salat refers to a physical ritual with bowing and prostrating and glorifying god, and the assumption that there are several times for the ritual during the day, and they think that whenever those words are mentioned, it must be talking about salat, or they try to fit 5 times into the quran and manipulate the meaning of those words to fit their idea of salat.I should have clarified what I meant. By ?title? I meant name. Three salat were given names (ex fajr-salat etc etc). salat is a word, but there are classification for words. And according to the Koran, it is a verb (230, 4101). For example, I can say ?observe your kick?. I can give a kick a specific name like ?observe you roundhouse kick?.
Assumption or no assumption, this word salat is a verb and is given three specific names. Just like a dog can be given personal names (Lucky, Joe etc.) or human are given specific name (Mark, Jesus, etc) or a action (roundhouse kick, back slap etc)
So my question is this, is the names (what I meant by title) of the salat sufficient justification for the number salat of to perform?
-
Aren't you doing the same?
Have you actually studied/cross-referenced salaat?
Maybe....but it doesn't really matter to me, and shouldn't matter to anyone else unless I try to force my idea down their throats.
I was going to get in-depth into it but I really don't care anymore. -
I should have clarified what I meant. By title I meant name. Three salat were given names (ex fajr-salat etc etc). salat is a word, but there are classification for words. And according to the Koran, it is a verb (230, 4101). For example, I can say observe your kick. I can give a kick a specific name like observe you roundhouse kick.
Assumption or no assumption, this word salat is a verb and is given three specific names. Just like a dog can be given personal names (Lucky, Joe etc.) or human are given specific name (Mark, Jesus, etc) or a action (roundhouse kick, back slap etc)
So my question is this, is the names (what I meant by title) of the salat sufficient justification for the number salat of to perform?
No it's not because another term can be used in place of that. But in most "salat time" articles that I've read I've noticed that the author assumes an idea of salat and then searches for times in the quran.
I'd find it worth my time to read what you have to say if you use the quran only to figure out what "salat" means and give us good reasons (independent of the quran) to do it. -
And Dargento, I find Idolfree1's idea of salat very appealing. I think his idea makes sense, but again, I really haven't verified it thoroughly. I mean, what he said salat is works, but I'm not perfectly sure if that is actually what the quran is talking about.
-
And Dargento, I find Idolfree1's idea of salat very appealing. I think his idea makes sense, but again, I really haven't verified it thoroughly.
That's just it; It's his idea, not your own. A lot of ideas can be very 'appealing' doesn't mean that a) they are true or b) in line with the whole quran
I am not saying his idea is wrong; I am saying it's not limited to his idea.
I'm also not saying one idea so salaat is right (be it physical, non-physical etc..), because it's not. I think salaat is like the placebo effect. 'Whatever works for you'. IMO, in the quran the purpose is much more important than the method itself, at least for salaat.
But in most "salat time" articles that I've read I've noticed that the author assumes an idea of salat and then searches for times in the quran.
You are right here, In order to be fair and balanced. We have to drop all preconceived notions about a topic/or a book in this case.
-
That's just it; It's his idea, not your own. A lot of ideas can be very 'appealing' doesn't mean that a) they are true or b) in line with the whole quran
I am not saying his idea is wrong; I am saying it's not limited to his idea.
I'm also not saying one idea so salaat is right (be it physical, non-physical etc..), because it's not. I think salaat is like the placebo effect. 'Whatever works for you'. IMO, in the quran the purpose is much more important than the method itself, at least for salaat.
Yeah I think I agree with that. I've never thought the method was very important, as long as you serve the purpose. But, what is the purpose?
-
2945 Recite what is inspired to you of the Scripture, and hold the Connection, for the Connection prohibits evil and vice; but certainly the remembrance of God is the greatest. God knows everything you do.
In this verse the remembrance of God supersedes Salaat. And the purpose is to avoid evil and vice. Things which lead us to bad things, which makes our lives worse... causing stress, depression etc...Remembering God helps us not do bad things.
Luqmaan
3117 "O my son, hold the Connection and advocate righteousness and forbid evil, and bear with patience whatever befalls you. These are the most honorable traits."
-Point(s) to consider The salaat is meaningless if one doesn't also observe good behavior.Which means Salaat for the sake of salaat is meaningless. It must have a purpose of some sort (to the individual).
2153 O you who believe, seek help through patience and through the Connection (salat), God is with the patient ones.
2441 Do you not see that everything in the heavens and the Earth glorifies God? Even the birds in formation, each knows its connection (salat) and its glorification. And God is fully aware of everything they do.
Now this is my favorite. The birds know their own salaat. What does this show? This shows that you don't need a book, or a messenger or anyone else or anything to show you what salaat is.
One of the methods of salaat I really like is meditation. It's excellent for stress, improves your immune system, has other health benefits etc... It really makes you feel peaceful.
For the record, physical salaat does exist in 4101-102 (demonstration)
This is the reason quran doesn't say 'do salaat this way!' because a lot of people are different. Some things work for some, other things work for others.
4913 O mankind, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the most honorable among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.
-
PEACE All
SHM i'm quiet surprised with the WAY you have said somethings as a SUBMITER.
You didn't seem to care too much about discussing and reaching a conclusion, part of the way you posted somethings appeared disrespectful and not so peacefull.
Please calm down and post in a more peacefull manner AND When posting do not forget kindness in your posts and do not forget the PRIMARY PURPOSE of discussing.
-
I will try and show you where IMO you followed Satan and forgot Good character.
Page 1 of the thread you said "Can this thread be the begining of some real "progress" for the progressive muslins?"
Page 2 "Sad. You are laughing yet you don?t have a solid proof what salat is. If you did, everyone would have agreed with you and a consensus on solid evidence would have been reach years ago." what are you implying by that which i have highlighted in bold? (Wakas your reply to that which is quoted in page 2 of the should IMO have been better (in kindness + trying to be freindly) I hope you are not enemies of One another CAUSE YOU TALK TO EACH OTHER IN THAT WAY(IMO).
Page 5 "One tactic I sometimes see use is the referral to PM articles like its substantial and unbiased information (when it is indeed mostly bias and misleading information). For example, a new member may joint free-mind thinking it?s a nonpartisan forum. He post is view then a strong PM supported will say ?you are wrong this has already been answer blah blah blah posting a link to PM articles like it not a bias material. But at the end of these links are just opinions."
blah blah blah is disrespectful my friend
The action which you claim to be a tactic is IMO not a tactic ) You have chosen to view it as a tactic.
I disagree with members saying things such as "you are wrong this has already been discussed" IMO they should say something like "This has already been discussed (give link) here. If you want more info chek the link"There are other cases further on in the forum but i feel that what i have said is sufficient proof for what i have said in the first line of this post. I am hoping that you will either agree with me REASONABLY or disagree with me REASONABLY.
But i request of you to PLEASE be polite and friendly in your reply to me (If you reply) in order to make sure that i will not respond to you with sarcasm or in an UNFRIENDLY manner.
-
nimnimak_11,
I have to agree with that SatanhHatesMe was rude with his argument, but it doesn't seem he/she is wrong. I just went through the all the posting in this salat section and no one really presented indisputable evidence everyone can rally behind. It seem no conclusion has yet to be reach on what Salat is. I have to agree with him or she when it comes to that argument.
