ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
-
Dear brother latif
First off all , i would like to offer you my gratitude for honouring my request to continue with the debate on this thread. It is a rare opportunity to find a logical mind belonging to the other group, willing to tell his point of view in a composed manner.
Brother ! probably, i have the same back ground as you have. long time ago when i hung in balance , and found my self unable to cross over, there were certain arguments which when i pondered , tipped me over to this side. In my next post i would like to share those with you and would request you to contemplate upon, and if need be we shall have a discussion.
I do not know why, but i have a gut feeling hmm, that you will finally cross over ;D,
peace handshake
sikandar
-
peace latif
when you are 'obeying' hadith you are not obeying the messenger but you are obeying the person who CLAIMED the messenger said this, this makes it no different than the bible, why do you not uphold the bible then? jesus was a great man too, why not him too? they also have moses' hadith, why not his hadith too, he even spoke to God himself ! I think i would like to follow his message
-
see, in my view, it doesn't matter where the guidance comes from, as long as the guidance is true.
I don't care what the hadith are or where they come from or who the prophet was. I just don't follow them because what they say makes absolutely no sense. And since they make absolutely no sense, we shouldn't even be having this debate. -
?when you are 'obeying' hadith you are not obeying the messenger but you are obeying the person who CLAIMED the messenger said this, this makes it no different than the bible, why do you not uphold the bible then? Jesus was a great man too, why not him too? they also have Moses' hadith, why not his hadith too, he even spoke to God himself ! I think I would like to follow his message?{DArgento}
Please permit me to add
Allah and His Book say
wa in tawallau fa innama_ 'alaikal bala_g(u),{Ref 320}
fa'lamu_ annama_'ala_ rasu_linal bala_gul mubin(u).{Ref 592}
Ma_ 'alar rasu_li illal bala_g(u).
And the Messenger is not responsible/duty bound EXCEPT to straight deliver the Message/Book.{Ref 599}
fa innama_ 'alaikal bala_gu wa 'alainal hisa_b(u).{Ref 1340}
?The reason being your duty is to deliver the Message/Book to people; and accountability/judging them is on Our part.The last Messenger has excellently discharged his responsibility/duty. He is not responsible for any thing one attributes to him. His duty was to deliver the Book. He delivered it. If any one now says that the Messenger said this or that, Messenger is not responsible for any thing attributed to him by anybody whosoever he may be. Messenger is responsible only for those words recorded in the Quran whose safety is guaranteed by none other than Allah; and His guarantee is trustworthy since he is the One who is living in all the time and space and is not going to die. Therefore let us trust the words of Quran alone, these are the words the Messenger is going to own to have said it.
And the Messenger has point blank informed us in the Quran that he is neither "Hafiz" nor "Wakil" for/upon us. Choice is our own if we rely on the words of Messenger recorded in the Quran or on those attributed to him after a so called detailed research by 6+1 persons belonging to same country, non Arabs who were, interestingly/strangely, not faced with any problem/question to resolve/decide for which they needed to go from city to city to find some rulings/injunctions/decisions given verbally by the Messenger. In the life of Messenger people around him believed in thousands of "Hadith" of earlier messengers. Did the last messenger accept any of those Hadith? We are required to follow the Messenger in letter and spirit. We must peep into our hearts why we want to run away from the Book; people right from the days of Noah {peace is always upon him} wanted to listen something other than the Book? Did any messenger of Allah oblige them with some hadith of his own?
And Allah and Quran says those who do not decide matters in accordance with what has been revealed in the Book are Fasiq, Kaafir, Zalim. Allah has used thrice same words with these terms. That is the strong emphasis to restrict to the Book. Choice is ours; which source of news we prefer. -
Salaam all,
Brother Siki, thank you for your warm words. I appreciate it. I do want to ask a favor. I do not really like to be called "logical". That is a word that irritates me at times, since people abuse it to present bias in the name of logic. I do understand that you are using it in a positive fashion, but I am sharing with you my personal feeling towards that word.
As for the crossing over. I have crossed over from Qur'an alone to Hadeeth. You can check my old posts on this forum. I even was one of the defenders like you guys, until it became clear to me that "Qur'an alone" is really a slogan of something that does not exist. There is always Qur'an and something, whether it is dictionaries, opinions of people like Rashad Khalifa, Dr Shabbeer, Safar, or a person's mind that has a mix of bias and logic.
I am in much better shape now than I when I was a Qur'an aloner. I have more peace of mind, safety and knowledge (at least to me).
when you are 'obeying' hadith you are not obeying the messenger but you are obeying the person who CLAIMED the messenger said this, this makes it no different than the bible, why do you not uphold the bible then? jesus was a great man too, why not him too? they also have moses' hadith, why not his hadith too, he even spoke to God himself ! I think i would like to follow his message
When someone makes a claim, then it deserves to be checked to see if the claim is true or not. You have a good criterion to judge it. It is called Qur'an. If one hadeeth is proven wrong, then that does not mean that all are wrong as well. That would be called stereotyping and unwise generalization.
Lobster,
I just don't follow them because what they say makes absolutely no sense. And since they make absolutely no sense, we shouldn't even be having this debate.
If people rejected everything that did "not make sense" then science would have never developed nor evolved. Rejecting what "does not make sense" is called ignorance. Scientists only reject what is proven to be wrong. At the very least, when something does not make sense, a person should have the humility to say "I cannot find a reasonable way to absorb it, but I could be wrong".
Mazhar,
Albalagh means to make something reach it's intended destination. In the message, that can be one of two things
1- Deliver the message and go on.
2- Deliver the message and make it understood.So, you go in the Qur'an to let you know which of the two was the mission of the messenger. Here is one
2129
--Yatloo Alayhim Ayatika wa yuAAllimuhumu Alkitab walhikmata wa yuzakkihim= He follows closely on them your signs and make them know the book and the wisdom and make them mature/ fruitful/grow.
Key words
Yatloo. It means follow closely. This meaning encompasses recitation as well as application of the signs on the people. So, part of the mission of the messenger is application.YuAAllimuhum It means make them know. You do not make someone know something by just leaving a book with them. You make them know it by bringing it in and explaining it.
Yuzakkihim make them fruitful/ mature/grow. You do not make grow a tree by throwing a seed in the desert. You make it grow by nurturing it.
After that, he is not wakeel anymore. Why? because he did not only deliver the message to the door. He delivered it and made it understood. The rest is on them. You guys want the message without his understanding. If you fail in your understanding, and many here are failing, then you only have yourselves to blame in front of God. You have in front of you a way to understand the Qur'an, and instead, you choose the "dictionaries" and your own "minds", neither of which was mentioned under the categories to have Safety and trust in.
Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
peace Hlatif,
If people rejected everything that did "not make sense" then science would have never developed nor evolved. Rejecting what "does not make sense" is called ignorance. Scientists only reject what is proven to be wrong. At the very least, when something does not make sense, a person should have the humility to say "I cannot find a reasonable way to absorb it, but I could be wrong".
I'm sorry, by "makes absolutely no sense" I meant "proven to be wrong by observation using our senses and reason or going completely against our conscience."
As for humility, it's fine, but if we have made sure that what we're following is right, and what we're rejecting is wrong, then we should have enough confidence in our god given abilities to move on. We can never be perfectly sure about a lot of things, but when it's decision time, we have to do what seems best.
And not all of us are as smart as Newton or Einstein, and usually when something doesn't make sense (you get no good answer for "why?" it usually shouldn't be followed. But then again, I don't think you have to be to do good things and be happy.
and when I read in the hadith that the prophet had no problem with his friends gang raping captured women and then selling them off, I don't go "I can't find a reasonable way to absorb this..." I don't think anyone does.
Same thing with circling a black pagan cube, stoning penises, running between hills, believing that a well has magical healing powers, praying 5 times a day and reciting arabic words you don't understand, believing that women are equal to black dogs which are equal to the devil, etc etc.
Not to mention that a lot of this contradicts the very book the hadith claim to be explaining.Everything that I have ever seen tells me that all of these things are what I like to call "crap" but if you can show me otherwise, please do.
I look at the quran the same way I look at the hadith, and I've found the quran to be a far better (maybe not perfect) source of guidance if it is used to explain itself. See, when you use Harry Potter to understand the Da Vinci code, it doesn't work. Stick to the book to understand it's message, whatever it may be. Bringing in other sources only muddles the message.
-
Role of the Prophet Muhammad
The Prophet's sole mission was to deliver Quran, the whole Quran, and nothing but Quran (320; 548-50, 92, 99; 619; 1340; 1635, 82; 2454; 2918; 4248; 6412).
Delivering the Quran was such a momentous and noble mission that the Prophet did not have any time to do anything else. Moreover, the Prophet was enjoined in the strongest words from issuing any religious teachings besides the Quran (6938-47). He was even enjoined from explaining the Quran (7515-19) - God is the only teacher of the Quran (551-2) and the Quran is the best Hadith (3923 & 456).
These Quranic facts are manifested in the historical reality that the words and actions (Hadith & Sunna) attributed to the Prophet did not appear until the second century after his death. The Quran has prophesied the fabrication of Hadith and Sunna by the Prophet's enemies (6112-115). The Quran teaches us that it was God's will to permit the invention of Hadith and Sunna to serve as criteria for exposing those who believe only with their lips, not in their hearts. Those who are attracted to Hadith and Sunna are proven to be false believers (6113). Ironically, the books of Hadith report the Prophet's orders to write down nothing from him except the Quran! Shown below are two such Hadiths taken from the Hadithists' most reliable sources, Sahih Muslim and Is-haah Ahmad Ibn Hanbal
The Prophet said, "Do not write down anything from me except the Quran."
This Hadith states that the Prophet maintained his anti- Hadith stand until death.
quoted from http//www.quran.org/mosque/
-
peace Hlatif,
I'm sorry, by "makes absolutely no sense" I meant "proven to be wrong by observation using our senses and reason or going completely against our conscience."Actually, he does speak the truth. Most revered figures refused to accept something because "it doesn't make sense", and after they died, it turns out their initial thoughts were correct and did "make sense".
There's a difference between that and "disproved", most hadith are the latter when compared to the Quran.
-
OPF, I use "makes sense" a bit liberally. If something "makes sense" to me, it doesn't mean I instinctively feel that it's true. I just put it against my experience and my observations and see if it fits.
But again, if there is something that is so un-intuitive that it seems like total non-sense, and no matter what we have experienced seems to go against it, then we just have to conclude that it's false. All of us don't have the minds of Newton and Einstein and Heisenberg who were able to see things that although were against intuition and common sense but were actually true.but the thing is, the issue of right vs wrong is different. Because you can't prove that something is right. Something's might be correct, but they might seem wrong to our conscience.
Let's say everyone in your town takes their cars for their morning commute. That leads to traffic problems and pollution etc. So you FORCE everyone to take public transportation. No more traffic jams, less pollution, faster travelling, but you took away people's freedom.
and then there's the situation where you are a doctor, and you have to sacrifice one person to save many others. What do you do? What is the right thing? How do you PROVE which is right? -
All of us don't have the minds of Newton and Einstein and Heisenberg who were able to see things that although were against intuition and common sense but were actually true.
Funnily enough, when I said "most revered figures", I did mean those sorts of people.
"but the thing is, the issue of right vs wrong is different. Because you can't prove that something is right."
Yes, that's true. Depends on context. You don't need to prove that 2+2=4 is right. The hadith? A different story.
As for the last, if you take away emotion, the answer is easy
-
Salaam all,
I'm sorry, by "makes absolutely no sense" I meant "proven to be wrong by observation using our senses and reason or going completely against our conscience."
"Senses", "reason" and "conscience" are overrated. The three can be mixed with bias and can fool. This is the role of Taqwa= consciousness. The consciousness of God, oneself and the surroundings. One of the roles of the consciousness of the self is to be able to detect biases.As for your Einstein and Newton statement. The reason that they became what they became is because they entertained the "does not make sense" and questioned the "make sense". Not many people do that. People prefer to be part of the herd. The herd declares what makes sense and what does not and people follow. The herd in vogue is that of western thought. In a hundred or two hundred years it will appear so backwards. Then, much of your conscience and reason is down the drain.
As for your misrepresentations of the hadeeth. You can reject and that will still not give you the licence to reject the other hadeeths. Or you can try to understand them or the angle about them that you missed, unless you believe that you know it all.
DArgento,
Thanks for slinging some Ayat of the Qur'an out of their place. I guess however that it was not you, but the site that you linked to.The Prophet's sole mission was to deliver Quran, the whole Quran, and nothing but Quran (320; 548-50, 92, 99; 619; 1340; 1635, 82; 2454; 2918; 4248; 6412).
This was covered in my last post. Delivery includes in it's meaning, the teaching and explanation of it.
Moreover, the Prophet was enjoined in the strongest words from issuing any religious teachings besides the Quran (6938-47).
It says in 6944 If he made up speech and attributed it to us.
Well he never did, and if he did, then the Qur'an would have exposed him. This means that one has to trust him further.
He was even enjoined from explaining the Quran (7515-19)
wrong. It says
thumma inna Alaina Bayanah= Then on us is clarifying it.How does God clarify it
1- Directly and this is true in the case of the messenger but not us.
2- Indirectly through others that will clarify. What are those? Here is one 1644
Wa Anzalna Ilayka aththikra litubayyina lilnasi ma Unzila ilayhim= Then we descended to you (singular) the reminder so that you will clarify to the people what was descended to them.So, yes God promised us clarification through the messenger.
God is the only teacher of the Quran (551-2)
It says He made known the Qur'an. This is
1- Directly and that is the case for the messenger, but not us.
2- Indirectly through means that work under him. What are those
YuAAllimakum alkitab walhikmata= and he makes you know the book and the wisdom.As for this
and the Quran is the best Hadith (3923 & 456).
True, but should not stop one from reading the hadeeth nor do they declare Kufr on one who reads them in addition to the Qur'an.
As for the hadeeth related to writing hadeeth
1- There are other hadeeths that said write. So, one can opt to refuse one and accept another. On another hand, one can see that they harmonize in different ways. HowDifferent times and different occasions.
Intent not to write hadeeth and Qur'an in the same place and time.
the prohibition was particular to a particular time.
Not writing it does not mean a prohibition to remember it and share it with others, just not through writing within a time limit.As for the cliche of two hundred years.
1- If true then That is not proof of lack of connection to the prophet.
2- There are earlier collections that are earlier than two hundred years.
3- At the very least, they are a reflection of the understanding of early muslims. An understanding that is valuable to all generations. They spoke and understood the language better than any Arab or non Arab of today.Take care all and have a great day.
Hussein
-
peace be upon everyone,
OPF,
Funnily enough, when I said "most revered figures", I did mean those sorts of people.
okay that is quite funny. Einstein thought heisenberg made no sense, but apparently he did. But Einstein himself predicted a lotta stuff that made people laugh at him. Newton of course discovered that light already has all the colors in it. That sounds like a load of horse manure too. this is not even relevant, so I'll stop.
Yes, that's true. Depends on context. You don't need to prove that 2+2=4 is right. The hadith? A different story.
As for the last, if you take away emotion, the answer is easy
I don't mean "right" as in "true." I mean "right" as in right vs wrong, good vs evil kinda thing. 2+2=4 is true, but if you apply that somehow to humans, it's not necessarily right.
and I don't get the answer. Take away emotion?Hlatif, hope you are having a great day yourself. )
"Senses", "reason" and "conscience" are overrated. The three can be mixed with bias and can fool. This is the role of Taqwa= consciousness. The consciousness of God, oneself and the surroundings. One of the roles of the consciousness of the self is to be able to detect biases.
Senses are not biased. The biases are inside your head. Reason is, at least in the way I'm using it, lack of bias. To reason is to look at something rationally without emotion.
And I don't know what our conscience is, but that's where this whole concept of doing the right thing comes from.
"conscience" simply means the voice in your head that tells you to do the right thing, even if it means doing something irrational.
You can't say that our senses are overrated, because that's all we have. Our senses are what connect us to this world. And yeah, they can't always be trusted, but most of the time what they give us is our best bet. Except of course if our own mind is full of biases and preconceptions, that's when senses become useless.
Agree about the role of consciousness in detecting biases. But the only reason you are detecting biases is so that you can see more clearly. So that your "vision" isn't clouded by your emotions.As for your Einstein and Newton statement. The reason that they became what they became is because they entertained the "does not make sense" and questioned the "make sense". Not many people do that. People prefer to be part of the heard. The heard declares what makes sense and what does not and people follow. The heard in vogue is that of western thought. In a hundred or two hundred years it will appear so backwards. Then, much of your conscience and reason is down the drain.
Well, I don't like heards, and I don't follow heards. I believe what I have found to be the right thing. I may be wrong, but that's why we have to keep learning and growing.
But if you're saying that Islamic practices are backwards only because "the heard" says so, then you are being quite ignorant (no offense). "Backwards" isn't the term I'd use to describe Islam. I'd use the word "wrong" or maybe "evil."
And don't tell me that ideals like freedom, equality, justice, charity, peace will get old in a few centuries. These are some of the ideals I believe in, and I like to promote them in my community.
Hopefully, these great concepts will not be replaced by the Islamic ideologies of imprisonment of thought, domination of rich arab men, injustice, and war.As for your misrepresentations of the hadeeth. You can reject and that will still not give you the licence reject to the other hadeeths. Or you can try to understand them or the angle about them that you missed, unless you believe that you know it all.
I did not "misrepresent" any hadith. What I said in my last post still stands, since you have not been able to refute it. In all honesty, I would like to hear an honest answer from you for some of these things.
Please explain to me
#1. Why God wrote a book.
#2. Why God wrote a book which didn't explain any of it's concepts.
#3. Why God wants us to believe that water coming out of a stream has magical powers.I have nothing against the hadiths. One of them says that a person was told by another person that a guy who knew the decendents of one of the companions of the prophet told him that he was told that one day the companion heard that the prophet said you should seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.
I mean, who cares how many generations after the prophet this was recorded, or if someone just made it up, or even if there was a prophet or not, shouldn't we seek knowledge our whole life? shouldn't we keep learning? It's a great quote and a great reminder. It has a lesson in it that I will follow. That's all I need from it.
-
Salaam Lobster,
Thanks for your response
Senses are not biased. The biases are inside your head. Reason is, at least in the way I'm using it, lack of bias. To reason is to look at something rationally without emotion. And I don't know what our conscience is, but that's where this whole concept of doing the right thing comes from.
"conscience" simply means the voice in your head that tells you to do the right thing, even if it means doing something irrational.
You can't say that our senses are overrated, because that's all we have. Our senses are what connect us to this world. And yeah, they can't always be trusted, but most of the time what they give us is our best bet. Except of course if our own mind is full of biases and preconceptions, that's when senses become useless.Emotion is not the only thing that makes a person biased. Bias is the holding of something as fact when there is nothing to support it as being fact. Emotion can be in and out.
Senses can get biased. We perceive what we look for and miss what we do not look for. The person who is thirsty will more likely perceive the mirage as a lake. This is how bias works. It forces us to perceive what is not present and to miss what is present.
When a person claims that he has no bias in his or her reasoning, then that person needs to look more honestly at himself in the mirror. Bias is the struggle of humanity. We all deal with it and need to cleanse it or at least, be aware of it.
When we give our senses veto power in regards to what they cannot negate nor affirm, then we have overrated them.
And don't tell me that ideals like freedom, equality, justice, charity, peace will get old in a few centuries. These are some of the ideals I believe in, and I like to promote them in my community.
Hopefully, these great concepts will not be replaced by the Islamic ideologies of imprisonment of thought, domination of rich arab men, injustice, and war.In both instances you used words that hold an amotional reaction in people, positive and negative. Define freedom, equality, justice, charity and peace. Those too are slogans that have been used and abused, very much as the term "Qur'an alone". How do you define freedom when unrestrained, it will take away the freedom of others? Equality in the view that we are clearly different? Sure everyone wants to be equal, but what does that mean and in what area? When is difference ok, since we are already different? Justice without wisdom and mercy would be too rigid and harsh at times. Charity in the wrong place is counterproductive. Peace, does it mean that you let people step all over you?
The world is not about beautiful slogans. It is about reality and action and thought within that reality.
#1. Why God wrote a book.
God is just. He does not want to leave any excuse for people to leave his instructions.
#2. Why God wrote a book which didn't explain any of it's concepts.
The Qur'an explains the concepts that God wanted to convey in the best way. When it comes to books, one deals with two barriers
1- The author's limitation in conveying his or her thoughts clearly in written or said words. All human authors deal with that challenge and limitation. God is not limited by this. Everything He wanted to express, He expressed exactly the ideas He wanted to share.2- The ability of the reader to extract those ideas. This is the problem of the reader and not the author. Here, one has two tools
A) language The Qur'an was revealed in a language that had a critical mass of speakers. They had the ability to understand a good bit of it. Their writings are present in the statements that came to us from them. Also, a good bit later, we have dictionaries and books of grammar.
B) People who know the author well, or people who were chosen by the author as explainers. Those are the messengers.
So, God left a two tier system to help us understand the Qur'an. A system that is more secure from error, rather than one which is prone to the bias of the reader.
#3. Why God wants us to believe that water coming out of a stream has magical powers.
1- The skope of this discussion is not about a particular hadeeth or a thousand hadeeths. It is about the concept of following the messenger. A particular hadeeth's correctness or incorrectness does not change the order of God to obey the messenger. It just makes it doubtable that hadeeth was said by the messenger.
2- I doubt that the messenger used "magic powers" in a positive sense, and therefore your misrepresentatioin.
3- When one wants to discuss a particular hadeeth, they bring it, preferrably in Arabic, and discuss it. I would be happy to discuss a particular hadeeth if you want, but not in this thread. A judgement of a hadeeth positively or negatively should not change the message of obeying the messenger.
I have seen you guys parade hadeeths in big numbers. I have seen some of you respond to anti Islam people by saying Usually, those missionaries will parade a bombardment of Ayat to weaken you and it is better to ignore them but respond to one particular issue at a time. That is why I ignored your statements, especially as you were using emotionally laced expressions. It came from some wiser people on this forum.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Brother,
The Messenger of Allah's complaint is perhaps the worst of the happenings of the day, since it is being said by a person who is personification of Rahmat. But you have nothing to worry since complaint is only with reference to "This Quran"; he is not complaining that people did not listen to his "hadith". Since he himself didn't accept any hadith prevalent in his days therefore neither asked nor expected anyone to roam about from city to city to collect from people about his sayings. Quran can be made "Mahjoora" only and only be spreading unending sayings and stories. Anybody may enlighten me if Quran can be made "Mahjoora" by adopting any other method/technique.
-
Salaam DArgento,
why is muhammad complaining in 2530, if his followers are so on the right path?
The Aya uses the word Qawmi= my people. My people can be one of two things
1- The people to whom he was sent but did not follow.
2- The ones that followed him.
In order to know which of the two groups was intended, one goes to the preceding Ayat
Picktall,
The Sovereignty on that day will be the True (Sovereignty) belonging to the Beneficent One, and it will be a hard day for disbelievers.On the day when the wrong-doer gnaweth his hands, he will say Ah, would that I had chosen a way together with the messenger (of Allah)!
Alas for me! Ah, would that I had never taken such an one for friend!
He verily led me astray from the Reminder after it had reached me. Satan was ever man?s deserter in the hour of need.
What do you get here? Two significant things1- Those are the people he was sent to but rejected.
2- They affirm that the right path is the path of the messenger. So, the path to the Qur'an is through the messenger. It is the people that refused to follow the messenger that ended up abandoning the Qur'an in 2530What else does the Qur'an tell us? regarding the followers of the messenger?
Kuntum Khayra Ummatine ukhrijat lilnass= You happened to be the best nation that was made to come out to the humanity.If you add all this together, then the people talked about in 2530 have to be understood as the people he was sent to but did not follow. If one wants to expand the meaning further, then it will apply to anyone who abandoned the Qur'an and did not follow the path of the messenger as indicated in 2527
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Peace Brother latif
kindly ponder over the meaning of Mahjoor? ( deserting, chaining, no account, or immobilising, what ever you think appropriate). But its meaning does not fit in the explanation that you have given.
People at the time of prophet , did not accept Quran. There is a big difference in accepting/rejecting, and deserting or chaining, and considering your intellect , i don't need to explain it for you.
On the day when the wrong-doer gnaweth his hands, he will say Ah, would that I had chosen a way together with the messenger (of Allah)!
Alas for me! Ah, would that I had never taken such an one for friend!
He verily led me astray from the Reminder after it had reached me. Satan was ever man?s deserter in the hour of need.
What do you get here? Two significant things25-27 On the day when the wrong-doer gnaweth his hands, he will say Ah, would that I had chosen a way with the messenger (of Allah)!
Again, , Reflect upon the meaning of , choosing a way with the messenger. It is not way of Messenger, or way of Mohammad. This means the messenger is following/followed the message, And alas, i should have also been right along with him , doing the same , what he was doing. Remember if god can take the name of the book as Quran, he could have also said Mohammad , instead of Messenger, But he did not , and i am quite sure , you know the reason.
siki
-
Salaam DArgento,
The Aya uses the word Qawmi= my people. My people can be one of two things1- The people to whom he was sent but did not follow.
2- The ones that followed him.
Brother ! Do you not consider yourself Qaum e,,,, ? and if not , then what do you consider yourself?
He verily led me astray from the Reminder after it had reached me. Satan was ever mans deserter in the hour of need.
What do you get here? Two significant thingsThe satan led away the message from him, after It had reached him,
If you do not accept something from the beginning , it is like , it has never reached you, but after it has reached you, and then the Satan leads you away , what does it mean?
Come, My Brother! You belong here, and don't let the Satan lead you away from the message after it has/had reached you,
siki
-
Brother,
The Messenger of Allah's complaint is perhaps the worst of the happenings of the day, since it is being said by a person who is personification of Rahmat. But you have nothing to worry since complaint is only with reference to "This Quran"; he is not complaining that people did not listen to his "hadith". Since he himself didn't accept any hadith prevalent in his days therefore neither asked nor expected anyone to roam about from city to city to collect from people about his sayings. Quran can be made "Mahjoora" only and only be spreading unending sayings and stories. Anybody may enlighten me if Quran can be made "Mahjoora" by adopting any other method/technique.
well said,, to add
Can we be blessed with a better example than the present day scenario , where Hadith churning sectarian Mullahs are having a Ball, and the poor Quran is lying in cupboards , or may be used for kissing and mimicking ,. Fornicators and apostates being stoned and killed, in gross violation of Koranic rules?
Brother latif ! this is what happens if you provide an opening to man made conjectures. An honest mistake morphs in to a Monster and shackles the society, and then nothing short of a bloody revolution can restore the system back to its original form (Quran)
A simple misspelled law , of "hadood" created havoc with the innocent rape victims in Pakistan . They rotted in jails for decades with punishment of "stoning to death" staring in their faces, just because they could not provide 4 witnesses, For 20 years this non sense brought shame to the Muslims of the whole word, and when one single brave man went out of his way to improve upon the wording of the law,with an intention to save an honest innocent female rape victim, the so called educated bunch of Mullahs banded together(every single one of them) and threatend to uproot the Govt itself ? what a shame.
siki
-
2- The ability of the reader to extract those ideas. This is the problem of the reader and not the author. Here, one has two tools
A) language The Qur'an was revealed in a language that had a critical mass of speakers. They had the ability to understand a good bit of it. Their writings are present in the statements that came to us from them. Also, a good bit later, we have dictionaries and books of grammar.
B) People who know the author well, or people who were chosen by the author as explainers. Those are the messengers.
Salaam haltif
I may add a third tool (which is even more important than language)
C) How God described himself and His system to the reader, through attributes and clear examples. The examples are there to stop the bias in understanding the meaning of justice, peace, charity..etc. Prophets did not know more about God than what He told them, and us, through His books. They did not spend a day out with Him. They are not different from us except that they were chosen by Him to deliver the message.
You asked earlier what "being peaceful means, do you leave people step on you?" My reply is doesn't the qur'aan explain what the limits of being peaceful are? In fact the qur'aan frowns upon letting people step on you. The degree of bias is not that big as you think. Same thing goes with the other principles.
Past scholars interpreted the qur'aan, or undertood what they believed to be the sayings/actions of the prophet with their own bias and the bias of their time. We do not need to bring the bias of the past and add it to what we already have. This is also the advice of the qu'aan.
We might differ about what is right and what the truth is. This is quite normal and healthy. But we know, or should know, what is wrong. When I read, for example, "adribuhunna", I know it is wrong to understand it as "smack them", not just because I am a woman and do not want to be smacked (which is an acceptable reason in itself). I don't care what it means, but whatever it means, it should conform to the system of God as He explained it to us in the qur'aan in punishment and justice, and to His attributes.