Focal Point
-
Salaam brother,
From Project Root List, according to Lane's Lexicon
= Ayn-Lam-Miim = to mark/sign/distinguish, creations/beings, world, science/learning/knowledge/information, aware/know. By means of which one knows a thing, hence it signifies world or creation, because by it the Creator is known. alim (pl. ulama) - one who is learned/wise or knows.
http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm
"To distinguish" means "to mark off as different, to discern, to set apart as different, to show as different, to make prominent or eminent". "Distinguish" is between two categories such as in 2143.
"To make evident" means "to prove/demonstrate" or "to make obvious/manifest/apparent". The Arabic word would be "waadhi7" or "zaahir". "Make evident" is not between two categories.
-
Salaam brother,
From Project Root List, according to Lane's Lexicon
= Ayn-Lam-Miim = to mark/sign/distinguish, creations/beings, world, science/learning/knowledge/information, aware/know. By means of which one knows a thing, hence it signifies world or creation, because by it the Creator is known. alim (pl. ulama) - one who is learned/wise or knows.
http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm
"To distinguish" means "to mark off as different, to discern, to set apart as different, to show as different, to make prominent or eminent". "Distinguish" is between two categories such as in 2143.
"To make evident" means "to prove/demonstrate" or "to make obvious/manifest/apparent". The Arabic word would be "waadhi7" or "zaahir". "Make evident" is not between two categories.
salam brother
thank you very much for your help. i appreciate it.
salam
-
Salaam brother,
thank you very much for your help. i appreciate it.
You are most welcome brother. Please take your time and ponder over all the possibilities carefully and verify everything for yourself before trusting it.
-
Hello Tanveer,
-
Nowhere in al-qur'aan does it mention that "al-masjid al-haraam" is in the so called Mecca. If you think that "al-masjid al-haraam" is or was a physical location in Mecca or elsewhere, then bring proof for it please.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Haraam in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. In fact, there is evidence that shows that such a physical building was constructed around the so called Kaaba many years after the revelation of al-qur'aan. The evidence also shows that at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, there was no physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Haraam in the so called Mecca.
If you think that a physical building by the name Masjid Al-Haraam existed in the so called Mecca or elsewhere at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
- The God also mentions "al-masjid al-aqsa" in al-qur'aan. It is an established fact that the physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Aqsa was built in the Ummayad dynasty long after the revelation of al-qur'aan, thus it cannot be "al-masjid al-aqsa" talked about in Chapter 17. Even the staunchest sectarians admit that. If it is a physical building, then which building is "al-masjid al-aqsa" mentioned in 171 ?
http//www.jewishmag.com/59mag/al-aqsa/al-aqsa2.htm
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Mosque
http//www.stanford.edu/~jamila/Aqsa.html
http//2jay.wordpress.com/2007/04/25/masjid-al-aqsa/
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masjid_al-Nabawi
http//www.alshindagah.com/Shindagah75/alaqsa_mosque.htm
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masjid_al-Haram
http//www.geocities.com/mutmainaa/mosque/kabah.html
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a town named Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. If you think that a town named Mecca existed at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a physical building by the name of Kaaba in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. In fact, there is evidence that shows that the pagan temple in the so called Mecca was renamed after the common noun "kaaba" in al-qur'aan, about 80-100 years after the revelation of al-qur'aan.
If you think that a physical building by the name Kaaba existed in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
http//www.mefeedia.com/entry/3351244/http//www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kaba-history.htm
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaaba
http//www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13045
http//www.ezsoftech.com/hajj/hajj_article1.asp
- The God tells us that His message is fully detailed and complete and details ALL things (6114-115, 6126, 12111, 1712), contains every example (1789, 1854, 3058, 3927) and clear explanation of everything (1689) relevant to our guidance to the straight path and is enough for our guidance (2951) and the prophet followed only the qur'aan (1015, 4105).
Such claims are controversial and contradicting several other verses of the Quran.
Peace!
-
-
Peace brother,
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a town named Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. If you think that a town named Mecca existed at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a physical building by the name of Kaaba in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. In fact, there is evidence that shows that the pagan temple in the so called Mecca was renamed after the common noun "kaaba" in al-qur'aan, about 80-100 years after the revelation of al-qur'aan.
PEARL OR DIAMOND OF THE DAY
A KNOWLEDGE OF QURANIST -- SUBHANALLAH /MASHALLAHEVIDENCE IS PRESENT SIR
Importance of Makkah
Picture of the Kaaba taken in 1880Academic historians, however, state with certainty only that Makkah was a shrine and trading center for a number of generations before Prophet Muhammad . The extent of Makkan trade has been hotly debated. Some historians believe that Makkah was a waypoint on a land route from southern Arabia north to the Roman and Byzantine empires, and that Arabian and Indian Ocean spices were funneled through Makkah. Patricia Crone, in her book Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, argues that the Meccans were small merchants dealing in hides, camel butter, and the like.
According to the Qur'n and Muslim traditions, the city was attacked by an Ethiopian Aksumite army led by Abraha in 570, the year of Muhammad's birth. The attack was said to have been repelled by stones dropped by thousands of birds, followed by a plague.
Before the time of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, Makkah was under the control of the Banu Quraish. Muhammad, a member of the Banu Quraish, exiled from the city for preaching against paganism, returned to the city in triumph in 630 and after removing the cult images from the Kaaba, dedicating it as the center of Muslim pilgrimage. (For further information, see the main article, Conquest of Mecca.)
View of Mecca 1910After the rise of the Islamic empire, Makkah attracted pilgrims from all over the extensive empire, as well as a year-round population of scholars, pious Muslims who wished to live close to the Kaaba, and local inhabitants who served the pilgrims. Due to the difficulty and expense of the Hajj, the annual pilgrimage was small compared to the millions that swell Makkah today. Pilgrims arrived by boat, at Jedda, and came overland, or joined the annual caravans from Syria or Iraq. The city was small. 18th and 19th century maps and pictures show a small walled city of mud-brick houses crowded around the mosque.
Makkah was never the capital of the Islamic empire; the first capital was Medina, some 250 miles (400 km) away. The capital of the caliphate was soon moved to Kufa by the fourth Caliph Ali and then to Damascus by the Ummayads and Baghdad by the Abbasids and then to Cairo after the Mongol invasion, and then at last to Constantinople by the Ottomans.
the Kaaba , Mecca 1937Makkah re-entered Islamic political history briefly when it was held by Abd-Allah ibn al-Zubayr, an early Muslim who opposed the Umayyad caliphs. The caliph Yazid I besieged Makkah in 683. Thereafter the city figured little in politics; it was a city of devotion and scholarship. For centuries it was governed by the Hashemite Sharifs of Mecca, descendants of Muhammad by his grandson Hassan ibn Ali. The Sharifs ruled on behalf of whatever caliph or Muslim ruler had declared himself the Guardian of the Two Shrines. Makkah was attacked and sacked by Ismaili Muslims in 930. In 1926, the Sharifs of Makkah were overthrown by the Saudis, and Makkah was incorporated into Saudi Arabia.
On November 20, 1979 two hundred armed Islamist dissidents led by Saudi preacher Juhayman al-Otaibi seized the Grand Mosque. They claimed that the Saudi royal family no longer represented pure Islam and that the mosque, and the Kaaba, must be held by those of the true faith. The rebels seized tens of thousands of pilgrims as hostages and barricaded themselves in the mosque. The siege lasted two weeks, and resulted in several hundreds deaths and significant damage to the shrine, especially the Safa-Marwa gallery. While it is the Saudi forces that carried out the assault, they were assisted with weapons and planning by a small team of advisors from France's GIGN commando unit.
Current Status
The city has grown substantially in the last several decades, as the convenience and affordability of jet travel has increased the number of pilgrims participating in the Hajj. Thousands of Saudis are employed year-round to oversee the Hajj and staff the hotels and shops that cater to pilgrims; these workers in turn have increased the demand for housing and services. The city is now ringed by freeways, and contains shopping malls and skyscrapers.SOURCE http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca
-
-
Peace all,
Nice unverifiable hearsay story but still ZERO authentic evidence of existence of Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. I can write a better story of existence of Mecca than that if I tried.
What are the original references of this story ?
Any authentic evidence anyone ?
This has been extensively discussed on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
According to the Qur'n and Muslim traditions, the city was attacked by an Ethiopian Aksumite army led by Abraha in 570, the year of Muhammad's birth. The attack was said to have been repelled by stones dropped by thousands of birds, followed by a plague.
The lie of the century in red above !!
Authentic references please !
Chapter 105 says nothing about Mecca or Kaaba. What 105 is really about according to al-qur'aan has been discussed extensively on this forum. One can use the search function.
According to archeological evidence, there is no mention of Mecca in the expedition of Abraha to South Arabia, and there is no authentic evidence of any "elephants" in that expedition any more than the "flying horse". This also has been discussed extensively on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
Oh ! one more thing; according to archeological evidence, the expedition of Abraha was around 550 CE, not 570 CE. This also has been discussed extensively on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
A KNOWLEDGE OF QURANIST -- SUBHANALLAH /MASHALLAH
I AM NOT A QURANIST OR A QUR'AAN ALONER. This is the zillionth time I have stated that on this forum. One can use the search function.
The signs are not just in al-qur'aan but in the horizons and within us also
4153 We will show them Our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things?
Leoxyz keeps asking for references but then he comes out and posts LIES and ACCUSATIONS without any authentic proofs or evidences.
2875 And We will extract from every nation a witness, then We will say "Bring forth your proof." They will then realize that all truth belongs with God, and what they had invented will abandon them.
I will request the moderators to issue Leoxyz a warning and take disciplinary action against him for slandering/accusing/insulting me with the label of Quranist and making unsubstantiated claims about al-qur'aan without backing it with evidence.
According to forum rules
2] Please note that this forum is primarily dedicated to the study and understanding of the Scripture (Quran). Thus, mocking it or not being able to back-up claims with specifics will all result in deletion of such posts and/or removal of topic and/or disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
3] Respect other users of the forum. Language and/or material of vulgarity, obscenity, harassment, profanity or insulting nature, whether it is direct or suggested, will NOT be tolerated. Any messages containing such language or material will be moved to the trash section or deleted, without notice and may result in disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=8177.0
-
Peace all,
Nice unverifiable hearsay story but still ZERO authentic evidence of existence of Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. I can write a better story of existence of Mecca than that if I tried.
What are the original references of this story ?
Any authentic evidence anyone ?
This has been extensively discussed on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
The lie of the century in red above !!
Authentic references please !
Chapter 105 says nothing about Mecca or Kaaba. What 105 is really about according to al-qur'aan has been discussed extensively on this forum. One can use the search function.
According to archeological evidence, there is no mention of Mecca in the expedition of Abraha to South Arabia, and there is no authentic evidence of any "elephants" in that expedition any more than the "flying horse". This also has been discussed extensively on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
Oh ! one more thing; according to archeological evidence, the expedition of Abraha was around 550 CE, not 570 CE. This also has been discussed extensively on this forum in the past. One can use the search function.
I AM NOT A QURANIST OR A QUR'AAN ALONER. This is the zillionth time I have stated that on this forum. One can use the search function.
The signs are not just in al-qur'aan but in the horizons and within us also
4153 We will show them Our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things?
Leoxyz keeps asking for references but then he comes out and posts LIES and ACCUSATIONS without any authentic proofs or evidences.
2875 And We will extract from every nation a witness, then We will say "Bring forth your proof." They will then realize that all truth belongs with God, and what they had invented will abandon them.
I will request the moderators to issue Leoxyz a warning and take disciplinary action against him for slandering/accusing/insulting me with the label of Quranist and making unsubstantiated claims about al-qur'aan without backing it with evidence.
According to forum rules
2] Please note that this forum is primarily dedicated to the study and understanding of the Scripture (Quran). Thus, mocking it or not being able to back-up claims with specifics will all result in deletion of such posts and/or removal of topic and/or disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
3] Respect other users of the forum. Language and/or material of vulgarity, obscenity, harassment, profanity or insulting nature, whether it is direct or suggested, will NOT be tolerated. Any messages containing such language or material will be moved to the trash section or deleted, without notice and may result in disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=8177.0
Dear ;
Quran means nothing in the eyes of a Quranist.They Tamper it ,not to speak of disbleiving all Historians of the world.
In fact you claimed contrary to the accepted belief.You did not provide EVEN A SINGLE EVIDENCE THAT MECCA DID NOT EXIST AT THE TIME OF REVELATION OF THE QURAN.
MAXIMUS PROOF YOU ARE PROOF IS AGAIN A "PEARL ""THIS MATTER HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ON THIS FORUM"
Subnallah /mashallah
Forum contains 'tabarrukaats " like you and they go on posting such 'Anti-islamic/anti-quranic " posts.
Whether you are quranist or not ,your brain level is definitely equivalent to them. -
This has all been discussed by Ayman and Tanveer and others in several of the 20+ page threads floating about.
-
First, subjective.
Second, start a new thread in quran divinity section and mention such contradictions
First, belief in a "fake god" in support of Quran and its unrealistic and barbaric injunctions. Second, supporting the first in extreme affirmation as the Only Truth. As for the contradictions, there are plenty mentioned in the Quranic Divinity section. You can also do a google search by typing "contradictions in the Quran". For some magical reasons, all of them will be vehemently denied because of the second and putting a heavy weight on all others to become subjective.
What ex-Muslims have to say
http//www.apostatesofislam.com/http//www.formermuslims.com/forum/index.php
http//www.islam-watch.org/
-
Is that why you call us Quranists? (
Indeed, the quran means nothing in the eyes who follow hearsay, who refer to humans as "Holy," and who make the quran simply an afterthought.
Bring the Evidence that Mecca was not at the present at the time of Revelation of the Holy Quran.
All this brainless progeny is addicted to "lying" and posting things without any proof/evidence.
2111
I am anxiously waiting for evidence of" non -existance of Mecca"{BTWIs Mecca present even now or not ?? What is the "Quranist thought"}
-
Bring the Evidence that Mecca was not at the present at the time of Revelation of the Holy Quran.
All this brainless progeny is addicted to "lying" and posting things without any proof/evidence.
2111
I am anxiously waiting for evidence of" non -existance of Mecca"{BTWIs Mecca present even now or not ?? What is the "Quranist thought"}
Nowhere did I assert Mecca didn't exist. I am undecided. You need to stop generalizing ("Quranists" as if one of us is arguing something, then EVERY other person who follows the quran only agrees. Stop, really, it's childish.
-
Nowhere did I assert Mecca didn't exist. I am undecided. You need to stop generalizing ("Quranists" as if one of us is arguing something, then EVERY other person who follows the quran only agrees. Stop, really, it's childish.
"LYING ' is a marker sign of Quranist How can you deny ? Look at your post;
-
Nowhere in al-qur'aan does it mention that "al-masjid al-haraam" is in the so called Mecca. If you think that "al-masjid al-haraam" is or was a physical location in Mecca or elsewhere, then bring proof for it please.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a town named Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. If you think that a town named Mecca existed at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
Who said this ?
Still waiting for Evidence for "Non existance of Mecca"
-
-
Salaam all,
2142 mentions about them turning away from the "qiblata" that they WERE on, i.e. the former qiblata, and the wording used is "allatee kaanoo 3alayhaa", meaning "that they WERE on".
2143 uses the wording "allatee kunta 3alayhaa", meaning "that you BECAME on" (referring to the new qiblata of al-masjid al-haraam). If 2143 was pointing to the same qiblata that they WERE on, i.e. the old qiblata, then the wording should have been the same as in 2142, i.e. "allatee kaanoo 3alayha".
This is my understanding but it could be wrong. I would request those who are well founded in Classical Arabic to correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.
salam
brother, i am still having difficulty with the forms of qibla in these verses. i understand your point about the qibla in 2142 being plural/collective in the past tense. however i do not understand what you are saying about the qibla in 2143. i appreciate it is singular, but are you saying it is in the present tense? the english translation as "that you became on" is not completely clear and a little awkward linguisticaly.
when i suddenly and unexpectedly abandoned my former practises and beliefs about God which i had been spoonfed by the clergy, i was resolved not to discuss or debate God or the Quran with anyone for a long time, in fear of being brainwashed again. i had decided to study secretly, and form a better understanding (at least outwardly) of such things before i progress, God willing, to engage in the kind of discussions as this.
i do not know how so quickly my thirst for enlightenment has made me abandon my initial resolve. i think i have far too little understanding and knowledge to be involved in this debate, and i think i am wasting other people's time. i am not sure if i can add anything of value to the discussion, with my knowledge in Quran and arabic so poor. it seems i am still lacking understanding of basic concepts that the clever people on this forum take for granted. i apologise.
thank you for your time.
salam
-
Peace brother,
Thank you for taking the time to address some of the points. God willing, we should arrive at the truth by being patient, connecting with The God, letting al-qur'aan explain itself, using our gifts of mind, logic, and reasoning, and continued constructive discussion, and then following the best meaning.
Brother, you still have not addressed a very important issue of wherever you are, and some other points.
- If the people of previous scriptures know it is the truth from our Lord, and know it as they know their children (2146), then how come none of them knows about or acknowledges any "al-masjid al-haraam" at mecca or anywhere else ? After all, they are supposed to know it as they know their children. Please go and ask any one of the knowledgable people of previous scriptures and that will be empirical verification of this issue.
this verse plays on my mind a great deal. i always thought this is the key to understanding what al masjid al haram is, because, as you say, one could verify a theory by asking people of knowledge of previous scripture. however, it is far from clear who these people are and where one might find them. i do not think most modern jews and christians can be classified as people with knowledge of previous scriptures.
i think if brother Layth has a theory that al masjid al haram is somewhere in Jerusalem or nearby. if you ask most jew or christians, who are the closest i can find to being people with knowledge of previous scriptures, they will unanimously indentify with Jerusalem.
this verse still does not show whether al masjid al haram is a physical thing or location, or if it is something mental. i do not think that people that are the likeliest candidates for people with knowledge of previous scriptures would identify with the institution that you are saying al masjid al haram is.
- It bothers me when people quote partial phrases and then base their conclusions on the partial phrase, instead of taking the whole phrase into account.
Brother, The God asks us to face towards "al-masjid al-haraam" WHEREVER WE ARE, and not just face towards "al-masjid al-haraam". Now please think with an open mind and address the following issues, which you have neglected in your previous post
-
You are driving on I-10 (in USA) going west. You are somewhere, right ? Now WHEREVER you are on I-10, you are supposed to face al-masjid al-haraam, how are you going to do it ? Remember, you are sitting in a car, driving on I-10 going west, and you are supposed to be facing al-masjid al-haraam which is supposedly located in Mecca or Jerusalem, how are you going to face it in that situation ? If not then you are disobeying 2144, 2149, 2150.
-
You are sitting in your friends house watching TV. His furniture is arranged in such a way that when you sit on his sofa, you are facing west. For argument sake, lets say that in that area, the supposed al-masjid al-haraam is east of you. Now in this situation, you are somewhere right ? How are you going to face al-masjid al-haraam which is to your east, while watching TV facing west ? The only way is by rearranging all the furniture in your friends place so that you can face east. Do you do that when you visit your friends place ? If not you are disobeying 2144, 2149, 2150.
-
You are sitting in your own home on the toilet facing west, and al-masjid al-haraam is supposedly towards the east. Now remember that according to 2144 you are supposed to face "al-masjid al-haram" WHEREVER you are. When you are sitting on the toilet, you are somewhere, right ? How can you face al-majid al-haraam on your east while you are sitting on a toilet which is built in such a way that you are facing west when you are sitting on it ? If not, then you are disobeying 2144, 2149, 2150.
-
Right now, you must be sitting in front of your computer, facing a certain direction, which is most likely not in the supposed direction of al-masjid al-haraam. If that is true, are you not disobeying 2144, 2149, 2150 ?
-
When you go to sleep on your bed, you must lie down on your back with your face up at some time thus facing the sky, or on your side with your face not facing the supposed physical al-masjid al-haraam at some time. The moment you do that, you are disobeying 2144, 2149, 2150.
Now tell me the following
WHICH PHYSICAL DIRECTION IN THE WORLD IS SUCH THAT ONE WILL BE FACING THAT PHYSICAL DIRECTION WHEREVER ONE IS ?
I hope you can see clearly that this is an impossible interpretation.
the later part of this section presents much more difficulty to the idea that al masjid al haram is something physical. it is only now that i understand your point of wherever you may be meaning always, continuously. if by this phrase, God means constantly and always, the theory of al masjis al haram being anything physical hits upon a very tall hurdle, maybe an unsurmountable one.
i have been pondering this phrase wherever you may be and i really have not got to grips by what exactly God means by it. if He means continuously in a strong literal sense, then why did He not make it clearer. i think there are many ways He could have expressed this idea of constancy, but it seems there is a great deal more in this phrase than just that.
all the traditional translations, and tafseer parenthesise in prayer in this phrase, but you are absolutely right that there is nothing that suggests this. i cannot find any contextual reason to justify relating the verse specifically to prayer, and neither can i see any word meaning prayer therein.
i am tempted to conclude that al masjid al haram must be a mental or metphorical thing at this stage, but i am dissatisfied with my understanding of wherever you may be. i realise my arabic is very poor, but i think the matter goes deeper. perhaps you could comment on this phrase? is it used elsewhere in the Quran?
-
The distinguishing is for both The God and the people. Suppose you take a test, and the teacher declares you in 1st position without announcing each person's test results to all others, would the students not complain and object to that and claim that it was not fair ?
-
A hypocrite can easily pretend to be a believer and face a certain physical direction with the other believers, thereby deceiving them. It is, however, IMPOSSIBLE for a hypocrite to mentally keep facing the inviolable institution of obedience and be a hypocrite at the same time.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to distinguish a hypocrite from a believer just on the basis of facing a physical direction.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for a hypocrite to keep facing the inviolable institution of obedience.
The ONLY way to distinguish a hypocrite from a believer would be if the "qiblatan" is a mental one. For example, if one mentally faces the inviolable institution of obedience wherever one is, one cannot be a hypocrite, because the actions/deeds will always match that mental "qiblatan".
i do not see that a hypocrite is distinguishable of the qibla is a mental one. if is mental, how do you propose to read another's thoughts? if it is physical, you at least have the possibilty of distinguishing you see a hypocrite facing a different direction in private. it is also not obvious that those who turn on their heels means specifically hypocrites. it could mean those who go from belief to disbelief, or from practising the religion of islam (if such a thing exists) to not practising it. in this case, those who turn on their heels are distinguishable.
what is still not clear to me is exactly who is to distinguish. if it is God, then both physical and mental qiblas are clearly distinguishable to Him. if it is his humans, then i think my objections to a mental qibla in the last paragraph stand strong.
- What does piety have to do with facing a physical direction ?
2177 Piety is not to turn your faces towards the east and the west, but piety is one who believes in God and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Scripture, and the prophets, and who gives money out of love to the relatives, and the orphans, and the needy and the wayfarer, and those who ask, and to free the slaves; and who honors the Connection, and who contributes towards betterment; as well as those who keep their pledges when they make a pledge, and those who are patient in the face of good and bad and when in despair. These are the ones who have been truthful, and they are the righteous.
i agree that piety is not about facing any direction or any other kind of outward action. the qibla, however, is not necessarily about piety and I do not think God implies that it is. there are many things spoken of in the Quran that are not about piety, although their importance in faith and following the straight path are not any the lesser, for example, adminstering justice or dividing an inheritence.
Are The God's words not clear ?
God words are clear, there is not doubt. that my vision is not good is also clear. God veils the hearts of some wrongdoers, and i might just be one of those. i cannot see any way out of this except pray to The Raheem.
You did not address the following point
You are sailing on a ship on the Pacific, and you are at a point on the surface of the Earth which is directly opposite where al-masjid al-haraam is supposedly located physically. Which direction do you face, and why not the other direction ?
in this case one has many ways of facing al masjid al haram; it is not impossible.
I think you misunderstood the relevant point again. I was not mentioning any building but the supposed physical al-masjid al-haraam, or the supposed physical Kaaba itself
You are standing in the so called Kaaba, in Mecca. You have to perform salaat in this situation. Which direction do you face ?
take 2 steps back, and your problem is solved.
at this point it is not even clear to me if the qibla is mental or physical; whether it is the kaba is a distant question to me, so only give the above example to demonstrate that your objection can be easily overcome.
Actually the "qiblatan" is not only for salaat, but for wherever one is. Even if you are not performing salaat, you are supposed to face al-masjid al-haraam wherever you are, i.e. in every possible anatomical orientation of the human body. Facing which direction will you stand or sit IN the so called Kaaba, and why ?
Remember, in the Kaaba, when you are facing a certain direction, a major portion of the supposed physical al-masjid al-haraam will be behind you or on your sides. Facing the direction of something physical means that all of that physical thing has to be in front of you.
i have addressed this near the top of this post.
I hope you can see the logical impossibility of the part of your quote in red.
the impossible situation that you refer to here is my example of a man on the moon, on the face opposite to the earth, facing al masjid al haram. this is not impossible or difficult. there is no need for the astronaught to contort himself or lie on the moon surface to achieve this; he can simply look down. i do not find anything unusual or difficult about this, and it fits well within the universal and natural meaning of to face something.
Let me remind you The God asks us to face the direction of al-masjid al-haraam WHEREVER we are, which means that we should be facing it in whatever anatomical position we are. What you are suggesting can only happen if one is in a perpetual bowing position while standing on the Moon with the Earth on the opposite side. Even if you are lying down, you will always have to lie on your stomach so you are facing the Earth. While you are sitting, you will have to sit in a bowing position with your face towards Earth at all times. Do you see the absurdity of what you are proposing ?
i have addressed this above where i talk about the concept of wherever you may be.
Asking someone to bring proof of a negative statement is illogical. The burden of proof is on someone making a positive statement.
For example, someone cannot say that "Iraq has WMD" and then ask others to prove him wrong by bringing proof that Iraq does not have WMD. The burden of proof is on that person to bring proof that Iraq does have WMD.
You cannot just say that "al-masjid al-haraam" was in Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, and then ask others to bring proof that "al-masjid al-haraam" could not have been in Mecca at that time. You will have to bring proof that "al-masjid al-haraam" was in Mecca at that time. The burden of proof will be on you to prove the positive.
- Nowhere in al-qur'aan does it mention that "al-masjid al-haraam" is in the so called Mecca. If you think that "al-masjid al-haraam" is or was a physical location in Mecca or elsewhere, then bring proof for it please.
i did not ask for proof of a negative statement. what i said was that it has not been proved that the thing in mecca, commonly thought of as al masjid al haram, did not exist at the time of revelation. i agree that the converse that it did exist is also not proven.
just because there is no proof that al masjid al haram did not exist in mecca during revelation does not mean it did not exist.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a town named Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. If you think that a town named Mecca existed at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
-
There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a physical building by the name of Kaaba in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. In fact, there is evidence that shows that the pagan temple in the so called Mecca was renamed after the common noun "kaaba" in al-qur'aan, about 80-100 years after the revelation of al-qur'aan.
If you think that a physical building by the name Kaaba existed in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
- There is ZERO evidence of the existence of a physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Haraam in the so called Mecca at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan. In fact, there is evidence that shows that such a physical building was constructed around the so called Kaaba many years after the revelation of al-qur'aan. The evidence also shows that at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, there was no physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Haraam in the so called Mecca.
If you think that a physical building by the name Masjid Al-Haraam existed in the so called Mecca or elsewhere at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan, then bring proof for it please.
please see my last point. also, i think it is not correct to say that there is zero evidence. i agree the evidence is miniscule or weak.
even if al masjid al haram is not in mecca, it may be something physical elswhere.
- The God also mentions "al-masjid al-aqsa" in al-qur'aan. It is an established fact that the physical building by the name of Masjid Al-Aqsa was built in the Ummayad dynasty long after the revelation of al-qur'aan, thus it cannot be "al-masjid al-aqsa" talked about in Chapter 17. Even the staunchest sectarians admit that. If it is a physical building, then which building is "al-masjid al-aqsa" mentioned in 171 ?
i am not sure of the relevancy of this.
- The God tells us that His message is fully detailed and complete and details ALL things (6114-115, 6126, 12111, 1712), contains every example (1789, 1854, 3058, 3927) and clear explanation of everything (1689) relevant to our guidance to the straight path and is enough for our guidance (2951) and the prophet followed only the qur'aan (1015, 4105).
Did The God forget to tell us the physical location of al-masjid al-haraam in al-qur'aan ?
please see my response, earlier in this post, to you comments about God's words not being clear.
please remember, brother, that i am not attempting to support any theory of al masjd al haram. i am trying my best to understand the Quran as objectively as i can.
also, i sometimes gain insight when strange thoughts cross my mind. it just occured to me that al masjid al haram could be the Quran itself. i do not expect this is the correct interpretation, but sometimes i gain insight into problems by thinkning about the wrong solutions. without going to too much trouble or providing a detailed proof, is there any reason why this idea is ridiculous?
i know i had said that i should keep out of these debates and let you geniuses work it out, but i feel awkward leaving a discussion half way. you can probably easily sho my ideas to be proposterous, but please do not feel obliged to waste your time responding.
salam
-
Peace Leoxyz,
EVEN A SINGLE EVIDENCE THAT MECCA DID NOT EXIST AT THE TIME OF REVELATION OF THE QURAN.
Prove that MECCA EXISTED AT THE TIME OF REVELATION OF THE QURAN.
I know you can't. Nobody was able to prove that on this forum or ANYWHERE ELSE.
Let me make it even easier for you
Prove that MECCA EXISTED ANYTIME BEFORE THE 8th CENTURY CE.
Try it.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace Leoxyz,
Prove that MECCA EXISTED AT THE TIME OF REVELATION OF THE QURAN.
I know you can't. Nobody was able to prove that on this forum or ANYWHERE ELSE.
Let me make it even easier for you
Prove that MECCA EXISTED ANYTIME BEFORE THE 8th CENTURY CE.
Try it.
Peace,
Ayman
salam brother Ayman
sorry if you directly wished to address brother Leoxyz, but here is my 2 pennies worth.
i think the point is has neither been proved that it existed, nor has it proved that it did not. you cannot say it did not exist just because there is not proof that it did exist.
the lack of proof of its existence and its actual existence are not the same thing.
salam