Problems with the Reformist Translation
-
Salaam Bigmo,
You keep putting YOUR personal opinion over what the quran is saying....You keep looking up 'idol-worship' in english dictionaries to come up with conclusions.
For the 80th time
622-23
Also, if shirk is what you think it is...Tell me in the story mentioned in 1832-42 ... How did this man setup his own property as an idol. Hint He didn't 'worship' it literally.
-
Salaam Bigmo,
You keep putting YOUR personal opinion over what the quran is saying....You keep looking up 'idol-worship' in english dictionaries to come up with conclusions.
For the 80th time
622-23
Also, if shirk is what you think it is...Tell me in the story mentioned in 1832-42 ... How did this man setup his own property as an idol. Hint He didn't 'worship' it literally.
My problem with Sunnis is not what they believe in, my problem with them is they never provide evidence from the Koran when they condemn others yet think they still can do so. But at the same time, I don't see the wisdom of attacking others if you don't have a convincing argument and evidence from the Koran. Quoting verses without having a unified interpretation is not convincing. Its not your way is wrong, its your interpretation is exactly that, your interpretation. But you deny those interpretation as much right as yours.
Let me show you, you talked about
18.32-42. Set forth to them the parable of two men for one of them We provided two gardens of grape-vines and surrounded them with date palms; in between the two We placed corn-fields. Each of those gardens brought forth its produce, and failed not in the least therein in the midst of them We caused a river to flow. (Abundant) was the produce this man had he said to his companion, in the course of a mutual argument "more wealth have I than you, and more honour and power in (my following of) men." He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul He said, "I deem not that this will ever perish, "Nor do I deem that the Hour (of Judgment) will (ever) come Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange." His companion said to him, in the course of the argument with him "Dost thou deny Him Who created thee out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned thee into a man? "But (I think) for my part that He is Allah, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord. "Why didst thou not, as thou wentest into thy garden, say '(Allah)'s will (be done)! There is no power but with Allah.' If thou dost see me less than thee in wealth and sons, "It may be that my Lord will give me something better than thy garden, and that He will send on thy garden thunderbolts (by way of reckoning) from heaven, making it (but) slippery sand! "Or the water of the garden will run off underground so that thou wilt never be able to find it." So his fruits (and enjoyment) were encompassed (with ruin), and he remained twisting and turning his hands over what he had spent on his property, which had (now) tumbled to pieces to its very foundations, and he could only say, "Woe is me! Would I had never ascribed partners to my Lord and Cherisher!"
Now whil you looked at what it said from a material association, i saw what his theology was, a denier of judgement day. So If i look at the Koran i see that the pagans never believed, and still don't, on a day of judgement. Now this guy might have been a pagan and did not believe what his friend told him and continued to follow his gods. He then assured himself well, even if my friend is right, I think i will also be lucky on the after life if there is one because i am a man of fortune and great luck and blessing.
You are looking at the part where he says that I believe this fortune would last forever and then cried and regreted about his shirk when it got destroyed. You then connected the two together. OK, peace. But I might look at aqeedah and his denial of judgement day and connect it with the many verses in the Koran about how the Kuffar deny the Last day. He just had a friend who was a believer and was doing Dawa to him. He then became convinced that these gods he prayed to betrayed him. There are many verses about how thes god people pray to not only do not benefit but even harm and won't save them against any misfortune.
BUT THEN a third person, perhaps more spiritual and philosophical might say, no, I don't see it this way. the verses start by saying
Set forth to them the parable of two men
Meaning this is a parable. The garden this man had and enjoyed and worshiped was this world. He was happy with this life and thought there is no life after this so let me enjoy it. His friend said to him this life is nothing, the here after is better and longer lasting. Then when this guy was resurrected, he realized that the after life was more important and does not crash like the story of the man and his garden. He then cried because he did not put his faith in the greater reward of the after life. Then he can connect that with the many verses in the Koran about how these gods men worship will be a curse on judgement day and would betray their worshipers. Who would cry and live in regret for their rejection of the prophets and their warning. The friend he says in this parable are the prophets. And the garden is this world, and his arraogant faith that this garden will be protected are these gods he worship who gave him false assurance.
So here you have just 3 different interpretion. Maybe there are others. One looked at those verses and nothing else. The second looked at those verses withing the whole Koranic context to explain it. The 3rd looked at the parable of the story and how it relates to the over all argument the Koran tries to educate us about.
-
Salaam Edip,
I am fond of your ideas and translations about Islam except the RASHAD KHALIFA FACTOR.
Edip
EDIP You know that I do not trust those books of stories. I bet you do not trust them either. Thus, you cannot pick and chose from them.
It is impossible to get a clear picture without reading those stories, it is Just to close our eyes. The most criticizers of Hadith I have met say that because these stories display negative image of the Prophet Muhammad so they cannot be true, I think you understand what I mean to say, this is a mind made already? To trust those stories is or reject them is another issue you can only do it with providing a solid proof, and not like most of these "Quranists" over here who say; "It is not in Quran" or "it contradicts Quran" therefore it is not true.
Edip
As for wives and concubines, I have more than enough reason not to believe those stories about Muhammad's life. As I argued from the Quran, islam rejects slavery and considers it as the biggest violation against God, since making another human being a slave is the zenith of arrogance as Pharaoh has done. (See 7924; 9013; 1239-42; 425). You will find my reasons discussed in numerous pages of the Reformist Translation
Quran
Only with their spouses, or those who are rightfully theirs, do they have sexual relations; they are not to be blamed.Who are these rightfully theirs, because Spouses have been mentioned at the beginning of the verse?
As you seem to care much about grammar and spellings, I am sorry; in both I am weak.
Thanks.
-
Peace all
Is there any chance that those who are rightfully theirs could mean the girlfriend or boy friend??
Or the person they have fallen in love with??
Or the person who they are planning to marry??
-
Salaam Edip,
I am fond of your ideas and translations about Islam except the RASHAD KHALIFA FACTOR.
Edip
It is impossible to get a clear picture without reading those stories, it is Just to close our eyes. The most criticizers of Hadith I have met say that because these stories display negative image of the Prophet Muhammad so they cannot be true, I think you understand what I mean to say, this is a mind made already? To trust those stories is or reject them is another issue you can only do it with providing a solid proof, and not like most of these "Quranists" over here who say; "It is not in Quran" or "it contradicts Quran" therefore it is not true.Edip
Quran
Only with their spouses, or those who are rightfully theirs, do they have sexual relations; they are not to be blamed.Who are these rightfully theirs, because Spouses have been mentioned at the beginning of the verse?
As you seem to care much about grammar and spellings, I am sorry; in both I am weak.
Thanks.
I have a discussion on this in my attachment
-
Partners?
I wonder if it means previous partners before Islam. Or women who you have married without the wedding formalities yet done like dowries and a marriage house. What we call in Arabic "katb al kitab". Usually people do this so they can go out with them before they actually make the ceremony and pay the dowries and make the financial arrangements. It could mean slaves also.
I don't think the only issue with hadiths is just it tainted the prophet. Many hadiths praises his character also. The issue is many hadiths contradict the Koran and was compiled centuries after him and taints the Koran also. Plus the fact all sects have their own hadiths. The whole Isnad methodology is a highly subjective method. No two collectors agreed with each other. Plus many hadiths stress obedience to the rulers who in turn over saw these hadith collection efforts while their legacy was both bloody and corrupt. Than the issue of these witnessers like Abu Huraira and Ibn Abbas and Ibn Malik and Ibn Umar. All knew the prophet for a short time and some were only young teens during the prophet's time yet narrate hadiths like leaves falling from a tree. Also the conflict of interest since Sunni sectarians collected hadiths and authenticated and also compiled the biographies of the narrators and also established rulings and then made them binding. Its was not led by an independent source. Not forgetting that there are no multiple sources to back those hadiths and most of them are single narrations. And also the political rivalry and division that occured right after the prophet's death and the climbing of some of the prophet's ardent enemies to power like the Umayyids and Abbasids.
-
Bigmo
It could mean slaves also.
That is what I want to discuss, but lets wait for Edips input.
I am going to read the attachment you mentioned.nimnimak
Peace all
Is there any chance that those who are rightfully theirs could mean the girlfriend or boy friend??
Or the person they have fallen in love with??
Or the person who they are planning to marry??
My girl friend or her boy friend can be husband or wife of another therefore they are not rightfully.
theirs.
We can fall in love with a person, who does not love's us or he or she may be also love of another person, therefore cannot be rightfully ours.
Now if I have a sexual relation ship with a girl do whom I am planning to marriage, if the marriage doesnot carry on their will be lots of social problems, may be not in Europe and USA but rest of the world.Partners
The most strange definition i ever heared, can the quoter describe it further.
-
The most strange definition i ever heared, can the quoter describe it further.
Stranger than boyfriend and girlfriend, or even fiancee?
I personally do not agree with any of the explanations mentioned on this page, including mine, but I just wanted to mention to the poster that a partner more rightfully belongs to his/her partner than does a fiancee or a girlfriend/boyfriend. People here take partners for more than a reason
To avoid expensive wedding expenditure
To avoid going to the church, which they do not believe in anymore
Because they believe it's not the government business to register them as husband/wife
Other reasons I am not aware ofHowever, apart from these ceremonies, they live like any other married couple and the children are registered under the father's name. The government also recognize this kind of relationship when calculating any financial dues or taxes.
-
Here is our translation of verse 43, 24 and my argument for them
43 If you fear that you cannot be just to fatherless orphans, then marry those whom you see fit from the women, two, and three, and four. But if you fear you will not be fair then only one, or whom you already have contract with. So that you do not commit injustice and suffer hardship.*
424 The women who are already married, except those whom you have contractual rights, God's book is over you; and permitted for you is what is beyond this, if you are seeking with your money to be protected and not for illicit sex. As for those whom you have already had joy with them, then you shall give them their wage as an obligation. There is no sin upon you for what you agree to after the obligation. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.*
NOTE
004003 Polygamy is allowed only to provide psychological, social and economic support for widows with orphans (See 4127). Muhammad's practice of polygamy must have been in accordance with the condition to serve an important social service. Sure, physical attraction of widows might be one of the factors for marriage and there is nothing wrong with that. Those who could afford practicing polygamy, mentally and financially, should try hard to treat them equally, though 4129 expresses the practical impossibly of attaining that ideal. Additionally, the consent of the first wife is necessary; otherwise, she can always seek divorce. It is clear that polygamy is not an ideal form of marriage and an unusual practice allowed for difficult times, such as a dramatic reduction in the male population during wartime. The age gap between marrying men and women creates a surplus of women who will never be able to find a monogamous partner. By a strict prohibition on polygamy, millions of young women are deprived from having a legitimate relationship with men. The only hope for millions of young girls is to get married with already divorced men, perhaps with kids, or to have a relationship born out of promiscuous sexual practices. The Western world does not prohibit polygamy since many males have sexual relationships with more than one woman at the same time. The only thing that modern societies do is deprive those women from the protection of law; they are there to be used, disposed of and recycled by men! The hypocrisy in the modern attitude becomes clear when homosexuality is defended on the pretext of "consenting adults," but the same standards are not afforded to the polygamists. The conditional permission for polygamy is for the psychological and financial protection of children and their widow mothers, in cases of war or natural disaster.
Polygamy, according to the Old Testament, started with the seventh generation after Cain and continued as a common practice in the patriarchal age together with having concubines (Genesis 419; 62; 161-4; 2221-24; 288-9; 2923-30, etc.). However, the Old Testament also disapproves of polygamy (Deuteronomy 1717).
The Old Testament contains numerous exaggerated stories. One is about the number of Solomon's wives. The roundness of the numbers of wives and concubines and their total, the three numbers being perfectly round, indicate an intentional exaggeration. "And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines and his wives turned away his heart? (1 Kings 113). It is highly plausible that the word "hundred" was inserted in the text by later scribes to damage the reputation of Solomon for some political agenda. The following verses depict Solomon as an evil person and idolater. The Quran neither accuses Solomon of indulging in a hedonistic sexual life nor of associating partners with God. Ironically, modern Christians are now bashing Solomon for not sticking to monogamy. To be politically correct, modern Christians do not hesitate to condemn the common practice of polygamy among Jews and their prophets.Contrary to the Quran, which exhorts muslims to help widows, the misogynistic Rabbinical teachings inserted into the Old Testament put them in the category of harlots, and finds them unworthy of marriage by the privileged class priests (Leviticus 2114).
The expression Ma malakat aymanukum has been translated by most translations as "whom your right hands posses" or "captives" or "concubines." We translated this and similar expressions found in 43,24,25,36; 1671; 236; 2431,33,58; 3028; 3350,52,55; and 7030, as "those with whom you have contractual rights." These were the wives of the enemy combatants who were persecuted because they acknowledged the message of Islam and sought asylum at the Muslim community (6010). Since they did not get through a normal divorce process, an exceptional contract allows them to marry muslims as free women. Marrying them could create some social, economic and personal complications for the husband. They have nothing to do with IBaD (slaves), as sectarian translations and commentaries state. As we will learn, the Quran categorically rejects slavery and considers it to be the greatest sin (See 379; 425,92; 589; 867; 2432-33; 583; 9013; 2286; 1239-42; 7924). The practice of slavery was justified and resurrected to a certain extent via the influence of Jewish and Christian scholars, as well as fabricated hadith and sharia laws, decades after Muhammad's departure.
It is ironic that Jews who suffered the most from slavery and were saved by God through the leadership of Moses (Exodus 113-14), later justified enslaving other people, including selling one's own daughter, and inserted that practice into their holy books (Exodus 217-8; 2121-22; 26-27; Leviticus 2544-46; Joshua 96-27).
Though Jesus never condoned slavery, St. Paul, the founder of modern Christianity, once asked the masters to treat their slaves nicely (Colossians 322), and asked the slaves to be "submissive to your masters with all fear" (1 Peter 218; Ephesians 65; 1 Timothy 62; Colossians 322; Titus 29) justifying the Marxist maxim, "Religion is the opium of masses." The use of religion by the privileged class to enslave or exploit people is vividly depicted by the South African archbishop Desmond Tutu "When the missionaries came to Africa, they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'let us close our eyes and pray'. When we opened them, we had the Bible, and they had the land."
The word YaMYN means "right hand" or metaphorically "right," "power" or "control." However, its plural form aYMaN is consistently mentioned in the Quran to mean not "right hands" but to mean "oaths" or "promises," implying the mutual nature of the relationship (See 433 589; 912; 1691-94; 2224-225; 3028; 662; 553; 6109). This unique Quranic usage is similar to the semantic difference between the singular and plural forms of the word Ayat (signs) (see 2106).
The expression in question, thus could be translated as "those whom your oaths/contracts have rights over" or "those whom you hold rights through your contracts," or by reading aYMaN (oaths/contracts) as an object rather than a subject, "those who hold/possess your contracts."The marriage declaration is a mutual partnership between two sexes and is formed by participation of family members. A married woman cannot marry another man without getting divorced from her husband. However, if a woman escapes and joins muslims while her husband stayed behind participating in a war against muslims, she may marry a Muslim man without actually getting divorced from her combatant husband; she will legally be considered a divorcee (6010). Since this contract is different from the normal marriage contract, this special relationship is described in different words. The same is valid for a man whose wife allies with the hostile enemy. See 2431 and 3355. Those who work for another person according to employment contracts are also referred to with the same expression. See 1671; 3028. Also, see 425,36; 236; 2458; 3350; 3352; 7030.
The Quran does not demand those who lived together based on a mutual promise (AYMaN) during the days of ignorance, without a marriage contract, to get divorced. Similarly, it does not want those who married two sisters before accepting islam to be a way of life (423). This tolerance does not encourage living together without marriage. It only does not want to incur further damage to the family structure and does not want to create hurdles for those who wish to live according to the principles of islam.
NOTE for 425
004025 Slavery as an evil practice of Pharaoh and other polytheists is abolished by the Quran (379; 43,25,92; 589; 867; 2432-33; 583; 9013; 2286; 1239-42; 7924). No wonder, this verse emphasizes the equality between men and women, between the free and those who were unjustly enslaved by polytheists. See 6010.
God issues a lighter penalty for formerly slave women who commit adultery because of their past. Their tragic history and experience is considered a mitigating factor. This rule, at the same time, rejects the Sunni and Shiite punishment for adultery (death), since there cannot be half of a capital punishment. See 242. -
Dear Brother Edip,
Salam, it is indeed a pleasant surprise to find you here in this forum after a long time. Good , that you have taken some time off your busy schedule .
your above explanation is a good effort , however it is still far from being perfect
424 The women who are already married, except those whom you have contractual rights, God's book is over you; and permitted for you is what is beyond this, if you are seeking with your money to be protected and not for illicit sex. As for those whom you have already had joy with them, then you shall give them their wage as an obligation. There is no sin upon you for what you agree to after the obligation. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.*
To start with, You have translated Mohsinnats, in 4-24 as , Married women, which in my opinion is wrong. You may like to check the other occurrences of this term.
just to give you a clue, right in the next verse 4-25 it is again being used , and here the meaning of it could be any, but Married.
The conclusion i have reached after a long study of the term mohs7innat is, that it simply conveys expression of a chaste woman.
NOTE for 425
004025 Slavery as an evil practice of Pharaoh and other polytheists is abolished by the Quran (379; 43,25,92; 589; 867; 2432-33; 583; 9013; 2286; 1239-42; 7924). No wonder, this verse emphasizes the equality between men and women, between the free and those who were unjustly enslaved by polytheists. See 6010.
God issues a lighter penalty for formerly slave women who commit adultery because of their past. Their tragic history and experience is considered a mitigating factor. This rule, at the same time, rejects the Sunni and Shiite punishment for adultery (death), since there cannot be half of a capital punishment. See 242.Above is another contradiction , you have explained MMA as the women whom you have contract with, but are of combatant enemies undivorced Azwajs, but in 4-25 exactly the same expression has been used (MMA) ,but now you are explaining them to be the previously enslaved women ?
peace
siki
-
Who are these rightfully theirs, because Spouses have been mentioned at the beginning of the verse?
The same persons mentioned in these verses -- no denying there was slavery in 6th century Arabia...
2221 Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe A SLAVE woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe A man SLAVE who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind That they may celebrate His praise.
492 Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due) If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing SLAVE, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing SLAVE (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing SLAVE be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running by way of repentance to Allah. for Allah hath all knowledge and all wisdom.
Peace
-
Dear Brother Edip,
Salam, it is indeed a pleasant surprise to find you here in this forum after a long time. Good , that you have taken some time off your busy schedule .
your above explanation is a good effort , however it is still far from being perfect
Dear Siki
You have two excellent points. Inshallah I will study them and come back here within one or two days.
Peace,
Edip -
The same persons mentioned in these verses -- no denying there was slavery in 6th century Arabia...
2221 Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe A SLAVE woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe A man SLAVE who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind That they may celebrate His praise.
492 Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due) If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing SLAVE, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing SLAVE (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing SLAVE be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running by way of repentance to Allah. for Allah hath all knowledge and all wisdom.
Peace
But the word for slave used here is not "right hand possess"
-
this question goes to either edip or layth.(excuse me, i didnt wanted to make a thread about it)
i have a problem.
i have gotten the book recently and in one of the first pages i see the symbol of the flower of life.
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/Flower-of-Life-small.png
what does this has to do in such book.
explanations please?peace be with you all
-
Dear AspeRin
I did not know that it was called Flower of Life, but I just wanted to put a visual design, or a geometrical object. When I came across this one, I liked it, since it was hexagon with 19 circles, resembling the 19x6=114 chapters of the Quran.
As it seems, its intricate yet symmetric design has received attention of those who appreciate mathematics. I personally find no harm in using a geometrical design with such a diverse and rich appeal. I do not necessarily subscribe to the speculations made about the design, but I personally find it visually artistic and structurally-numerically interesting. Please see the information about this design.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_of_Life
PS After posting this article I learned that a charlatan named Drunvalo Melchizedek is abusing this design for his religious business. I might delete it from the book in future editions.
What do you think, folks?
Peace,
Edip -
peace edip
thanks for the quick reply.
i didnt notice it had 19 circles, it is amazing now that i know that. as the number 19 has to do with God, message, life and all the good about signs of God...
the coincidence could make one say all religions that hold this symbol are related(as in coming from the same source, same deity). incorporating islam now because of the number of circles and the fact that number is really important in the quran.
or... why 19 circles then? maybe a sign for those who are related to it, take a look at islam? God knows best.still i would not advice anyone to use symbolism as i personally oppose to all kinds of symbolism on anything related to islam and beyond. the symbol does look nice, but for me it doesnt belong in that book because of the history of who has used that symbol, and that the book has a full quran content in it, and nothing but quran related material should appear.
peace