Salaam Str41ghtw4y,

its self evident from the Islamic concepts, the simple concepts support all I write, like Allah is the owner of all creation, therefore we cannot own anything but what we ourselves create, so the earth and her resources belong to Allah alone as we never created it, we only have a right of use. Allah is the only sovereign, not even Muhammad can be your sovereign, this removes all forms of imposed authority, in every walk of life.

It needs no great effort to see the concepts of Islam, like the concept of no compulsion which demands you do no impose on those around you with your dictates and beliefs.

Like I say follow what you wish, I am not obligated to hold anyones hand and lead them through the concepts of Islam, as people refuse what is difficult to accept as true, and much of what I write is hard for most to accept.

Salaam Abdun,

Clearly we all follow what we wish - but this latter part of your answer digresses from the point I have raised which relates to providing justifications from the Quran to support a point of view. Note that I'm clearly not making any specific claims/counter-claims to the content of your posts, or making a statement of my position with regard to the content. I am merely pointing out that your purported articles of 'truth' simply cannot be published as 'truth' in the way they are currently written, without references.

Quite revealing is your use of statements such as 'self evident', 'simple concepts', 'refuse what is difficult to accept as true' etc in order to justify your claims rather than Quranic references. It amounts to you posting a baseless opinion - which is fine, and in keeping with what the majority do. There are many good blogs out there, yours is one of them. It is a pity that you seem to equate effective argumentation and justification as 'hand-holding'. Particularly as I see great potential in transforming many of the articles on your site into ones with supported claims of truth - or at least pointers to Truth.

However, as you say, there is no compulsion.

Peace.

Salaam Abdun,

Your response evades my question and seems hypocritical. If you will choose not to support your claims with Quranic reference, this will not be different to the majority who "....uphold baseless Hadith...." . Why post or maintain a website, if you are seeking to show others Truth, then surely this would entail justifying your claims?

Peace.

Salaam Stillearning,

natural law is simple, it is the foundation of all law, everywhere on earth, it is based upon reason, it is known as the law of the land, prescriptive law, the unwritten law, but it is basically based upon two simple laws that must be kept in mind when you create a society, they must always remain the base.

Do all you have agreed to do.
Do not encroach upon another man or woman, or their property.

Although really the 'or their property' bit is within the logic of the first part of do not encroach.

From these two simple laws all law flows, and as extension society.

If you go on my website I have written the reasoned understanding of natural law, and the concept of allodial rights of use, which is an integral part of the law, I have also explained many of the frauds, like ownership, legislation, democracy, corporation, trusts, etc.

Contract of community

http//servantofthelight.com/content/view/178/235/

Allodium Claim

http//servantofthelight.com/content/view/197/239/

Onion of ownership

http//servantofthelight.com/content/view/194/231/

Salaam Abdun,

Thanks for the links.

Are you intending to reference your articles contents to the Quran? I note that you've done this for a minority of all your website articles. After all

Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith, and thus divert others from the path of Allah without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution.

Peace.

What I presently understand is that the quran explains itself by means of tautology (self-referential truths). For example a tautology is 75% of human beings on Earth make up 3 quarters of its population. These are powerful in that they are unquestionable truths (2123 - The truth cannot be questioned for its acts but all others may be questioned).

The application of set theory (think Venn diagrams) leads to extraction of information from tautology imagine, for example, two shades of green which are exactly the same but the slightest bit different - the behaviours of both shades of green are perfectly alike but differ by precisely 1 bit. By applying set theory to the similarities and differences of these shades of green, we can decode and reconstruct the entire spectrum of light! We begin with Shade A, Shade B, then we split these entities and treat them as sets, creating a new set {A, B, NOT A, NOT B}. NOT B overlaps with A and NOT A overlaps with B. We apply this repeated method of contradictory similarity and soon we have all the properties of all the frequencies of the spectrum.

Likewise we can apply this principle to the tautology presented about the Earth population (e.g. 3/4 is a fraction, 75% is a percentage therefore they are the same AND not the same). All Quran analysis is actually the study of tautology. The quran is almost definitely quantum cryptographically secured by means of a binary symmetric communications channel. Further research into this is required; the book "Binary Symmetric Quran" points to this study. This security is unbreakable in this context as it requires one to open their heart to the book thereby negating all malevolence.

It is noted that green is the middle of the light spectrum for humans - the inhabitants of paradise are adorned with green for a very good reason.

As a result of the application of tautology, the entire quran is a complete and self-consistent set of axioms thereby totally negating Godel incompleteness!

This can only happen if all of these axioms are themselves truths and thus the circle of self-reference is completed. In such a context, the word "ayat" in the quran in reference to God signifies a self-consistent complete axiom/truth. So truly, if all man and jinn combined to make a book like the quran, they could never do it )

Salaam IAMOP

Could you please demonstrate this line of reasoning to an example, let's take the position of the Quran with regard to consuming pork.

Peace.

Brilliant post. Godel was a genius and this Incompleteness Theorem is a brilliant reasonable and logical way of proving Allah/God like Abraham used his reasoning skills to come to the conclusion of a self conscious being.

Since the topic involves Godel I highly recommend reading Godels Self Reference Theorem and how Allah/God is aware of this theorem and the Quran passes this with flying colours in all occurences. Here's a good written article about it

http//rationalreality.50webs.com/godel.htm

PEACE

Salaam Prince,

Thank-you for the excellent link!

I am hoping others will give this topic the time it deserves to help themselves recognise greater truths....

Peace

The combination of man and book leaves no room for inconsistency.

I'm pretty damn sure the quran bypasses Godel Incompleteness altogether too

One of the key conclusions of the incompleteness theorems is that they make a significant statement regarding the limitations of logic - that is that there will be truths that cannot be demonstrated using any system based on logical reasoning. This obviously has many implications, one is about how one must approach the Quran as a complete Scripture; there MUST be transendental processes (to logic) required to fully comprehend its contents. This almost seems self-evident, or intuitive (in itself a mode of reasoning outside logic), but having a mathematical proof that this MUST be the case is powerful evidence. It cuts at the roots of analytical philosophy (that which forms the basis of current scientific thinking and is pushed as the gold standard with which all phenomena must be explained) as the favored method of reducing philosophical questions (or any question really) to foundations found in logic - this is flawed as demonstrated by indisputable mathematical proofs by Godel.

Peace.

I'll add a quick excerpt of the page to see if that sparks more interest

"If you visit the world?s largest atheist website, Infidels, on the home page you will find the following statement
?Naturalism is the hypothesis that the natural world is a closed system, which means that nothing that is not part of the natural world affects it.?
If you know G?del?s theorem, you know all systems rely on something outside the system. So according to G?del?s Incompleteness theorem, the folks at Infidels cannot be correct. Because the universe is a system, it has to have an outside cause.
Therefore Atheism violates the laws mathematics.
The Incompleteness of the universe isn?t proof that God exists. But? it IS proof that in order to construct a consistent model of the universe, belief in God is not just 100% logical? it?s necessary."

But this is only one implication of the theorems!

Salaam all,

Not a criticism, merely an observation. I'm surprised by how few people are interested in getting closer to the Truth of the actual meaning of the words in the Quran. I note many good posts which make the observation that perhaps we are debating/conjecturing on topics or ideas that don't even exist (because translations in the light of deeper analysis may significantly differ to those that exist in the popular mainstream). Or is it that most people accept mainstream translations as being as close as we can hope to get to the Truth?

Peace

Peace all,

Thankyou for your thoughtful responses, each valuable in their own right.

My impression is that if one truly wants to steer clear from conjecture, the closest one can get to Truth is through personal effort in addressing the meaning of the words of the Quran and making up ones own mind.

InshaaAllah we may all find our Straight Path.

Peace.

Thanks for your replies.

I guess my point for discussion in describing the above example of iblis/shaitan is considering whether it is in fact the same (ie to be an 'unbeliever&#039 if one chooses to 'conceal/deny/reject' any one of Allah, Truth, righteousness, 'good' or anything which is the antithesis of evil, or indeed be 'ungrateful' for the same. And if so, does this perhaps imply that rejection of one of these is to reject them all - that there is perhaps no requirement for an explicit rejection of any particular one of these eg 'belief' in Allah as depicted by the Quran, because all that is the antithesis of evil is One and the same - the separation is illusory. That is, there exists only a duality of good and evil, and all other 'names', ideas, phenomena etc are synonymous with one of the two. From this perspective for example, it makes no difference if you encounter the Quran or not, but whether you do or not will change the appearance and nature of the events of the path your life takes on a journey between and ultimately toward one of the dualities. Ultimately only Allah knows the ultimate Truth, we can only therefore operate in a realm where everyone as individuals exists in a pseudo-reality in their minds, and when you think about it, this is fundamental to creating the differences between us which then creates a realm in which we can be tested for our choices between good and evil. Perhaps I am stating the obvious, but this seems to generalise nicely and bring together - unify if you like, some of the examples of definitions mentioned in the other replies, along the lines of what loxbox13 stated. It can perhaps also increase empathy and tolerance toward others, perhaps erroneously labeled 'unbelievers' simply because the nature of their 'test' looks different to ours.

Allah knows best.

Peace.

Peace all.

Not sure if this idea has been discussed recently.

Given the 'Al Quran' is after all defined as 'The Recitation', a crucial part of this is that which is held in memory. Could we get closer to the original unaltered version by seeking out relatively remote communities that have passed on this Recitation solely by word of mouth? There are clearly no guarantees that this process would yield anything better than what we have today, as there would clearly have been cross-communication between these communities, perhaps exposure to written sources etc etc, however it may be a fruitful endeavour.

Just a thought!

simplest explanation I could find, well worth a read, MANY implications across all forum topics....

http//www.cosmicfingerprints.com/incompleteness/

Salam all,

Was wondering if anyone knows of a computer program (or where i could find someone with the expertise to create such a program) that would function in a similar way to the Quranic corpus website (corpus.quran.com), but so that one could modify word meanings and grammar rules according to their own research? This would save a lot of time compared with manual pen/paper methods.

I have no idea about computer programming, so any thoughts appreciated.

Peace.

I thought this was old news, but in case you missed it

http//zeenews.india.com/news/space/universe-bound-by-cosmic-thread_734237.html

and

http//www.nature.com/nature/journal/v380/n6575/abs/380603a0.html

http//www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html

Peace to all.

It has become increasingly apparent, on my brief journey with the Quran thus far, that there is a veil of unreality cloaking the Truth of the Quran that exists at the level of interpretation of the arabic by using different dictionaries/lexicons/grammatical analyses. As I look at all these sources, they all purport to be 'authentic', 'authoritative' etc, and we have all heard these worthless descriptors in various contexts.

I'm interested to know if anyone could point me toward a method and/or resources to minimise this limitation on interpretation. Are there any english or arabic sources that you have found that most closely align with interpretations that are internally consistent across the Quran and minimally influenced by cultural/traditional ideas or agendas?

Many thanks in advance.

Asalam alaykum to all,

I am relatively new to the Quran, so please excuse my ignorance.

I was reading an english translation of the Quran for verse 234 at http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=2&verse=34

It depicts iblis becoming one of the 'disbelievers'. This is a striking statement to me, as it places the term 'disbeliever' in this context; that is of iblis receiving a direct order from Allah, refusing the order and becoming an evil-doer. As far as I can tell, iblis and shaitan are the same embodiment of evil. The Quran later contains many verses that imply that shaitan is fully aware that Allah alone is the Master of our universe; to me this seemingly implies that being a 'disbeliever' can be generalized to the idea of being one who chooses a path of evil as opposed to a limited definition which might include the requirement to believe in Allah as depicted by the Quran. Perhaps this sets up a context for Judgment of those who will not encounter Islam or the Quran, or who choose to live as righteously as possible without calling themselves Muslim. Is it thus acceptable to say that anyone who strives to a righteous existence within the context of their circumstances may be accepted by Allah as equal to a 'Believer'?

Allah knows best.

Asalam alaykum to all,

I was wondering if anyone could point me to any Quranic verses which refer to the positive and/or negative personal consequences of the actions of an individual during their lives on earth (ie not with regard to the Day of Judgment, nor at the level of entire populations)

Best wishes.

handshake