This section is online for reference only. No new content will be added. no deletion either...
Go to Current Forums ...with millions of posts
     | Friday, December 15, 2000 - 11:08 pm Louis Gene Walcott Farrakhan is not a Muslim, nor is his doctrine Islam. Farrakhan is the leader of a black racist cult called "the Nation of Islam," (NOI) founded in Detroit, Michigan in the 1930's. While the group calls its followers Muslims, in reality, they have very little to do with the faith of Islam. Islam believes in the total transcendance of almighty God (called in Arabic, Allaah), the NOI teaches that black people are angelic gods. Islam maintains universal brotherhood, the NOI says that Islam is for blacks only. Islam teaches that prophethood ended with Muhammad ibn Abdullah, more than 1400 years ago. The NOI teaches that Farrakhan's teacher, Elijah Muhammad, is the last prophet. Islam teaches principles of spiritual and moral decorum such prayer, fasting, charity, pilgimage, etc., Elijah Muhammad cast these out or altered them beyond recognition. Yet, it is an error to oversimplify the issue by denouncing Farrakhan's racist diatribes while playing down Farrakhan's God-is-a-man and Prophet-after-Muhammad beliefs. Racism has very little to do with the issue. Sure, racism is contrary to Islamic principles and Islam rejects it. However, the deviation of Elijah Muhammad and Louis Farrakhan are MUCH more serious than racism. It is the sin which Allah DOES NOT forgive. If Farrakhan would leave his man-is-god and prophet-after-Muhammad beliefs, but was still a raving racist, he would be much better off than the other way around! Let me say very clearly, that there is NO ideology on the face of this earth which could be farther from Islam than that of Louis Farrakhan. NONE! The NOI's origins are found in (a) two black self-improvement movements that began shortly before World War I: the "Moorish Science Temple of America," founded in 1913 by Timothy Drew, and the "Universal Negro Improvement Association," founded in 1914 by Marcus Garvey. (b) the NOI was also shaped by a Depression-era con-man, and convicted drugdealer, Wallace Dodd Ford. Upon Ford's 1929 release from California's San Quintin Prison, he moved to Detroit to start a new life. Ford used a number of names, including Wali Farad and Master Fard and claimed to be from Mecca, Arabia. Being that Ford's parentage was a mixture of white and South Pacific Maori, he used his skin color and his prison con skills to pass himself off to blacks as a "mystic" and a "prophet" from the Middle East. Working as a door-to-door rug salesman by day, Ford blended the ideas of Garvey and Drew along with a smattering of Islam, to form what would later become the Nation of Islam. Among his first students was an unemployed Georgia migrant worker, Elijah Poole, who Ford renamed "Elijah Muhammad." In later years, Ford disappeared and Elijah assumed leadership of the NOI which he held until his death in 1975. Elijah developed an convoluted belief system based on ideas extracted from everything from Christanity to Masonry to Islam. He elevated Ford's status to that of the Creator of the heavens and earth, and he developed a myth which he dubbed, "Yacub's History." This racist doctrine is still maintained by Louis Farrakhan. In brief, the doctrine states that the first humans, a race of black people, whom the NOI calls 'the Original Man,' created white people in a genetic experiment 6,000 years ago. Elijah claimed that they (the whites) would rule the world for 6,000 years and then be destroyed at the 'end of their time' by the blacks. He said that 'Judgement Day' means that at the 'end of time' the Gods (i.e., blacks) would destroy the entire white race (devils) and then establish a Paradise (nation) on this earth ruled forever by the blacks (i.e., Gods). For a number of years, Farrakhan has managed to present himself as a champion for the oppressed masses, this also is a distortion. Like his teacher, Farrakhan has for more than 35 years engaged in hoodwinking blacks out of money in the name of black self improvement. The only self-improvement however, that has taken place has been for Farrakhan's family and their associates. Additionally, his entire inspiration for the "Million Man March" is based on his alleged, "vision of being swept into a UFO that took him to a larger mothership." While in the UFO, he claims to have spoken to the late Elijah Muhammad before being beamed back to earth. (The Washington Post, Sept.18, 1995, p. D3). What many do not realize, is that Farrakhan has repeated this doctrine for more than 35 years! Indeed, Farrakhan's UFO "vision" is an inseparable, doctrinal link to the heretical claims of Elijah Muhammad. Elijah explained that blacks were originally, "moon people" and that the UFO "mother wheel" was piloted by 13 youths who perpetually orbited the earth, waiting to unleash global destruction on whites, while rescuing all blacks. Farrakhan to this day, teaches this same doctrine- his inspiration for the Million Man March. The Million Man March in fact, was planned with the following goals in mind: (a) To hold it in Washington, and aim for a turnout of one million, so as to surpass the number of attendees at Martin Luther King's 1963 March on Washington, and thereafter be promoted as being greater than Dr. King and Malcolm X. (b) By being mentioned in the same context with Dr. King, Farrakhan hopes to be remembered likewise as a charismatic, messianic black figure who commands a large and politically significant following among US blacks. (c) To remove the cloud of suspicion which still surrounds Farrakhan regarding his involvement in Malcolm X's assassination. (d) Most importantly, Farrakhan has to find a new way to pay for his and his family's ornate palaces in Chicago and Phoenix, his Lexus, Mercedes, Rolls Royce and Lincoln Town Cars, a Mexican villa, a new 77-acre Michigan estate and over $1.5 million dollars in unpaid back taxes. This is the reason he had an $11 registration fee, a $3.99 per minute 900 number for call-in registration (Average call is three minutes), a $700 vendor's fee, (reduced from $1000), and even ads in his newspaper soliciting for "donations" to "help defray the astronomical costs of the march," in exchange for listing the donor's name and city under appropriate categories (Platinum, Gold, etc.): $1000 or more (Platinum), $500 or more (Gold), $100 or more (Silver), $25 or more (Patron) not to mention $2 "special issues" of his 'Final Call' newspaper. Louis. A true high-tech con-man. You want to see Louie's real vison?: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. It is thus impossible for anyone to try to make a distinction between Farrakhan and his UFO inspiration, or "endorse the goals of the march without endorsing Farrakhan," or say that Farrakhan is greater than Malcolm X. Malcolm's greatness was as a result of his renouncement of Elijah's false teachings, and his acceptance of true Islam, factors which Farrakhan has yet to achieve. A. Idris
|
| | Saturday, December 16, 2000 - 06:44 am Idris Thanks for your opinion. You just need to look at NOI's dress code to know that they are lost souls. The guys wear dark suits with bow ties, that for all intents and purposes, looks like the Turkish or Tunisian flag (ironically the two most secular states in Islamdom) What has that got do with "blackness" or Islam is beyond me. It is a rebellion, not a faith. They think Islam is somehow `blacker' than christianity, when in fact both Faiths have their roots in the Middle-east and are totally and equally `unblack.' Poor things. You can't help but sympathize with their ignorance. Their very European (white) suits juxtaposed against their anti White racist rants never fails to amuse me.
|
| | Saturday, December 16, 2000 - 07:29 am Galool amusing you isn't hard, so the "never fails to amuse me" loses resonace when you offer it. I think you are right, that Nation of Islam is a form of rebellion and pride, but fail to realise, that i think Islam and Christainty histries are distinctly different, while Islam and Christainty may both be "equally unblack".. Christainty has distinctly been "white", Jesus Christ was long depicted as a Aryan with blond hair and blue eyes, lets include facts in our debate, rather than fancies. Islam has never had such conatations and it has never had such bias. If the Nabi had been Somali?, would you have found Islam more appealing, if yes what a sad state of mind you cocoon yourself in, if no then are you just vulturing on any aspect of Islam you feel shows "exposed" areas where you can sink your teeth in to Yourself are a victim of the same ignorance you wish to ascribe soley to the NOI, the tortured curl of a young black womens hair affects you both, just in different ways, you lash out at both religions in a shakespearan plaugue on both your houses manor which is quite unbecoming for a genuine obsever of the Islamic phenonmenon
|
| | Saturday, December 16, 2000 - 02:18 pm Idris, didn't Louis Farkhan repent recently and said that he was going to adhere to Islam, and follow the sunni way??
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 12:35 am Common Dude, why do you feel compelled to knock Christianity at every turn? Every time someone even mentions it in an off hand way you feel compelled to tear it down. The world ain't black and white dude. And since Christianity is the closest thing there is to Islam - it's the in the Qur'an, maybe you should lighten up a bit. I'm not even a Christian and I find the constant anti-Christian diatribes to be a bit much. They also under-cut your intellectual character. A true intellectual does not pick articles of faith as repeated targets. Islam and Christianity are pretty close cousins, yet you treat it as a red-headed step child.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 01:25 am MM Don't be too harsh on our much "adored" Common. You see, although he will not accept it, he has something in common with the NOI. His Damascene conversion to Islam is at least partially out of rebellion as well. He was brought-up in the West - and faced with rejection, or what he perceived to be rejection, he decided to rebel against white `Christian' society. And there is no better way of lifting two fingers at the West than immersing yourself in a believe system that stands against everything liberal capitalist societies hold to be sacred. (oh no! look what I have done now! the girls will slaughter me!)
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 01:27 am Madmac, And what exactly is it that you do on Somalinet? Look at you lecturing common about picking at articles of faith. Practise the tenets yourself before you preach them. May be then people will start taking you seriously.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 04:32 am Galool. You remind me of something funny I read once. The title said: "How to win arguments, As it Were". One of the tactics included "drinking" if it helps. Automatically when I saw that, it reminded me what you told me earlier in another forums about you going to your local bar(being sunday this morning also helped me remember) to make yourself little crazy. This is what the first advice was; "Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room." LooooooL, Do you see the picture I am drawing here GALOOL?. Your STORNG VIEWS about islam, COMMON ARE Strange LOL!. Your freind MAD fits in the second part of the funny advice since he said the Quran says christianity is close to islam (which you share anyways): The second Advice goes like this: "MAKE THINGS UP: just like MAD did here):" "Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: "I think Peruvians are underpaid." Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level." NOTE: Always make up exact figures. If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr.Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?" Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house." Making things up won't help you folks. Face the reality in life. Besides, TO DIFFER YOUR OPINIONS DOESN'T MEAN ONE UNDERCUT HIS INTELLECT. Your writings HAVE REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY ON PEOPLE. They doubt, they seek the answer. That is the power of islam. It grows while you brandish it with negatives. Keep up your poor works SMARTS.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 04:41 am Mad mac, Common' s commont answers Galool's woeful thinking that Islam and Christianity are the same. And he is right they are not the same, though, they both arose in the same region and both monolothics they are substantially different.Because of the man's altaration that took place in Christianity. this opened the gate that christianity is no longer a religion from god, hence hierarchies and racism are pretty part of it. ----- and waht about you...calling us '' Quran freaks' does not mean my law allows me to say what ever I think but not you!!!!! Equality man!!!!! I told you about this. Did not I?! Galool, What a fascinating ' notion' ! Common grow up among white recist, so he has to be that way! Well, that highlights common ignorance that Islam is an ethnic religion. what about the Middle class white male coverting to Islam? any idea why? Do you know Bichtal( may be wrong spelling). --- we do not sloughter the poeple we discuss with them--- I am thinking to open a debate btw you and me but still cannot get the title--- hope ramadan is going well my Somali cousin.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 04:51 am FG, LOL, long time no see. how is ramadan brother. this is Arawelo
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 06:38 am Common Asalaamu alaikum bro. I tend to joke around but I can be dead serious at times, and this is one of those times. Don't let them get to you. You are an adorable, intelligent, knowledgeable, and dare I say probably handsome, muslim brother. Maasha Allah. May Allah increase all goodness for you and keep you strong in your faith. Regardless of what the "good analysts", "literature profs", "towel heads", "camel jockeys", "beardos" or "beardesses" say, you are adorable and will remain as such as long as I read your postings. I know you know better than to take to heart what they say. OK walalo? As for you Abtee, you better limit yourself to your literature books before I cut my diplomatic ties with you. FG, I was gonna say a few things but will limit myself to maasha Allah. This should force some people to persue other venues for arguments.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 07:56 am Common, Just one more thing, I forgot in my earlier posting. Allah says in the noble quran: "almu'minuuna walmu'minaatu awliyaau baduhum libadi yaqbiduuna eydiyahum". Which rougly translates to: the male believers and the female believers are more friendly to each other, humble to each other, kind to each other, they support each other.
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 10:11 am FG How are you coping with Ramadan Gran 'Ol Beard? Not very well, I guess, judging by your latest effort. I know Islam, and you know that, no point in pretending otherwise. In fact I know Islam, perhaps too well for your taste ( who cares about modesty, eh?) All I said was that there is nothing `Black' or African about Islam. I suspect you totally agree with this argument, albeit for a different reason. According to your believe, Islam is a universal faith designed for the good of all mankind. So I fail to see what your gripe was with my statement. Common was right when he said that Jesus is always depicted as a blue-eyed blond Teuton. What he doesn't know is that the Ethiopian Jesus looks Ethiopian (although a shade more light-skinned)while some African christians portray him as a Black man. The truth is of course somewhere in between. He was a Middle-Eastern Jew and was therefore probably a short, olive-skinned fella. Dare I say so was Mohammed. I remember someone suggesting both of these Prophets probably looked like Yasser Arafat! As for my comments about Common, I did not say anything he did not admit to in earlier discussions here. Serious I don't recall exchanging embassies with you, unless you are of course my favourite Beardess. (btw, Somalis consider a little bit of wispy body hair on a lady to be beautiful! Does anyone remember that famous Dule song which went something like this " ... whenever memory takes me back to your wispy-haired arms, I get tickled all over!" So don't feel insulted by the title) If you are telling me to leave Common alone, I am afraid I will have to disappoint you, much as it pains me. He may be 21 but he is blessed with restless intellect and a dormant wit that could only brought out by a stimulating debate. All that adoration and that treacly " ..Masha allah brother the sun rises out of your derriere..." may help his self-esteem, but will do him no good in the long-term. (I hope he doesn't feel patronised by this.) Hannah I agree with you, there is nothing "ethnic" about Islam. That was exactly the point I was trying to make!
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 10:20 am FG And about the drink thing, I havn't touched a drop in the whole of Ramadan, although God only knows I needed a drink or two on few occassions. To me, the the whole point about Ramadan is foregoing all those things that comfort you; it is about testing your resolve, so I resisted. So may Allah forgive you for suspecting a fellow Muslim of such an unsavoury deed in this holy month!
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 02:50 pm Abtee, I can't tell you to leave common, or anyone else for that matter alone. It is not my position to do so. What I'm saying is this. Make the discussion fair by leaving my comments out of it. My adoration or detestation of any particular individual, including you should not be used to penalize people. What says you your highness? By the way abtee, do you speak Amharic?
|
| | Sunday, December 17, 2000 - 10:59 pm Hannah What I said was that Common never misses an opportunity to knock Christianity, I did not say they were the same religion. I said they were close cousins. To which Formerguest replied that I was "making things up". To which I respond citing Surah 5:82: .....And nearest among them in love to the Believers wilt thou find those who say "we are Christians": Because amongst these are men devoted to learning. And men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. You see many Christians who read the Qur'an will be inclined to absord it as they absorb the Bible, and will regard it as part of the message of God. They likely will not renounce Christianity, but they also will respect Islam. The problem is the message seldom gets to them, because militant Islam does not try to educate them, it rejects them. And so the message that Westers get from Islam is one of enmity, not one of brotherhood. Rather than try and reach an accomodation and understanding both sides tend to gravitate toward the differences and then justify their intransigence. I'm not asserting there are not differences, what I am saying is that we have far more in common that not. Maybe we should emphasize a little more where we a alike and a little less where we are different. I think you would find more people likely to come around to your way of thinking were you to do that.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 12:59 am For a starter, Let us look at the verse MAD quoted without giving reference and the verses behind it that will shed a light on WHO IS MEANT "AMONGST" the christians: "82. Strongest among men in enmity to the believers will you find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant." "5:83. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, you will see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognize the truth: they pray: "Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses." 5:84. "What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us, seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?" 5:85. And for this their prayer hath Allah rewarded them with Gardens, with rivers flowing underneath, - their eternal home. Such is the recompense of those who do good." 5:86. But those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs,- they shall be companions of Hell-fire. Those christians are the ones who believe in the oneness of ALLAH and that MOHAMMED pbuh is his last messenger as in dicated IN VERSES 83-85 inwhich they declared their BELIEF in the QURAN after listening to IT and wished to BE WRITTEN WITH THOSE WHO ARE WITNESSES TO THE TRUTH. There is nothing similar between those christian believers who became muslims and the christians who follow THE TEACHINGS of ST PAUL and THE POLYTHEISTIC BELIEFS of PAGANISM. Allah completely rejected those christians and gave them a warning about their beliefs when He said to them : "4.171 O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Three (Trinity)" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." Allah almighty also told Muslims those christians should be considered DISBELIEVERS opposite OF WHAT MAD wants us to belief. And Allah said: "5.73 They disbelieved who say: Allah is one of three (in a Trinity): for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous chastisement will befall the disbelievers among them." As long as somoene believes that ALLAH is expressed in TRINITY AND THAT JESUS IS HIS SON, HE/SHE is considered a DISBELIEVER and shares nothing WITH ISLAM AND MUSLIMS. If they want closeness to islam THEY HAVE TO RENOUNCE what ALLAH is telling them to renounce. Nothing less would be UNACCEPTABLE. When MAD is saying militant muslims, he meant muslims who follow strictly the Quran and reject all that is rejected in it. And I say blessed be those Militants. If MAD wants someone to compromise his/her beliefs and accept his brand of thought, I guess he will have to shed a crocodile tears before that happens. Jesus PBUH came TO UPHOLD THE law of mosses and the commandments first of which DICTATES "There is only one god and people should not take other gods with allah". A true christian would follow that. Unfortunately, All christians follow St PAUL who cancelled THE LAW JESUS said he was upholding and following it. MAD should be straight forward with people from now on and stop denying his affliation with christianity. And if he doesn't accept that, I would say "LEAVE CHRITIANITY ALONE". Let those who truly believe in it represent its views and teachings. Serious&HANNAH. High sisters, welcome to the discussion. I will see you around inshallah if I can log on today. Keep firm in your beliefs.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 01:17 am "so may Allah forgive you for suspecting a fellow muslim" on the authority of Abu Huraira who said:the messenger of Allah(pbuh)said: "Do not envy one another, do not inflate prices one to another, do not hate one another, do not turn away from one another, do not undercut one another, but be you, O slaves of Allah, brothers. A muslim is the brother of a Muslim:he neither oppresses him nor disgraces him, he neither lies to him nor does he hold him in contempt. Piety and righeousness is here- and pointed to his breast three times. It is evil enough for a man to hold his brother Muslim in contempt. The whole of a Muslim for another muslim is inviolable: his Blood, his Property, his Honour." maa-shaa-allah :-) islam is not by name, it is by DEED :-)
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 01:34 am Galool. Understanding islam doesn't mean knowing it. In your case, you really don't understand the message of islam. That is why you insult even the prophet by drawing an example of someone whom he doesn't look like. The prophet was very handsome man in looks. The same goes for Jesus oeace be upon them all. I thought we had an agreement that you don't insult ALLAH and HIS messenger. Keep to our agreement. Do you think you can be a muslim anytime you want and the other time you can deny Allah and say negative things about him?. You can take advantage of your intellect and put it to good use. May allah guide you. Idea. Sister, how are you doing behind the screen?. Did you eat SAXUUR?. I have ten minutes to do it now. MACASALAMA sis.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 01:41 am FG, behind the screen!!! i don't know :-( trying to come up with a good equation for capital market efficiency...man!! finance is not my field :-( salaamaa
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 02:47 am F.G. Look carefully at what you wrote. Reread 5:73. Any observer can see how confusing that is. Now the Qur'an SPECIFIACLLY SAYS those who call themselves Christians are closest to Islam. Not those who were Christians and converted. Think this through. Why does the Qur'an mention Christians specifically and not Jews. Why not say Jews who converted. Or Hindus??? Or Pagans? Why mention Christians at all if there was no intent to cite the fact that Christians do not have a shared idealism???? A shared love of God??? You don't like what the Qur'an says here so you simply are rationalizing it away!!! And again I quote the famous Islamic scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali: "In 5:82 we are told that nearest in love to the Believers among the people of the book are the Christians. I do not agree that this does not apply to modern Christians 'becausethey are practically atheists or free thinkers.' I think that Christian thought, like the worlds thought, has learnt a great deal from protest of Islam against priest domination, class domination, and sectarianism, and its insistence on making this life pure and beautiful while we are in it. We must stretch a friendly hand to all who are sincere and in sympathy with our ideals." Note here he says in sympathy with our ideals. No all who believe exactly as we do. Now I did not say you have to alter your beliefs. What I said is that if you show others enmity or contempt for their beliefs, don't expect them to be very receptive to yours. Formerguest, as a Muslim one of your roles here on earth is to spread the word of God - Islam. If you believe that then that means you need to stretch out a friendly, not venemous, hand. Christianity is much more flexible than Islam because of its roots. You could win far more friends and converts if you just made the effort. But the truth is you don't want to win friends, you want to villify. And if the Qur'an says you are suppose to spread the word of God, if the Qur'an says that you will find sympathy among Christians, well, since that doesn't fit in with your view of the world, you disregard it.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 03:42 am MAD MAC----YOU SAY CHRISTIANITY IS MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE (SINCE IT'S FOLLOWERS COMPROMISE CHRISTIANITY) THAN ISLAM (WHICH DOES NOT COMPRIMISE THE TRUTH), BUT I WONDER WHY ISLAM IS STILL WINNING FAR MORE CONVERTS THAN CHRISTIANITY?------THE ANSWER-----COMPRIMISING THE TRUTH IN RELIGION DOES NOT WIN HEARTS-------THE STICKING WITH THE TRUTH IN RELIGION WINS HEART, RIGHT?
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 03:47 am Galool, I am not sure if you missed my point or if you cleverly twisted it! what I meant was; your idea that those brought up in the west tend to look islam as alternative that they think it stands everything liberal capitalist societies hold to be sacret -- is baseless. May be your argument suits you here cuz Common is somali ( though I disagree with you) Islam is the fast growing religion in the West. Among the converters there are middle class - whites. They convert to islam for real spritual or intelectual reasons. Now could you tell me that they converted cuz they are rebillions. common, Tell me off if you think ia mnot explaining the things proberly therefpore letting the guy get awa`y with his ideas. Yesterday i was in a rush.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:02 am HANAH-----YES, ANYONE WHO CONVERTS FROM ONE RELIGION TO ANOTHER HAS REBELLED. THOSE WHO LEFT CHRISTIANITY, JUDISM AND ISLAM HAVE REPELLED FROM THEIR BELIEFS. YES, IN THE WEST, THERE ARE MORE CHRISTIANS AND JEWS WHO REPELLED FROM THEIR BELIEFS THAN MUSLIMS-----TO OTHER RELIGIONS OR OTHERS BELIEFS. ALSO, THE FACT IS THAT MOST AFRICAN AMERICANS WHO REPELLED FROM CHRISTINITY TO THE NATION OF ISLAM (FOR WHATEVER WRONG OR RIGHT REASONS) HAVE EVENTUALLY REBELLED FROM THE NATION OF ISLAM ALSO TO THE REAL ISLAM.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:26 am Mad mac, I agree that sometimes muslims do not have the best way of telling islam to non-muslims. However, if someone is looking for flexibilty I think he /she is not looking for the Thruth. I do not know that guy you refered to, is he the Quran transalater( YusuF Ali) I am not sure who he is but by reading your quatation and this is what could happen; some poeple are modernist in away that they slpped away into the westren thinkings ( but again i will refrain myself to say that) When you say I am not Christian I would take that you do not beleave the trinity. If you do not mind what part of the Quran do you not beleave in and why?
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:35 am Anon, The way you meant and the way galool and I are using the word are different; I mean; are they converting to Islam cuz they are fed up of their system that treats them unfavouvrle and resict as the Nation of Islam can be described, a group that came into excistance cuz of their anger against oppression? Or are they converting to islam cuz it is the thruth they found? You see what I mean
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:40 am Anon Try, just try, not to ascribe a value to the matters we are discussing. Try to be neutral. Just step outside for a second. The reason Christianity is more flexible (and I'm not ascribing a value to it one way or the other) is because of its roots. The Qur'an has one author. The Qur'an is, for all practical purposes, newer. The Bible is a collection of seperate works from seperate authors. Most (not all) Christians believe that the Bible is divinely inspired but not divine. Muslims, on the other hand, believe the Qur'an in Divine. Islam offers far less room for interpretation because of this (although obviously there is some room). Also, the Qur'an is different in intent. It proscribes many aspects of life that the Bible does not address. Christianity is, by design, a guideline for how to live. Guiding principals. Islam, on the other hand, gives very specific guidance in most facets of life. By definition this makes Islam less flexible. I'm not saying that's bad or good, I'm just saying that's the way it is. That's why it is much easier for a Christian to conclude that the Qur'an is divinely inspired and still be a Christian. The other way around is not really possible. Also, the Qur'an specifically states that there are no prophets after Muhammed. The Bible says beware of false prophets, it does not say there won't be any more prophets at all. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. But don't over-state this. In most Muslim lands prostelytizing is met with harshness. Furthermore, apostacy is punishible by death. Therefore not too many Muslims in too many Muslim countries are likely to convert. Couple that with the fact that Islamic countries have huge birth rates and you can see why Islam is the fastest growing religion. I'm not denegrating Islam, or saying that there are no true converts, but it would be a mistake to conclude that everyone in America or Europe is looking to Islam for their salvation or that that will be the case in the future. I noticed you did not even address the central issue here. Why does the Qur'an specifically state that Christians are in sympathy with Islams ideals? Why mention them at all? Why mention them compared to pagans or Jews. If one size fits all, as Formerguest seems to imply, why imply that Christians should be regarded in a different light. BTW I am not a Christian. I am simply noting what seems to be obvious.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:52 am HANNAH-----I DO NOT THINK I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. I JUST MADE MY POINT. REMEMBER, I SAID MOST AFRICAN AMERICANS (MUSLIMS) WHO REPELLED FROM CHRISTINITY TO THE NATION OF ISLAM (FOR WHATEVER *WRONG* OR *RIGHT* REASONS) HAVE EVENTUALLY REBELLED FROM THE NATION OF ISLAM ALSO------TO THE REAL ISLAM. SOMETIMES, GOD WORKS MYSTERIOUSLY. I MEAN, MAYBE FOR THEM TO BECOME REAL MUSLIMS, THEY NEEDED TO JOIN WHAT LOOKED LIKE ISLAM IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE REAL ISLAM. YOU SEE, PEOPLE ARE NOT THE SAME AND THEIR LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE THINGS IS DIFFERENT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THOSE AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSLIMS WHO CONVERTED FROM CHRISTIANITY TO ISLAM FOR THE *WRONG* REASONS HAD UNDERSTOOD ISLAM BETTER LATER ON WHEN THEY JOINED NATION OF ISLAM WHEN THEY HAD BETTER OPPORUNITY TO SEE THINGS DIFFERENTLY THAT LED THEM TO BECOME REAL MUSLIMS.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:10 am MAD MAC----ASCRIBING A VALUE OR NOT AND THE QURAN BEING A NEWER OR NOT, THE LAWS MOSES AND JESUS BROUGHT WAS NEVER FLEXIBLE. THE SO CALLED FOLLOWERS OF MOSES AND JESUS MADE IT FLEXIBLE-----THUS, COMPROMISING THE TEACHINGS OF MOSES AND JESUS. THAT IS THE FACT WHICH WE CAN NOT STEP OUTSIDE FROM IT. TO DO THAT IS ITSELF A COMPROMISE WITH THE TRUTH; THUS, NOT BEING NEUTRAL. YES, ISLAM IS WINNING MORE HEARTS WITHOUT THIS COMPRIMISE-------IN THE WEST. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT IN THE SO CALLED MUSLIM LANDS. I MEAN THERE ARE MORE CHRISTIANS AND JEWS BECOMING MUSLIMS THAN MUSLIMS LEAVING ISLAM IN THE WEST. ARE THE MUSLIMS IN THE WEST AFRAID OF GETTING PUNISHED? I DO NOT THINK SO. I DO NOT DENY THAT SOME CHRISTIANS (NOT ALL) HAVE SYMPATHY WITH MUSLIMS EVENTHOUGH THEY DISBELIEVE WHAT IS IN THE QURAN. I HAVE SYMPATHY WITH NATIVE AMERICANS TOO EVENTHOUGH I DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT THEY BELIEVE. MOST PAGANS AND MOST JEWS HAVE ALWAYS HAD ENMITY AND HATRED TO THE MESSAGE OF ISLAM. I KNOW THAT YOU SAY YOU ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN. I KNOW THAT YOU SAY YOU ARE AN AGNOSTIC. SINCE YOU ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN, THEN I CAN CONCLUDE THAT YOU ARE NOT ONE OF THE PEOPLE ALLAH TALKING ABOUT HAVING SYPHAY WITH THE MUSLMS (ISLAM), RIGHT?
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:22 am All I can read from your commonts isthat you are advocating for altaration which cannot be possible in islam. Your other point; The bible does not say beware about false prophethoods and that is it. Ney, it went more especific; the awaited prophet was to come from arabia. Deateronomy 33;1-2 it speaks of god ( god's revelation) coming from Sinai, rising from Seir ( a village of Sa'ir near jerusalam) and shining forth from Paran. According to Genesis 21;21 the wilderness of paran was the place where Ismail settled ( especifically MakKa) the King James version of he bible mentions the pilgrams passing through the valley of Ba'a ( Makka) Isaiah 42; 1-13 speaks of th ebeloved of God. His elect and messenger bring down a law to be awaited in the isles and who '' shall not fail nor be encouraged till he have set judgement on earth'' verse 11, connects that awaited one with the descendant of Ke'adar. Who is ke'dar? according to Genesis 25;13, Ke'dar was the second son of ismael, the ancestor of prophet Mohamed pbuh. ( my today's copy infringment) No, I am talking about birth rate but the new converters in the West. The Quran does not mention only the Christians but the jew as well but the way it mentioned does not necesarlly coincide the way the contemparry christians are.( and as FG already mentioned they follow St paul's writings who cancelled the lwa of Juses said to follow.) I WILL continue from here my break is up.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:27 am No, he is not a christian, muslim or jew but he has smpty for Islam. No doubt aboput that. we will talk later. ANAN, i got your point now.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:28 am MAD MAC-----YOU SAID THAT A CHRISTIAN WHO CONCLUDED THAT THE QURAN BEING DIVINELY INSPRIED BY ALLAH CAN STILL BE A CHRISTIAN. I SAY THAT HE OR SHE IS BEING FLEXIBLE-----AND HE OR SHE IS DOING COMPROMISE WITH THE TRUTH, RIGHT? I MEAN IF HE OR SHE BELIEVES THAT THE QURAN IS CORRECT, BUT HE OR SHE IS STILL NOT CHOOSING TO BECOME A MUSLIM (BECOME A FOLLOWER OF THE QURAN), HE OR SHE IS PLAYING GAMES. I MEAN, I HAVE NEVER MET A PERSON (WHO WAS NOT A MUSLIM) SAYING THE QURAN IS CORRECT. TO ME, IF SOMEONE SAYS HE BELIEVES WHATEVER IS IN THE QURAN, HE OR SHE IS A MUSLIM. IF A PERSOM DISBELIEVES PARTS OF THE QURAN (IN ISLAM) HE OR SHE IS NO MUSLIM.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:28 am Wrong. If I believe in certain parts of the Qur'an, if I have gone to mosques to pray and have had long discussions with Muslims about Islam, wouldn't you say that that makes me sympathetic. Does the Qur'an specifically mention Macists? No, there aren't enough of us to bother with. Now again, you didn't really understand what I wrote. and you certainly were not able to take a neutral viewpoint for a second (I mean a second, not permanently). I already know that Muslims believe that the true message of Issa and Moses was corrupted. My point isn't that Muslims must agree that maybe some aspect of the Qur'an is wrong, or that some aspect of some other belief is right. What I am saying is if you want others to respect your belief you must respect theirs. Islam preaches this, but in practical terms Muslims have gotten further and further away from this. Now Muslims tend to regard all Muslims as enemies or potential enemies, rather than friends or potential friends. As for conversions, face it, there's not a lot of that going on. The VAST MAJORITY of people remain in the faiths they were born into. In America, there are a few, but very few, Muslim converts who are white. Black Muslim conversion is obviously related to dissaffection with American society. Even you stated that here. This is not to say they aren't legitimate, but let's face it. White Europe and White America are not now suddenly undergoing some vast conversion, nor are they going to. Same with many Asian countries. Islam found resonance in some and not in others. Where Bhudism and Confucionism and Hinduism hold strong, they are likely to continue to do so. I don't get the whole Hindu thing, but I do recognize that it seems to be resilient. There are certainly far more Hindus on the sub-continent than anything else. Like I said, while Islam is the fastest growing religion, that really doesn't mean much because we aren't seeing any significant shifts among any of the large nations population bases.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:39 am MAD MAD------I DON'T HAVE TIME TO RESPOND TO YOUR *WRONG* IDEAS--- RIGHT NOW. I'LL BE BACK LATER ON, INSHA-ALLAH.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 05:55 am Mad writes: <Now the Qur'an SPECIFIACLLY SAYS those who call themselves Christians are closest to Islam. Not those who were Christians and converted. Think this through.> You need to think that through by reading what those christians did to deserve that praise from ALLAH. They listened to the Quran, They cried after they understood the sincerity of the message, They believed in it, They prayed to Allah to write them among the witnesses. It doesn't take to be a genius to figure that OUT. yOU CAN'T CUT and paste the QURAN according to one's intentions. The Quran explains itself in detail and if not there is the explanation of the PROPHET pbuh. Allah told christians in many places to believe in his last messenger and follow him. Allah also urged christians to stop fabricating lies against him by saying he took a son or that Jesus is co-equal with allah or Allah is the third of the trinity all of which are christian beliefs. "5.17 They disbelieved indeed those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then has the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and every one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He creates what He pleases. For Allah has power over all things." "5.72 Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help." In fact, Jesus will be questioned about the TRINITY: "5.116 And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Did YOU say unto men, take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah.?" He will say: "Glory to YOU! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, YOU would indeed have known it. YOU know what is in my heart, I know not what is in YOURS. For YOU know in full all that is hidden." Verses in the Quran are plenty that tell us why Allah declared christians to be disbelievers. And it stands that way. mad writes: <Formerguest, as a Muslim one of your roles here on earth is to spread the word of God - Islam. If you believe that then that means you need to stretch out a friendly, not venemous, hand." Well, the truth can be venemous to those who don't like it. And I believe islam to be the truth doesn't mean I fight with everyone who doesn't. I make no compromises over my beliefs consciously. I also have vast friends of all kinds. I wanted to go SKIING this monday, for example, after I was invited but declined do you to RAMADAN but will do AFTER RAMADAN. Those people who invited me are American friends and I don't think I hate them becuase they have different beliefs. There is difference between pointing out truth from falsehood and being venemous to people. Christians are wrong in BELIEF simple as that. Am I happy about it?. Obsolutely not. Do I want them to be like muslims?. Yes 100%. In conclusion, Mad needs to stop looking for excuses to stay in his wrong path. He knows he is wrong. I can tell that from his writings.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 08:45 am FG Ramadan is DEFINETELY getting to you. I suggest you write your contributions after Iftar. I find your accusation that I "insulted" the prophet offensive. I demand you take it back. I am not one for insulting anyone, let alone the Prophet. I said that the Prophet was a Middle-Eastern man, and therefore looked, well, middle-eastern! I don't see how that could be interpreted as meaning ugly (unless of course, you believe that Middle-eastern peoples are all ugly!) And remember, I was writing in response to a point raised by Common who objected to Jesus being portrayed in the West as a white man. implicit in his argument was that Islam and the prophet were somehow a shade "darker" than Christianity. I highlighted a simple historical fact: that both Faiths emerged within few hundred miles of each other and have similar roots. There is nothing more "African" in Islam in comparison to Christianity or indeed Judaism. It is typical of head-in-the-clouds turbans like you to you make fuss about something as self-evident and innocous as this. Ramadan kareem.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 08:50 am MAD MAC-----LET'S SEE NOW. THE PAGAN ARABS BELIEVED IN SOMETHING THE QURAN SAID ALSO, SO YOU SAYING THAT YOU BELIEVE IN CERTIAN IN THE QURAN PARTS AND VISITING THE MOSQUES (NOT PRYAING-----BECAUSE THE PERFORMING OF SALAAT WHILE IN THE STATE OF KUFUR IS NO USE) DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE SYMAPATHETIC. THE HYPOCRITES (THE ENEMIES OF MUSLIMS) DID AND DO THE SAME THINGS ALL THE TIMES. DOES THE QURAN MENTION PEOPLE LIKE YOU, MAD MAC. YES, IT DID AND YOU ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE ALLAH'S WORDS (SINGS). YOU SAID I'M NOT ABLE TO TAKE A NEUTRAL VIEWPOINT. DOES TAKING NEUTRAL VIEWPOINT MEAN BEING FLEXIBLE-----DOING COMPROMISE WITH THE TRUTH? IF IT DOES, I WOULD NOT TAKE NEUTRAL AND FYI, SAYING MAYBE THERE IS SOME ASPECT OF THE QURAN THAT IS WRONG-----DOES NOT MAKE YOUR WRONG IDEAS (BELIEFS) CORRECT. YOU MUST BRING EVEDIENCE AGAINST THE QURAN IF YOU WANT ME TO AGREE WITH YOU. LET ME KNOW THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT YOU HAVE AGAINST THE QURAN. BTW, IF I DISAGREE WITH YOU THAT DOES NOT MEAN I DISRESPECT YOU. I JUST THINK YOU ARE WRONG----THAT IS ALL. IF YOU THINK THIS MAKES YOU MY ENEMY, THAT IS YOUR CHOICE. I DIDN'T SAY THE VAST MAJORITY OF NON-MUSLIMS CONVERT TO ISLAM. I SAID WHEN DOING COMPARISION BETWEEN THOSE WHO DO THE CONVERSIONS IN THE WEST (THOSE WHO REBEL THEIR BELIEFS), THE CHRISTIANS AND JEWS OUT NUMBER THE MUSLIMS. THERE ARE MORE CHRISTIANS AND JEWS WHO CONVERT TO ISLAM THAN MUSLIMS CONVERTING TO EITHER TWO RELIGIONS. AS FOR THE BLACKS AND WHITES MUSLIMS IN AMERICA WHO CONVERTED TO ISLAM, I WILL NOT DIFFERENIATE THEIR REASONS OF REBELING THEIR OLD WAYS----RIGHT OR WRONG REASONS, I CAN NOT SAY THEIR CONVERSION IS ILLIGITIMATE. WHAT MADE WHITES REBEL CAN BE THE SAME THINGS BLACKS REBEL.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 10:04 am Asad First of all, if I told you once I told you a million times, I don't expect you to change your beliefs or articles of faith. Let's keep that straight here. Why does the Qur'an state that Christians are closest to believers in their love of Allah if, at the end of the day, that doesn't matter???? Why mention that at all????? Christians who convert are no longer Christians. Why is this in there??? Can anyone explain this. Because right now your interpretation does not make sense to me. Formerguest You ski??? Holy Cow. I would have never guessed. If you come to Germany (in the winter) I'll take you skiing.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 10:29 am MAD MAC-----EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO, I DON'T THINK YOU ARE CAPABLE OF CHANGING MY BELIEFS. I CAN NOT CHANGE YOUR BELIEFS EITHER. I DON'T EVEN THINK WE ARE HERE TO CHANGE ONE'S BELIEFS, ARE WE? WHY DOES NOT THE QURAN STATE THAT THOSE WHO SAY THEY ARE *CHIRSTIANS* ARE CLOSEST TO THE BELIEVERS IN THEIR LOVE OF ALLAH, YOU ASKED. THAT IS BECAUSE THE QURAN SAYS-----AMOUNG THEM ARE PRIESTS AND MONKS WHO ARE NOT STIFFNECKED. BTW, IN THE CONTEX AND WHEN THE VERSE WAS REVEALED, THE QURAN *WAS* TALKING ABOUT THE *CHRISTIAN* COMMUNITY OF THE PROPHET'S TIME, NOT THE SO CALLED FOLLOWERS OF JESUS OF TODAY, WHO ARE STIFFNECKED. THE QURAN IS TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE EARLY CENTURIES *CHRISTIAN* PRIESTS AND MONKS-----THE NAZARENES----RATHER THAN LATER-DAY ORTHODOX CHRUCHMEN. MAD MAC, IF THE MUSLIM'S INTERPRETATION OF THE QURAN (WHICH THEY 100% BELIEVE IN) DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO YOU, DO YOU THINK YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE QURAN (WHICH YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN 100%)? MAKE SENSE!------I DON'T THINK SO.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 03:07 pm Galool. Well, Galool, did you forget your poster boy?. You didn't say just "middle eastern". I will pass. I find it hard that you are offended Galool. Anyway, I take back if you didn't mean an insult. I remeber you said once someone like you even has reservations. Time will tell. Mad. If you like the support of islam this much for your cause, WHY NOT SIMPLY ACCEPT IT?. Yes I do like SKIING and will definitely go with friends both somalis and non-somalis after RAMADAN.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 04:12 pm FG So you think Abu-Ammar is ugly? I did not know you have a sense of the aesthetic! And you ski? Is there no end to your talents GOB? Why do I suspect this has to do with political persuasion rather than physical endowment (or the lack of it)? Am I being cynical or you would have found Arafat and the hunch-back of Notre dame incredibly good looking if they were fellow Islamists! Anyway, I think we should ask the girls what they think of this one. We men of course find it difficult to judge whether another man is handsome or as ugly as a hippo on a bad-hair day! Your reluctant apology is accepted.
|
| | Monday, December 18, 2000 - 11:34 pm Galool Yes, there are ends to his talents. He might know a lot about the Qur'an but he doesn't know dick about international politics. Asad OK, here it is. Surah 2:271: If ye disclose acts of Charity even so it is well. But if ye conceal them, and make thm reach those really in need, that is best for you. It will remove from you some of your evil. And Allah is well aqainted with what you do. I believe this Surah plainly indicates that the purpose of giving is less to receive reward (although reward is alluded to) than it is to do the right thing. To do the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing is noble. Now you could, I think, make the argument that doing the right thing pleases God and hence I am doing it to please God and receive a reward. But look at what the Surah is saying here. It's always good to give to charity, but it's better if you are not looking for self-aggrandizement. So the question is are you giving to help those in need because you feel compassion for your fellow man, or are you giving so Allah will recognize your gift and you will be rewarded? I think this Surah supports my thesis that reward is the by-product of pure motive, better than being the motive itself. What sayeth ye??? While we're at it, I have one more question for you which we talked about before but was never adequately cleared up. If you wanted to seek advice from God (let's say on whether or not to gett married). Not a question of legality, but advice. Maybe your parents don't approve of the girl because she's non-Somali. You know the Qur'an doesn't forbid it, but their lack of approval has caused reservations that you otherwise would not have (this is a hypothetical scenerio, it could be anything really). Would God answer your prayers? Do you believe that?
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 01:28 am Mad. Yes, there are ends to everyone's talents. And watch your wording please. Don't get excited when you think you have a point on me. Galool. I am not surprised that when you want to picture yourself as an intellectual giant, people must be deprived of everything?. Including the prophets of ALLAH. As of my physical endowment, I think I wouldn't do something that is out of my reach. There is nothing scientific about what I said I do. I am glad you found some fantasized weaknesses in what I said. Let me know when you get the scoring points through the mail. I am thinking, you are an old man crying over his lost years and can't deal with younger much talented people. So what does the old man do?. Go on the rampage and accuse everybody of inability. I have to watch what I say next time so that I don't offend the Old cracker.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 01:40 am Formerguest Sorry, I was just talking a little smack. That's just me, didn't mean nothing by it. Sometimes it's kind of fun to pull your chain.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 01:46 am MAD. That is fine. We can chatt. Galool. I meant "cracker" nothing else but " A noisy boaster; a swaggering fellow". Like Shak said once: "What cracker is this same that deafs our ears?". LoL. Adeer i cafi haddaad carootey.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 03:16 am MM, The answer to your hypothetical scenerio is , yes. ( you are reffering to istikhara, I think) If it is good for you you will pursue your parents, if it is not you will give up. ( have you read the Du' a) By the way this is Arawelo ( check my in puts above . the propet in the Bible , I can check the reference again cuz if you want cuz I was in hurry)
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 03:25 am hanah. asalaamu caleykum sis. How are you this morning?. MAD is not somali sis in case you didn't see his Irish roots claim(which I don't deny). If you knew that is fine. Plus, prayer to be accepted one has to disbelieve in all other gods and become a believer in ALLAH first. Mad is close but not there yet. MAD. If you are serious in prayer stuff and you like to pray, pray for guidance. That is more important than anything else.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 03:59 am FG, Yes, I know he is, but just answering the question. Yes, you are rigth the beleaf comes first. I am fine. do you know I am sister Arawelo, change the name, perhaps it should be better if I change it to Sumaya. But Insha Allah, in the near future I will have that name in the rael life. MadMac, I have looked at the Quran ( transilated by Yususf Ali same as yours) and this is what he says'' footnote 789. ( 5;82-85) The meaning is not that they merely call themselves christians, but that they were such sincere Christians that they appreciated Muslaim virtues, as did the Abyssinians to whom Muslim refugees went during the persecution in Makahh. -- We cannot read the Quran in an isolated way but it is a common error I do that sometimes-- thanks for reading it.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 07:04 am mad mac-----the verse does not say that charity work does not need purpose as you are claiming. while i'm disclosing the act of charity (from people, even the receiver), Allah is aware of it. at the end of the sura, Allah said He is well knows what you do. in fact, the verses after the verse you cited tells it all the purpose: "whatever of good you spend it is FOR YOUR OWN SOULS; and you spend not SAVE TO SEEK ALLAH'S COUNTENANCE, and whatever of good you spend shall be repaid to you, and you shall not be wronged"------charities are for the poor who are sustained IN THE WAY OF ALLAH.........and whatever of good you spend, surely ALLAH IS THE KNOWER THEREOF". you see, mad mac, not only the giving charities, but the principal motive-force, in the islamic code, to all acts of merit is not to win applause of human beings, nor to achieve good name, but implelled by the LOVE of your Creator, Master and Sustainer, and moved to WIN His good-will. a muslim is truly religious in all his or her acts of charity and benevolence. i told you before that giving charity is in fact an order from Allah. "And establish prayer and give charity to the poor and WHATEVER of GOOD you send forth of your souls you shallfind with Allah; surely Allah is KNOWS what you do" 2:110. in many places of the Quran when the order of the salaat is mention, the giving of charity is followed-------establish prayer and give charity. in fact, Allah said in another verse (2:117) this: "Virtue is not this that you turn your faces to the east and the west, but virtue is to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day and the angles and the Books and the prophets and GIVES OF HIS SUBSTANCE--------FOR THE LOVE OF HIM------to the kindered and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and the beggars and for redeeming necks; and establishes prayer and GIVES POOR RATE and is of the performers of their promises and in the time of voilence; these are they who have proved true; and these are they who are God-fearing" also check these verses in the Quran about charity having purpose------that is the purpose of giving things in the way of Allah: 2:262; 2:267;
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 11:08 am Dear Muslims A salaam aleikum My My My Haven't the little Kuffars been active.lol Dear ALL Hi whats up. Let me vioce my concerns. Hannah Dear sister, thanks for the messages which i feel were a zakat, i like this type of zakat,to recieve this zakat I don't think you were wrong in what you said, so there is no need for me to correct you sister Serious <smile> Gracious as always, remind me to talk to you soon about a serious matter, both you, sweetgirl, and idea Formerguest thanks for the advice you sent by e-mail, as usual it was on point and have already used the knowldge you taught me, although in another circumstance. Galool You know that hospital i used to volunteer at?, i used to clean it before i volunteered there, i used to clean the toliets and the changing rooms. In the changing rooms. Doctors used to leave lying around there stethscopes (spelling?) i picked it up one day and listened to my heart beat, it was profound, i heard this loud beating, steady and pounding so near to my breast, yet so hidden to me. In the buddist tradition, one of the first thing a wannabe buddha is asked to do, is become concious of his breath, one student asked why, and the teacher said take him to the river and hold me him under the water. When he came back, he knew why. I think there is a Hadeeth, when it is related that the most hidden of Allah's blessings is the breath. So beautiful, one breath away from death literally. I held my head under the bath a couple of days ago i haven't done it since i was a kid. You ever wonder why you think the way you do?. Do you think along with my observation that the human is Godlike in relation to creation?. I mean if you take away the spritual, the human is godlike on earth in relation to the earth and its inhabitants, only mankind can really affect his surroundings and do certain things, which other animals cannot do. Opposible thumbs is the key apparantly. Yet what is mankind like in relation to his Creator?, in relation to his humbling beginnings and his humble demise. What a sad affair is the human who clings to ingratitude through infirmity when reduced to incontinences from a height of prowness. Will you not recognise the signs of your lord Allah?. Does the wages you recieve compare?, i worry for the cravings of your soul, what lurks behind your typing of swagger. Does your heart not yearn like mine, does it not hurt, does it not leap?. Why do you stifle your life, with denial of your death. What a low opinion you hold of yourself, to think you are not of a creation, when you would give incredlous looks to the person, who postulated that something as simple a ship had no maker. That it perhaps appeared first as a boat from intially perhaps from a car that first came to the sea. Okay Galool part 2 Okay i will not chastise you for reverting from your "After Ramathan" postion. You had provocation. I will also not entertain the discord you wish to place between me and sistuhs on this page. I will instead focus on a few things. Dear Galool. let me make things perefectly clear, for you have a tendency to manipulate. I never implied, implicity, nor indirectly, that "Islam was a shade or two darker" than Christianity. what i said, that Christainty has been associated with whiteness and this is true, The Pope for example, claimed in the 18th century, that conversion to Christainy did not free a slave from his bondage, rather only attached the slave (black) further to it as the slave would realise his postion. How did you managed to infer that what i was implying that Islam was a shade darker, what i was pointing out is that Islam is a universal tradtion for all faiths, and has always been articulated as such. This is not an opinion, but is a documented fact, i cannot be blamed for asserting what those before be, both westeren and muslim have conceeded. Furthermore, didn't we establish that my emmersion in Islam was a "personal tramua" thing, which had little to do with my anti racism stances?. Which is indeed how Islam comes to most people, becasue that is when i think you are closest to your lord, helpless and desperate MM If we can agree, and i am sure we can that Christianty has often been a "white " religion, then would pointing that out make me "compelled to knock Down Christainity". I thought about not entertaining your ideas , which you project into the page, and stand back and observe liek they are golddust sprinkled on the page. So i really haven't internalised it. I have nothing against Chriatians,or indeed Christainity you know it, i know it, so don't i just look silly for saying it? So what do you want me to do, stop posting?. Furthermore, you seem to equate missionaries with Christainity, i don't, tell me who is more guilty of knocking Christainity, every time i call you a missionary, you jump up and say "i ain't even Christain". You mentioned a True intellectual, see i am not concerned with true intellecuals, the world of academia, is inherently messed up. I am a true Christian, just as i am a true jew and a true muslim.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 11:24 am Common That's what Iäve been saying. I'm a true Christian, Jew and Muslim. But every time I say it, Asad says BS, you can't be all. You have to pick one. Boy this is getting confusing. Asad What do you mean without purpose?? The purpose is to assist poor people. I gues that's what my point comes down to. I say that Allah most approves of charity when the motive of the giver is to help those less fortunate. The by-product of the purity of motive is a better standing with Allah. But if the motive is a better standing with Allah, or worse yet a better standing with other people, it taints the act, if ever so little. If this is a test (something I'm sure not convinced of) then isn't the purpose to test the purity of the soul, not see how many hoops Allah can get you to jump through??
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 11:44 am MadMac, You ask but never reply! I have looked at what the Bible says about the Prophet pbuh. I also looked at the Quran translater ( yusus Ali's commont on the ayah you reffered to. Shall I take your silence that the things settled by that. I mean you no lnoger aksing why the Quran mentioned Christians. Common, Salams my brother, I do not see your writing nowdays. hope Ramadan is going well. This is sister Araweloby the way.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 12:26 pm mad mac----i don't care if you say you are muslim, jew and christian at the same time. what i'm saying to you is that Allah will accept only ISLAM. it is in the Quran. if this confuses you, i can not help you. also, if you are not convinced of the verses i cited for you------which contrdict your claim, lying about the Quran will not help you either. Allah said in the verse (2:117) this: "Virtue is not this that you turn your faces to the east and the west, but virtue is to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day and the angles and the Books and the prophets and GIVES OF HIS SUBSTANCE--------FOR THE LOVE OF HIM------to the kindered and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and the beggars and for redeeming necks; and establishes prayer and GIVES POOR RATE and is of the performers of their promises and in the time of voilence; these are they who have proved true; and these are they who are God-fearing". i told you many times that giving charity an order from Allah and muslims do this act-------FOR THE LOVE OF HIM (Allah)-----which is the best purpose of giving. Muslims establish the prayer for Allah and they give charity for Allah.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 06:18 pm somebody emailed me and pointed out to me that the verse number above is 2:177 and not 2:117. btw, there is another verse that talks about charirty------being------for Allah's sake only: "And whatever you give in gift in order that it may increase among the substance of people DOES NOT INCREASE WITH ALLAH, and what you pay in poor-rate SEEKING THE FAVOUR OF ALLAH, then these!----they shall have manifold increase"------Suraltul Rum:39 in islam, anything you spent not in the way of Allah but merely to conform to convention (humanitarain---the practice of many ceremonial occasions and with the veiw to receiving back more in this world or the tax exemptions charities) is no good with Allah. although these form of expenditures by the so called humanitarians will help people, yet there will be no recompense for it from Allah, nor will Allah bless it.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 08:32 pm common. I am flattered. I have no knowledge. I have islamic books(both arabic&english) at home for reference. I also visit websites that have the translation of ahadiths and the Quran which are easier to access. I also read interfaith materials a lot to see the missionary attacks on islam and what they have against the Quran. I feel guilty people thinking about me as someone who knows a lot about islam. May that assumption come true inshallah.
|
| | Tuesday, December 19, 2000 - 09:41 pm Hanah There was no where else to go on that subject. It had run its course. Do you have another question on it that I overlooked? Asad So, if I understand you correctly, then the only things that count are if we do them for Allah. Not to actually help the suffering or underpriveledged? Therefore all good we do must be in order to please Allah that we might get a reward afterward. What's wrong with that picture? No wonder you folks think the way you do.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 01:46 am MM, there is nothing wrong with that picture. It is a win win situation. You are pleasing your creator, which is supposed to be your priority in life anyway, while helping your fellow beings. It seems you have a problem with the fact that you have to please Allah, i'm I right in thinking that way? Common, salaam bro. NO worries. No more adoration or detestation from my part.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 02:31 am MM you a true Christain?, a true Jew? and a true Muslim. i don't think so. Let me simplify, see at the time of Prophet Moses, it was There is no God but Allah and Moses is his Messenger, at the time of Prophet Jesus, it was there is no God but Allah and Jesus is his messenger.(peace be upon them) Now it is There is no god but Allah, and Prophet Mohammed is his Messenger (peace be upon him) It is all Islam silly!, if i was around at the time of Nabi Jesus, would i not be a " Christain"?, what does it matter what you are called?, its about following the Prophet and his teachings. Now here comes the good part, if you look at historically verifiable data (and Moses is not a historically verifiable figure: ie: is only around in the scrolls and is belived soley on faith... isn't that something, we belive in the "Jews Messiah" soley on faith, yet they deny Nabi Mohammed (pbuh) then you will see, that the message was always, always the same, that is why you never saw Jesus, uttering ever that he was the son of God. Thta was introduced by four guys who apparantly have no surname mathew, mark luke and john (is this picking on articles of faith?, sorry i am not one of those people who have a religious preference, i have a belief) So of course, you cannot be a Christain a Jew and a Muslim, in todays context, you don't need to be, a Muslim is all three rolled into one. get it?. wasalaam
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 03:32 am OK, here we go again. Let me explain it again for the upteenth time. I agree that all of the prophets you mentioned were prophets. I also believe there are some great prophets that have been lost to history. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ALL OF THESE PROPHETS HAD VERBATIM THE SAME MESSAGE. Where is the Chinese Mohamed???? I mean, God sends four major prophets (that you guys count) and a host of little ones, all to the same basic geographic area. Doesn't that seem strange. Chinese civilization was at least 3,000 years old. Where's the Chinese Qur'an???? I mean, if they screwed it up, God would send another prophet until they got it right, correct? Where's the Incan Qur'an? Why were the Incas sacrificing people to sun Gods, etc??? Same with the Iroquois and the Cherokee. These were developed civilizations, small but developed. I don't buy into the fact that God just blew these folks off. I think in some instances people developed and followed their own belief systems and ignored the gifted (prophets) in their midst. In other cases, they interpreted the message slightly differently. But you will see in many established faiths there is a central theme of compassion. Islam institutionlizes this in a way that Arabs of the time could understand (do x and get y). For the time it was a little radical, but not overly so. Christianity and Judaism had already made some inroads on the Arabian peninsula. I believe the messenger is not divine - he must interpret his communications from God. Some do this well, some do not. I think we all can do it to some degree, but like in most things in life, some people have vast talents for something and some don't. I think people like Bhuda, Jesus, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, and others were gifted people. They could understand God's message better than most. But they weren't perfect. They didn't get it perfectly right. So what I do as look at the commonalities. Look at what the similarities are. And one conclusion I have drawn. The more selfless the motivation the purer. If I am giving to charity to please Allah so that I get a reward, this is a tainted gift. It's sure better than nothing. But best of all is if I give for the sake of giving. I give to help others. I give because I genuinely care about other people. not because I'm hoping Allah will reward me for my gift. Hence I do not believe there is one true religion. I believe they are all flawed. I suspect some are more flawed than others. So from my perspective I am all three of those (and more) and none of those.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 04:23 am I do not undrstand why we have to make the purpose of charity in Islam something that does not make sense, something which is difficult to understand. There is nothing wrong with the picture we give to charity to help the needy becuase we feel they need the help ( bearing in mind that there are a lot of things that can be a charity including a good advice) then Allah SWT will reward us becuase of our good intention the fact that we beleave in Him, and that we beleave we get the wealth we distribute from Him, and that is a test for us ( as much as it is a test for the needy one) To please Allah does not mean He needs us but whenever we do a good thing Allah will reward us. Allah is not the gods that Hindus worship and make food for him. MM, I hate studying but I think I have to challenge your above postings. Insha Allah.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 04:39 am Your pespective sucks. For the umpteenth time i will explain why. Firstly you need to recognise the distiction between a Messenger and a Prophet, Messengers actually came with something new, a new revelation,Prophets were in line with existing teachings. The golden rule being, all Messengers were Prophets but not all Prophets were Messengers How on earth do you expect me to now exactly how many Prophets they have been and who the Chinese one was? And what releavnce does this have to your faith? Again you confuse Islam, with Christanity,and Judaism you are very crude and unsohistiacted. You don't have to be born again or accept that Jesus died for your sins to be a believer,so every one else is not lost. Secondly it is a concept of "our one God" and in fact in all epochs different peoples have had a fundermental belief in One God and his Prophet. You silly man MM, how can there be a "Chinese Quran" Prophet Mohammmed was sent to all of mankind, ALL OF MANKIND. That is why there are Chinses muslims, they don't need a "chinese Quran" You ethno centric buffoon. I am really losing my proverbial temper with your coarse mind. The Quran is a Critera, how many times have i told you this, if you prefer a different verions of events, if you decide what Islam is, (contray to the 1 billion belivers)which puts the three world religions on a partity, then why shall we discuss something you have made up your mind on? "at the time it was a little radical, but not overly so" Moron. i am disgusted with your low level abuse, all i gotta say is read what the Christain Arabs had to say about the mulsims of the time. If you are not giving to charity for Allah sake,then whos?. What if the person is not grateful for what you have given them, do you take it back?. Lets approach the matter dialectically homeboy. As it exists, with the human nature we all know. The one with the big charity checks and etc etc. What can be more selfless, than something, not for the reward, but out of belief in the unseen. and fear of incuring the wrath of Allah (swt). Charity is prescribed, let me ask you something MM can you give charity to please someone else?. Your philosphers think otherwise, the hedonistic principle, argues that you do it becasue ultimatly it makes you happy. So lets be real, from the muslim perspective that is ireleavnt, whther it makes you happy or not, for we know it does, that the one who is not generous deprives himself first. What is more important, is that you rectify your intentions with Allah (swt). Its more to do with beleif than reward, you realise, taht nothing is yours, that everythuing you have is a loan from Allah (swt). So it is not yours to give. Tell me if it is not yours to give, then how can you give somthing for the sake of someone else, it was never yours. You are so, so crude. Your abrasive anaylsis, is perhaps why your "countrymen" are so often thought of as a uncouth population. Brush up on your Islam, before you sink your teeth into its teachings loser. You couldn't draw a conclusion, if it was a curtain. whwy do you genuienly care about other people?. is not Allah who has placed this Mercy between mankind?. Just as easliy we could have all been like wild animals to each other, that is truly a blessing, and yet you realise it not. What a desperate creature you are, a bitter entity, clinging to the perphery of your ego, even though it fails you daily. Shall you be a damn good anaylst on the day of Judgement, or a quivering wreck. Oh lord, i pity you from the depths of my inner being. I shall not be on your death however asking mercy for you soul if i live to see it..and i see why.. i mean look at your actions today,
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 04:44 am Hannah I'm sure you will. I don't expect you to agree with my train of thought. But as I said before, I don't think our relationship with Allah is a question of how many hoops he can get us to jump through. This sounds way too much like "If you're good little boys and girls and everyone takes his nap then you get cookies and milk." I believe deeds matter but I also believe motivation matters. And I'll take it a step further, I don't believe it's because this is the ticket to paradise, I think it's because this is the ticket to making you a better being. If we think about this world as an educational process, where you learn by doing, like an apprenticeship, then the Mormon view makes sense. At least as far as the after-life is concerned. You want to know another thing that bothers me, the threat that if you don't believe in Islam you will burn in hell. Then there's the Christian version, if you don't "believe in Christ" you will burn in hell. Most faiths have this implicit threat that if you don't follow their teachings then you're screwed. I think that's total crap. If I do Gods will, if I pray, if I work hard, if I give to charity and I'm kind to people, but I don't believe the Qur'an is devine I'm screwed. But if I stray every now and then, if maybe I beat my wife, don't pray as often as I should, but am sincerely sorry and beg forgiveness, then I'm good to hook. What's wrong with that picture?
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 05:00 am Well, Mad, I am sure your answers lie in the Quran if you are patient enough to read. You wrote: <I also believe there are some great prophets that have been lost to history.> Allah tells us in the Quran that there are prophets we have their stories in the Quran and others that we don't have their stories. If there was a need to mention them all in the Quran, it would have been so. "4.164 Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;-" The reason is that They all shared the principle of towhid (monotheism) and the oneness of Allah. "21.25 Not a messenger did We send before you without this inspiration sent by Us to him: that there is no god but I; therefore worship and serve Me." Basically, what those messengers and prophets taught their people is the same in principle. They differed RULINGS or SHARIA depending on the time and conditions. You also wrote: "Where is the Chinese Mohamed???? I mean, God sends four major prophets (that you guys count) and a host of little ones, all to the same basic geographic area. Doesn't that seem strange. Chinese civilization was at least 3,000 years old. Where's the Chinese Qur'an???? I mean, if they screwed it up, God would send another prophet until they got it right, correct? Where's the Incan Qur'an? Why were the Incas sacrificing people to sun Gods, etc??? Same with the Iroquois and the Cherokee. These were developed civilizations, small but developed. I don't buy into the fact that God just blew these folks off." The Quran informs us that Allah sent a messenger to every nation previously. "16.36 For We assuredly sent amongst every People a Messenger, (with the Command), "Serve Allah, and eschew Evil": of the People were some whom Allah guided, and some on whom error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth)." "10.47 To every people (was sent) a messenger: when their apostle comes (before them), the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged." I hope that helps. Allah sent messengers to human beings the last of them being our messenger pbuh. In previous nations, the message got corrupted and diluted with a lot of falsehood, then came islam to clear that away and rejuvinate the message with more wisdom and mercy. There is no avenue to Allah but Islam now.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 06:07 am mad mac----i told you that what you were saying about the Quran was what you made it up (not from the Quran). i told you that you were wrong and the Quran was right. after proving you wrong, i told you that lying about the Quran didn't help you and now i'm telling you that blaming about the Quran and the muslims would not help you either. it is your thinking that needs examination, mad mac. your problem is that you reject the Quranic sayings while at the same time relying on what you think is the Quran. you reject about the accountablity of last day; the creation of hell and heaven and the GIVING OF SUBSTANCE--------FOR THE LOVE OF ALLAH------to those who need it. as far as the being of-----a muslim, christian and a jew rolled into one---- concern, the prophet muhammad and his followers were not. they were only muslimiin. it was reported that the prophet once said that if moses were to come, he would have followed the teachings of muhammad. the name *christian* didn't exist jesus's time and jesus never called himself a *christiain*. the prophet muhammad followed the religion (the milah) of ibrahim, who was neither a *jew* nor *christian*, but only a *muslim*. it is in the Quran.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 08:03 am hannah-----you said you do not undrstand why we have to make the purpose of charity in Islam something that does not make sense, something which is difficult to understand. well, if you don't understand this verse, it does not mean there is something wrong with the purpose of giving. "And whatever you give in gift in order that it may increase among the substance of people DOES NOT INCREASE WITH ALLAH, and what you pay in poor-rate SEEKING THE FAVOUR OF ALLAH, then these!----they shall have manifold increase"------Suraltul Rum:39 as i said, in islam, anything you spent not in the way of Allah but merely to conform to convention (becuase we just feel they need or you feel like it) is no good with Allah. although these form of these expenditures by the so called humanitarians will help people, yet there will be no recompense for it from Allah, nor will Allah bless it. if this does not make sense to you, it does to me.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 09:21 am Anon, I did not say it does not make sense to me. I saked why the poeple make it sound like that. My brother do not make me loose my temper read what I said. Of course it makes sense to me, and it is not ahrd to understand, right? salaams walalo
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 10:37 am Asad You are one tough nut. OK, let's review the bidding again. I can see I am not communicating clearly here. Of course I am going to take parts ot the Qur'an I agree with and disregard those I don'T. I do the same with the Bible. And as I become more educated about Bhudism I am sure I will do the same with it. This is NOT a question of convenience, as some here on the net have postulated. This goes back to my conviction that there are certain common traits that can be found, that I don't believe a divine book exists, and that I do not believe in the perfection of the Prophets (or anyone else). That's why when you or Formerguest try and use the Qur'an "to prove" I am wrong it is not successful. Formerguest Here's what bothers me about your the Qur'anic hypothesis on other prophets. Why are all the established prophets of Islam (all the named ones) from the Middle East? All from the Judeo Christian tradition??? If there were a monotheistic prophet in China or Japan, why isn't he named? Why isn't there a Chinese version of the Qur'an. If the people there rejected it the first time or got it screwed up (as supposedly the Jews and Christians did) then why not send another prophet until they get the message? My argument is there have been many prophets, but they aren't sent. They are people with better insight, a better ability to communicate with God. But not a perfect ability, or even close to it. When they have the ability to communicate in a superior manner AND they are charismatic, then the big names surface. I suspect this ability in large measures is seen relatively seldom, but we all have it in some measure. Thus Confucian and Mohamed are having the same message communicated but they aren#t receiving it quite the same. And of course, their ability to receive is shaped/influenced by their environment and culture.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 11:17 am FG No offense taken. You can call me anything you like as long you don't accuse me of things I haven't done. I like to describe myself as `Wise' rather than old. (you see Ramadan affected me by diluting my sense of modesty, which beats the whole point in fasting I suppose!) I can still dance my dear wife off her feet, run to catch the bus, do a 100-yard breastroke without pause and that most important of organs is still throbbing away incessantly!(the brain is what am I talking about) So you see, I am not old at all.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 01:20 pm As'Salamu Aleikum muslims! As all brothers/sisters has mentioned here, The Nation Of Islam has nothing to do with Islam. Their "religion" is called Frakhanism. Ramadam Kareem Ansaari
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 01:50 pm mad mac---have you ever wondered that the reason you can not communicate clearly is that you are double talking a lot? when your lies is cought, you cry faul; you claim the Quran will support you, but i knew it was all lies. you said you could prove something that supports you from the Quran while at the same time contricting the Quran itself and now you want us not to prove you wrong-------while------using the Quran.! you can not believe whatever you want to believe. i don't care, but lying about the Qur'an will not help you. i mean, every which way you run, you would not win. crying like a baby and lying about the Quran will not make you successful.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 01:52 pm mad mac---have you ever wondered that the reason you can not communicate clearly is that you are double talking a lot? when your lies is cought, you cry faul; you claim the Quran will support you, but i knew it was all lies. you said you could prove something that supports you from the Quran while at the same time contricting the Quran itself and now you want us not to prove you wrong-------while------using the Quran.! you can believe whatever you want to believe. i don't care, but lying about the Qur'an will not help you. i mean, every which way you run, you would not win. crying like a baby and lying about the Quran will not make you successful.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 02:09 pm hannah----i read what you wrote and it seems to me that you had problem understanding the purpose of charity in islam. you said we make it difficult to understand therefore it does not make sense. that is after i cited the verses of the Quran about the purpose of charity in islam. i did not write the Quran and i didn't make the Quran that way. you said there is nothing wrong with the picture we give to charity to help the needy becuase we feel they need the help and i told you what the Quran says about this. i told you that the purpose is to SEEK THE FAVOUR OF ALLAH. without this purpose, Allah will not accept it. if Allah does not accept (eventhough the needy people get what they needed) you will not receive anything from Allah-----that is the problem you don't see. so, my sister hannah, if pointing out this fact------makes you loose your temper-------that is not my problem.
|
| | Wednesday, December 20, 2000 - 11:27 pm Asad The Qur'an does support me, but only if I use some parts and disgard others. So, for example, look at what Formerguest wrote. The Qur'an alludes to other prophets which it doesn't mention. It states other prophets were sent to other places but their stories are lost. This supports my theory. Other Qur'anic quotes obviously contradict my theory. But if you assume from the beginning (as I do) that the message is garbled in transition, then clearly you are going to get incorrect data. Part of that Garbling is based on the culture of the receiver. Can you please not use the word lie. If you think that I have made an incorrect assertion can you use the word inconsistency. Lie indicates a deliberate attempt to deceive. I have never deliberately attempted to deceive. This is a poor usage of the english language which I put down to the fact that you are not a native speaker. But understand in English the word lie is a loaded term and in this case if incorrect usage. I have told you this before but you don't seem to get the message.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 12:33 am MAD. May be when you get the intent, you will get the help of Allah and see the shining light of islam in your heart. "8:125 And whomsoever Allah wills to guide, He opens his breast to Islam, and whomsoever He wills to send astray, He makes his breast closed and constricted, as if he is climbing up the sky. Thus Allah puts the wrath on those who believe not." Narrated by Mu'wiya rc in a sermon: I heard the messenger pbuh saying, "If Allah wants to do good to a person, He makes him comprehend the religion ( Understanding the Quran and Sunnah (legal ways) of the prophet. I am just a distributor, BUT THE GRANT IS FROM ALLAH. (And remember) that this nation (true muslims, followers of islamic monotheism) will keep on following Allah's Teachings strictly, and they will not be harmed by any one going on a different path till Allah's Order (Day of judgement) is established." (Al-bukhari Vol.1 Hadith No.71). Your going back and forth can be helped only by Allah. Arguing seaslessly is fruitless when your decision had been made by yourself not wanting to open mindedly see things the way they should be. I am amused by your unclever intent of using the Quran to serve your lazy military mind.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 01:47 am mad mac---the Quran didn't support your theory. for example, when you said (claimed) that the Quran will support you------when you were talking about the purpose of charity-----It did not support you; the Quran contradicted your theory---- as i pointed out thatIt will. so, mad mac, here is your predicament. as usual, you are here running around from your own making (your own doing or your own responsiblity) by blaming someone else or something else. for example, one time you blamed the Quran itself and the muslims in another time----for beleiving the Quran and now you are blaming the translation of the Quran (the message is garbled in transition). also, when your claims (deliberate lies or not) are caught and when you fail, you cry foul. either cases, i'm here telling you that you will not succeed.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 02:31 am Asad The Qur'an sis support my theory, to a point. If you take the one Surah I cited, it supports me. But when Mohamed wrote the Qur'an he interconnected it. He starts with a central theme, we are here to serve Allah. He then interconnects everything at some point or other around that theme. Thus when one Surah appears to lead another direction, another is developed that comes back to the original theme. So, if he works around this theme, and if, in order to Allah we must believe in the Qur'an, he has connected the points so that either you are a believer (in which case you are saved) or you are not a believer (in which case you are dooomed). The lack of middle ground was a deliberate ploy to force people to convert. Once he got the big mo on his side, it was easy to pressure folks. If you're born into it, it's easier still. The Bible wasn't able to do this because it is derived from different authors at different times. But the Qur'an was generated by either one author or one brain trust, so it was much easier to connect the dots. I love that part about see if you can get someone to duplicate just one Surah for content and no one could. Come on. I've read FAR better leterary prose than the Qur'an. Admittedly it's undoubtedly lost something in translation, but so do lots of other works. I love your quote here. On the one hand, Allah gives all men free will. On the other hand, they don't really have free will cause Allah blinds some men sometimes. This sounds as stupid as the Jews who say they are the chosen people. And you guys say I'm inconsistent (Or to use Asads words: Formerguest, first you claimed that Islam was there for everyone, now you claim that Islam is only open to those whomo Allah picks - that Allah opens their hearts. This proves you are lying!!!!!) Formerguest I do not have a lazy mind. Your attitude is the principal problem with the Muslim point of view. If people, after discussion (and probably before) don't see things your way then they are some pejorative. they are lazy, they are stupid, they are evil, they are influenced by Satan, etc. etc. etc. Why do you find it impossible to anknowledge that some people might read a document and come to a different conclusion than you without them being something negative? If Muslims were so great, then why does God keep letting them get their asses kicked by Infidels over and over again??? Oh wait, don't tell me, it's because most of them are properly practicing their religion. If everyone who said he was a Muslim acutally practiced Islam then Islam would be on top and God would help the Muslims. But since so many are corrupt God doesn't help them. Asad gave me that one already.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 02:37 am MadMac, I am speecless, I will write later.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 03:21 am MAD MAC, Regarding your comment about why there were "Never" any prophets sent to other civlizations such the Incas. Islam says there were possibly thousands of messengers from God, so even the groups you've mentioned could have had messengers who took the message to them. You critisize Common for "knocking down Christianity.." Well, you knock down Islam at every turn. Everytime, I check a thread about Islam, you are there critising it, ridiculing it, and knocking it down. So, why don't you start making the habit of respecting Islam, before you critisize others for doing the same thing you do. Common and all the others that strive to spread the true meaning of Islam. May Allah (SWT) reward you for your good deeds, Aamiin!
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 03:44 am Mad Mullah I have never, not once, knocked Islam. Not agreeing with it in its entirety is not knocking it. You will notice that there are many thread with many subjects that true believers only might beinterested in that I do not comment on. I don't go into those threads and say "Islam is this or Islam is that..." because I have stated, on many occassions that while I believe my theory is correct I don't know it. Just like none of you know that Islam is correct - you believe it. I acknowledge that its completely possible that the Muslims are right. Just as I acknowledge that the Christians or Bhudists might be right. On occassion (when provoked) I have criticized some tendencies of the practitioners of the faith. But arguing a certain thesis is not the same thing as attacking the foundation of another faith every time it's mentioned in an off-hand way. And Common does that all too often. I have a theory which I believe is correct. Instead of even trying to understand (not believe, just comprehend) what I'm saying Formerguest says I'm lazy and Asad says I'm lying. They don't even think about what I'm really saying. They just start looking for ways to pick it apart without absorbing the concept.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 03:52 am mad mac------as i said, the Quran (the verse you cited---2:271) didn't support your theory; the Quran said the opposite of what you were suggesting. in fact, the verse tells the purpose of giving charity------which is the expatiation evil deeds. mad mac, funny how your predicament is running wild now---- as you become desperate. you are now moving from blaming and the crying games to shocking people with your interpolation of the Quran---------this, however, is what desperate kufars do whenever they are cornered to the wall and failed or exhausted any other avenues for them to win in their arguments. if the running around from one tactis to another does not work for them, they go to their bizarre act of shocking the muslims-----as if this might work for them. it was funny when mad mac said that the intent of the Quran was "a deliberate ploy to force people to convert-----pressure folks" into accepting islam. i have never heard this before. i always heard from the kufars that wars what did it. what a funny line (lie). again, mad mac, which ever way you run, i'm here telling you that you will not succeed. i'm here to point out your desperation and lies (however funny, deliberate and shocking may turn out to be).
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 04:00 am Madmac, ' and the Quran is the work of Muhamed' ( sorry I will repharase your commonts cuz I cannot quote it properly) What is your proof tha the Quran is not the word of God. We Muslims have the evidence that the quran is the word of god the quran itself- the miracle of the quran that the propet pbuh could not know the time of the quran is dated back. Does the quran sound to you something written by one author in a desert some 1400 years ago. Can you imagine that an English author born and brought up in England would not write about england and would write about somewhere he never visited . The Quran does not talk about the desert. The following I took from ' the amazing quran' ' ' some years ago , the story came to us in toront about a man wh was in the merchant marine and made his living on the sea. a muslim gave him the transalation o f teh quran to read. the amn knew nothing about the history of islam but was interested in reading the quran. when he finished reading it , he brought it back to the muslim and asked , this mohamed , was he a sailor'? he was impressed as to how accuretly the quran describes a storm on the sea. ' ( I am not going to quate the whole page this was to describe and explain why the quran cannot be the work of the prophet. ' I have read far better litarary prose' Can you tellme which one. I am sure calling the quran amazing is not something said only by muslims but by non-muslims I will quate '' ... the question of the status of the quran as thw word of god...the case for considering the quran as revelation is avery strong one, but it should be clear by know that it is ahighly sophistacated text and not simply a serious of propositions which require human assent'' I will say a bit more later.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 04:01 am MAD MAC, You, yourself told me that I don't have the right to shut you off, that you live in a free country, am I right? Well, the same applies to Common. Freedom of speech, as you said it. And frankly speaking, it is not just disagreeing, you've the tendencies to be rude about Islam and Muslims all together. I've read your disrespectful comments in other threads about Islam and Muslims. I found this quite interesting-> "Just like none of you know that Islam is correct - you believe it." Why wouldn't we know that is it correct? Especially when we have all the evidences proving that it is correct? Listen here, just because you have a hard time believing that Islam is the right religion, doesn't mean that all Muslims do. You lack something that we have, and that is faith. You can walk on your head and still not be able to have faith, it is that complicated! About what you said about Asad and FG, I think they've a reason to do so. You see, your never-ending rampage against Islam has persisted for far too long, and people are becoming quite miffed with it. It would make more sense if you changed your tactics when approaching the Islam topic.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 04:25 am hannah, what do you mean by the propet pbuh could not know the time of the Quran is dated back? wasn't the Quran revealed on him?
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 04:30 am Sorry i was in arush. corrections= The miracle in the Quran, for example the things that the prophet ( if was not receiving the revelation) could not come up with. I am not good at explaining things but does thjaat make sense now.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 05:04 am MM, I will appretiate if you ccan give me an answer for this; How do you see the quran? Rules and Adabs.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 05:33 am Arawelo. Sis, those kinds of questions are what MAD thrives upon. He likes people to ask him about his opinion on the Quran. What Mad thinks about the Quran don't count at all. Don't be fooled by the flowery discourses of MAD and his fake charm. The guy is spreading EVIL'S work if you can truly see behind his writings. <6:111. Even if We did send unto them angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they are not the ones to believe, unless it is in Allah's Plan. But most of them ignore (the truth). 112. Likewise did We make for every Messenger an enemy,- evil ones among men and Jinns, inspiring each other with flowery discourses by way of deception. If your Lord had so willed, they would not have done it: so leave them and what they forge. 113. To such (deceit) let the hearts of those incline, who have no faith in the hereafter: let them delight in it, and let them earn from it what they may. 114. Say: "Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who has sent unto you the Book, explained in detail." They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it has been sent down from your Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt. 115. The Word of your Lord does find its fulfillment in truth and in justice: None can change His Words: for He is the One who hears and knows all. 116. Were you to follow the common run of those on earth, they will lead you away from the way of Allah. They follow nothing but conjecture: they do nothing but lie. 117. Your Lord knowes best who strays from His Way: He knows best those who are rightly guided.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 05:44 am FG, Jazakakha walalo, He already said so but I want him to be clear. whatever he thinks about the quran is not gonna change the thruth. And in fact I would like to challenge him since that can be the only way to tell him off and show him that he is wrong. Though, i do nt have the time and lost mcuh of my writing skills, he is not saying that much comparing what I know from the feild. But if you wish so I will take the advice. MM< Where are you, I am waiting your reply.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 05:48 am Sis, I don't mind at all. Let us see what he says. Just remember, read those verses with care, they explain a lot about the wonder boy.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 11:06 am I was watching a tape of the Tito Trinidad - Fernando Vargas fight. Did you guys see it??? It was a war!!! What a bout. A real throw back. OK, back to the subject at hand. First of all, note how before I can even respond once Asad is calling me a liar and Formerguest is calling me evil. Too much khat again fellas. Arawello I have no idea what an adab is, so it's tough for me to answer your question intelligently. MadMullah Agreed. I'm not saying Common can't state his opinion. All I'm saying is he ought to give the anti-Christian thing a rest. Everyone got the message and there aren't any folks here waiting to convert anyway who might need convincing. He ought to just let it go. It makes him sound like a fanatic. In one para you ask me how I can say Muslims don't knwo the Qur'an is the word of God, then you subsequently state the importance of faith in belief. You answered the question. Formerguest I noticed that you didn't even respond to the conflict I pointed out. Is the choice of becoming a Muslim one of free will? If it is, then how come Allah closes some individuals minds to making this choice??? That's not just. Arawello Muhamed definately wrote the Qur'an and was required to interpret it many times. Hence we also have the Hadith. I mean, how often do you see people use the prophets personnel example as evidence to support someting???? Well HO,HO,HO Jalle (is the plural Jalleo?). I have to go see my kid for X-Mas (He's a hard core catholic). do the Xa-Mas present thing, drink some egg nog and have a good time. Bought my woman a cool photography set (she wants to try her hand at photography).
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 11:31 am mad mac-----i call it like it is. lying about the Quran and saying muhammad wrote the Quran would not make you truthful.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 11:33 am MM, Mohamed wrote the quran? You need to step out of your box for a while and discuss things intelligently. I suppose you have evidence to back that statement up. I'm dying to read it.
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 01:03 pm Does MM know the prophet was Ummi(the one who does not read or write). The accusation of the Kafirs of Prophet Muhammed's time were more clever. The people whom the Quran is challenging to bring one verse similar to the Quran is the experts of Arabic literature. The Arabs at the time of the Prophet were the best at all times in Arabic literature. Those study Adab AL-Jahili(pre-Islamic Arabic Literature ) will know what I mean. This challenge is not for some one like MM who, I think, does not know how construct a meaningful Arabic sentence. But Quran has other plenty ways to show it's miracles to every mind who is seeking the truth. Look at the scientific miracles( Oceans, rain, embryos, plants,...). There is verses in the Quran and Hadiths who explains, explicitly very well, the creation process of embryos(maybe the spelling is not right). And that exactly what the 20th century Science(With all this telescopes, Sona radar and computers) is telling us. MM,was Muhammed a 20th Doctor? The scientific aspect of the Quran is just one of it's many miracles. MM said Allah is not just!!. Do you know what is just and what is not?!!. The Most brilliant Western Philosophers tried to define what is Justice and they failed. Every definition contradicts it's self. if you are brighter than Descartes and Kant, then tell us what Justice is. Oh, I would have continue but my break is over, sorry Ramadan Kareim
|
| | Thursday, December 21, 2000 - 04:58 pm MAD, Your son, Like father like son eh?. It doesn't surprise me. At least the child is innocent and doesn't understand why he has to pray to different gods combined in one body. The heil marries must drive him nuts too if he plagiarizes his tests, or looks adoringly at his female classmates. Funny how they look when they confess. DOES YOUR SON CONFESS AT SUNDAYS?. The altar boy enjoys much of the show and goes; AAAAAAAAND son?! What did you do next?! Tell me son, did you do it son?! What an embarrassment. See, if material education would make one smart it would help the million catholics and christians in general out of their predicament. I have some stuff that you can enjoy reading. It is not from me so don't panick. I know you are in denial about the trinity being three gods and gave lame excuses for it like "Muslims are inventing it" etc. How about VOLTAIRE taking ON IT?. Read the coming piece and enjoy it. Voltaire On Trinity: Translated from Voltaire's Dictionnaire Philosophique. There are heretics who might not be regarded as Christians. Nevertheless, they recognize Jesus to be saviour and mediator; but they dare to maintain . . . That nothing is more contrary to strict reason than what is taught among Christians about the Trinity of persons in a single divine essence, the second of which was begotten by the first, and the third of which proceeds from the two others. That this unintelligible doctrine is nowhere found in scripture. That no passage can be produced that authorizes it and to which, without in any way departing from the spirit of the text, a clearer, more natural meaning cannot be given, one more consistent with common sense and the basic and immutable truths. That to maintain, as do their adversaries, that there are several distinct "persons" in the Divine Essence, and that it is not the eternal who is the only True God, but that the Son and the Holy Ghost must be added to them, is to introduce the crudest and most dangerous error into the church of Jesus Christ, since it manifestly encourages polytheism. That it implies a contradiction to say that there is only one God and that nevertheless there are three "persons", each of which is truly God. That this distinction, one essence and three persons, was never in scripture. That it is obviously false, since it is certain that there are no fewer "essences" than "persons", nor "persons" than "essences". That the three persons of the Trinity are either three different substances, or accidents of the divine essence, or that same essence without distinction. That in the first case three gods are created. That in the second case God is composed of accidents and one worships accidents and metamorphoses accidents into persons. That in the third case an indivisible subject is uselessly and groundlessly divided, and what is not distinguished in itself is distinguished into "three". That if it is said that the three "personalities" are neither different substances in the divine essence, nor accidents of that essence, one would have to be at some pains to convince oneself that they are anything. That it must not be believed that the most rigid and the most convinced "Trinitarians" themselves have any clear idea of the manner in which the three "hypostases" subsist in God without dividing his substance and consequently without multiplying it. That Saint Augustine himself, after he had advanced a thousand reasonings as false as they are obscure on this subject, was obliged to admit that nothing intelligible could be said about it. Then they quote this father's words, which are in fact very singular: "When it is asked," says he, "what are the three, human language is found inadequate, and there are no terms to express them: yet it is said that there are "three persons", not in order to say something, but because we must speak and not remain silent. That the modern theologians have not elucidated this matter any better. That when they are asked what they understand by this word "person", they explain it only by saying that it is a certain incomprehensible distinction that causes one to distinguish in a numerically single nature a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost. That the explanation they give of the terms "to beget" and "to proceed" is not more satisfactory since it comes down to saying that these terms indicate certain incomprehensible relationships between the three persons of the Trinity. That from all this we can gather that the basic argument between them and the orthodox turns on the question whether there are in god three distinctions of which we have no notion and between which there are certain relationships of which we do not have any notion either.
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 03:26 am Hmmm wondering if this page should be called "common exposed" i did not know i was a anti Christain or a fanatic. Reminds me of Aideed, who said "i know i am a general by western standards, i do not know when i becamen a warlord" MM you becoming cheap, not that you were ever particulary classy
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 06:54 am Does Mohamed read the Quran? My above quatations was taking from books and research done by non-muslims. What is your response to that? You claimed above that the theme of the Quran is to worship the Quarn. But this highlights your incommunitive way of reading the Quran. My response to you about that; while the purpose of the Quran is to worship Allah as well as a gudance for the mankind, the cnetral htemes of the quran are god, human beings, society, reason, prophethood and revelation. eg, it describes the responsibly of persons as individual and society as the trustee of the god on earth. the quran makes frequent and repeated statements about nature in which the magnitute, stabilty and regularity of natural phenomenon are stressed. __--How do you read the quran? this is very important and I realised before and indacated that you should notv read ayah in an isolation ( i think you were arrogant not to ask me any advice baout that) .Whanever I see you remind me the fictitios character of a novel written by Margeret ( cannot remenmber the surname) . So, now I see you either you are a victim and need someguidlines about how to approuch the quran or you are deliberatly shut your eyes. either way good luck. The reason you said that The prophet pbuh gave us many examples about himself also shows your lack understanding of islam ( this is tru8e, no offence) Only would the westereners new much about Mohamed pbuh and the influence of islam to the westren civilastion then would they have amuch respect for Islam and the true muslims but alas , they do not understand and neither are they ready to do that.
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 10:31 am Common Please, do us all a favor and leave Aideed out of this. It can only be assured to degenerate the level of discussion. Cheap and classless. Harsh, very harsh. All OK, if Mohamed did not write the Qur'an who did?? Asad, you yourself have told me Allah can not come to earth (Something about blowing up mountains or something). So estansibly someone, somewhere, at sometime had to put pen to paper to generate the first Qur'an. Maybe that someone was divinely guided by Allah, but someone had to do the work. Formerguest I hate Voltaire, but I absolutely agree the trinity is a flawed concept. However, I don't agree that it is truly central to Christian principals (whether it is central to Christian faith or not is another matter). I know some Christians, however, would disagree with me on this point. If it warms your heart at all, the principal of the trinity and the claim that you could not get to heaven unless you believed Issa was the son of God. Arawello I read the Qur'an like I read any other document. Right to left and top to bottom. I don't get the question. Nour You know I heard that Mohammed could neither read nor write, but I thought it was Asad who corrected me on that point (perhaps I am mistaken, it could have been another guy who lurked around here last year - I forgot his name but he was hard core). If that is true it would truly be interesting that so a man could motivate a massive religious movement and produce such a document. But I don't doubt for a New York minute that Mohammed was a fascinating and remarkably talented man. Formerguest (and ONLY Formerguest) in all seriousness, is this a conflict (what I mentioned to you before) or am I mis-interpreting something there. How can Allah deny people the ability to see the truth? How can he allow Satan to do the same? This does not give them the opportunity to embrace the faith, which condemns without any free will on their part. What am I missing here? My son and I don't discuss religion. He knows I think the Catholic Church is full of it, but his family is Catholic (as is almost everyone in his village buried in the sticks) and he's not quite ready to have a detailed discussion about different faiths, politics or the meaning of life.
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 10:44 am mad mac---yes, someone wrote the Quran while the prophet recited it. no one reported the prophet wrote the Quran. when you said the prophet wrote the Quran, you did lie, didn't you?
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 11:05 am mad mad-----i never told you what you are claiming. again, your saying of asad or someone else told you that the prophet wrote or read the Quran is one of your blaming games. it is not going to work.
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 03:04 pm Mad. Your questions look more like jokes than an interest in finding the truth. Allah knows best. I can't differentiate your honesty from your dishonesty at all. I have both technical as well philosophical and religious proplems with you. Further more, YOU NEED INFORMED SCHOLARS WHO COULD ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS IN DEPTH AND WOULD SATISFY MAY BE YOUR CURIOSITY IF YOU ARE SERIOUS. Here on this net, You have me and others who are students themselves. Don't waste our time please. I don't understand why you need to bring your questions to this particular net whre most of us don't understand islamic tenets. YOUR FREE WILL QUESTION HAD BEEN ANSWERED BEFORE AS I RECALL IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN. You need to understand what is called in Islam DESTINY AND FATE of the person. What does Islam say about destiny and fate? how does islam view destiny and fate ? Praise be to Allaah. Belief in destiny and fate is one of the basic beliefs of Islam. It means that Allaah is the Knower of all things and the Creator of all things; nothing exists outside of His will and decree. He wrote down all things with Him in al-Lawh al-Mahfooz (the Preserved Tablet), and this was fifty thousand years before He created the universe. Everything in the universe, every creature and the things it does, is the creation of Allaah. Whatever He wills happens, and whatever He does not will does not happen. If something happens to a person, it could not have missed him, and if something does not happen to him, it could not have happened to him. A person is not forced to obey or disobey Allaah – he has free will as befits his state, but it is subject to the will of the Creator. And Allaah knows best.. http://www.islam-qa.com/QA/1|Basic_Tenets_of_Faith(Aqeedah)/al-Qadaa'_wa'l-Qadar_(Divine_decree_and_predestination)/What_does_Islam_say_about_destiny_and_fate.20111999.6287.shtml ALSO: Belief in Qadar Dr. Ja`far Sheikh Idris The Pillars of Faith The original meaning of the word Qadar is specified measure or amount whether of quantities or qualities. It has many other usages which branch out from this core. Thus yuqad-dir means, among other things, to measure or decide the quantity, quality, position, etc. of something before you actually make it. And it is this latter sense which interests us here. "God is the creator of everything, but whatever He creates, He creates with qadar(measure). [Qamar, LIV: 49] He knows before creating it, that He is going to create it and that it shall be of such and such magnitude, quality or nature etc. and specifies the time of its coming into being and passing away, and the place of its occurrence. If so, then one who believes in the true God should believe that there are no accidents in nature. If something disagreeable happens to him, he should say "God qad-dara (ordained), and He did what He willed" and not waste himself over wishing that it had not occurred, or worrying why it should occur. If on the other hand something agreeable happens to him he should not boast of it, but thank God for it. "No affliction befalls in the earth or in yourselves, but it is in a Book, before We create it; that is easy for God; that you may not grieve for what escapes you, nor rejoice (vaingloriously) in what has been given to you, God loves not any man proud and boastful." [Hadid, LVII: 23]. If God yuqad-dir (predestines, predetermines etc.) everything, that includes our so called free actions. But if so in what way can they be said to be free, and how are we responsible for them? This question occasioned the appearance, at a very early history of Islam,of two extreme theological sects. One of them, called the Qadariya, asserted man's free will and responsibility to the extent of denying God's foreknowledge, and claiming that God knows our free made actions only after we have performed them. The other, called the Jabriyya, did just the opposite and claimed that there was no difference between the motions of inanimate things and our movements in performing so-called free actions, and that when we use intentional language we speak only metaphorically. But there is no need to go to such extremes, since it is not difficult to reconcile Divine Qadar and human responsibility. God decided to create man as a free agent, but He knows (and how carl He not know!) before creating every man how he is going to use his free will; what, for instance, his reaction would be when a Prophet clarifies God's message to him. This foreknowledge and its registering in a 'Book' is called Qadar.'But if we are free to use our will' a Qadari might say,'We may use it in ways that contradict God's will, and in that case we would not be right in claiming that everything is willed or decreed by God.' The Qur'an answers this question by reminding us that it was God who willed that we shall be wilful, and it is He who allows us to use our will. "Surely, this is a Reminder; so he who will, takes unto his Lord a way, but you will not unless God wills." [lnsan, LXXVI: 29-30]. 'If so', says a Qadari, 'He could have prevented us from doing evil.' Yes indeed He could. "Had God willed, He would have brought them all together to the guidance; if thy Lord had willed whoever is in the earth would have believed, all of them, all together." [Yunus, X: 99]. "Had God willed, they were not idolaters; and we have not appointed thee a watcher over them neither art thou their guardian." [An'am, VI: 107] But He had willed that men shall be free especially in regard to matters of belief and disbelief. Say: "The truth is from your Lord; so let whosoever will believe, and let whosoever will disbelieve." [Kahf, XVIII: 29]. But men would not be so free if whenever any of them wills to do evil God prevents him from doing it and compels him to do good. "If our actions are willed by God," someone might say, "then they are in fact His actions." This objection is based on a confusion God wills what we will in the sense of granting us the will to choose and enabling us to execute that will i.e. He creates all that makes it possible for us to do it. He does not will it in the sense of doing it, otherwise it would be quite in order to say, when we drink or eat or sleep for instance that God performed these actions. God creates them, He does not do or perform them. Another objection, based on another confusion, is that if God allows us to do evil, then He approves of it and likes it. But to will something in the sense of allowing a person to do it is one thing; and to approve of his action and commend it, is quite another Not everything that God wills He likes. He has, as we have just read in the Qur'an, granted man the choice betwen belief and disbelief, but He does not, of course, like men to disbelieve (to be thankless). "If you are unthankful, God is independent of you. Yet He anpproves not unthankfulness in His servants; but if you are thankful, He will approve it in you." [Zumar, XXXIX: 7]. http://www.islaam.com/ilm/qadar.htm
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 03:17 pm KITAB-UL-QADR BOOK OF DESTINY INTRODUCTION Whether the fate of man is predestined or he himself is the architect of it, is a question which has been very often discussed by scholars of all times. This problem is significantly important as no sensible man. not even the man in the street, can afford to ignore it. Faith in Taqdir (Destiny) has a very deep impact upon our lives and we always find our lives oscillating between determinism and freewill. As a man looks around himself and looks to his own self and within himself, he finds that there are hundred and one things in shaping and reshaping of which he has no hand, e.g. in determining the climate of the land in which he is born, in canalising the courses of rivers which flow therein and in determining the nature of the soil thereof. He finds himself absolutely powerless. As he looks to himself he finds that there are so many things In him which are beyond his control, viz. the measure of intellect he has been endowed with, the shape and form of his physical structure with which he has been sent to this world, and the inclinations and so many other qualities of head and heart which are embedded in his very nature. In all these aspects of life he finds himself helpless before the Great and Mighty Power that created him. On the other hand, there are so many things in which man finds himself quite empowered. As he looks to the marvellous achievements of man despite all odds, he finds it difficult to believe that he is a mere puppet in the mighty hand of Nature. This problem of predestination and freewill, in which man finds his life hanging, has been adequately solved by the Qur'an and the Sunnah. We give below a brief summary of their elucidations. The first principle which Islam lays down in regard to Taqdir is that man is neither completely the master of his fate nor is he bound to the blind law of predestination. So far as the sovereignty of Allah's Will is concerned, it is all-pervading and nothing falls outside its orbit. Not even a leaf, therefore, stirs without His Will. It is His Will that prevails everywhere. To God belongs the sovereignty of Heavens and the Earth. He created what He pleaseth, giving to whom He pleaseth females and to whom He pleaseth males or conjoining them males and females, and He maketh whom He pleaseth barren, verify He hath knowledge and power (xlii. 48). Men are, therefore, completely subordinate to the overruling power of God, they cannot do anything unless God wills so. "Whom God guideth he is the rightly-guided. Whom he sendeth stray, thou wilt not find a patron to set him right (xviii. 16). His mighty grasp is, therefore, over everything. The Almighty Lord,Who has created everything and has determined its nature and course, has in His infinite wisdom and mercy conferred upon man a limited autonomy according to which a man is free to do or not to do a certain thing. It is because of this autonomy enjoyed by man that he is hold accountable for his deeds. The concept of human responsibility and that of his answerability for his deeds and misdeeds becomes meaningless if he is supposed to be deprived of this autonomy. There are, a large number of verses in the Holy Qur'an which make a pointed reference to the autonomy conferred upon man. Man shall have nothing but that what he strives for (liii. 39). Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (viii. 53; xiii. 11). Those who strive in His path, are guided in the right path, while those who persist in denial and sinful living have their hearts sealed against faith (ii. 7, 26; iv. 155; v;.i. 102). Allah does not compel belief and leaves the people free to believe or disbelieve (vi. 35, 150; xvi-. 9). Whoever has done an atorn's weight of good shall meet with its reward and whoever has done an atom's weight of evil shall meet with its consequences (xcix. 7-8). It should be borne in mind in this connection that the word Taqdir used in the Qur'an does not always signify something predestined. It at times implies a measure or the latent potentialities or possibilities with which Allali created man and all things of Nature. For example: He created everything for its Destiny (or its Measure) (xxv.2). In Sura 54, verse 9 (the words are): We created everything according to a Measure or Destiny. In both these verses Destiny impiies the inward reach of things, their latent potentialities or possibilities. The idea of Destiny as we find in the hadith that God wrote down the decrees regarding the created world fifty thousand years before He created the Heavens and the Earth does not in any way mean that God created a block Universe, finished off and complete, bound to the iron formulae of Nature. Here the idea behind Taqdir is that the creation of this universe is not accidental but something preplanned and pre-conceived and it was shaped according to the Grand Design of the Greatest Designer.There is no element of chance in the creation of this Universe. Everything is well-set and well-planned. The idea that Allah has a foreknowledge of everything that He created and the events unfold themselves exactly according to it, does not imply that human beings have been completely deprived of the freedom of action. The foreknowledge of God is an acknowledged fact, but it should not be interpreter in the sense of predestination, for if we do so we shall have to conceive of eternity as a storehouse of ready-made events, from which they drop one by one like particles of sand in a glass hour. If we take the foreknowledge to be a reflecting mirror we shall have to deprive the Creator and the Controller of the Universe of His Creative activity. Dr Muhammad Iqbal has shed a good deal of light over this problem. He says: "Divine knowledge must be conceived as a living creative activity to which the objects that appear to exist in their own right are organically related. By conceiving God's knowledge as a kind of reflecting mirror, we no doubt save His fore-knowledge of future events, but it is obvious that we do so at the expense of His freedom. The future certainly pre-exists in the organic whole of God's creative life, but it pre-exists as an open possibility, not as a fixed order of events with definite outlines." We should bear in mind that the idea of put, present and future is something relative and is conceived by the inite wind of man. It is. however, a great now in the eye of the All-Seeing God. The whole expanse of eternity lies before Him in the shape of now. Knowledge is, therefore, an act of creative activity and not the mere reflection of it. When He decrees a thing it happens and He knows it before it happens. God in Islam is not, therefore, a prisoner of necenity. He is a free Creator. The concept of predestination in Islam, therefore, does not in any way mean helpless abandonment of oneself to otherwise unwelcome fate. It means rather co-operation with God, studying His will andbringingoneself into unison with His Planning Will. Destiny as conceived by Islam is, thus, by no stretch of imagination, fatal to the freedom of conduct and unfoldment of one's inherent possibilities; it is a source of inspiration and encouragement and opens up vast fields of human activity. It is not a message of despondency and despair, but a source of solace, comfort and inspiration and a powerful means of evoking a sense of piety and humility and self-surrender to the Will of God. It does not inculcate in mind frustration and pessimism, making his life dark and dreary, devoid of hope and promise for the future, but it teaches him to put his heart and soul in the sublime work as assigned to him by his Master. http://www.iiu.edu.my/deed/hadith/muslim/033_smt.html
|
| | Friday, December 22, 2000 - 03:38 pm And finally, MUSLIMS DON'T RELY ON THE QADDAR(DEVINE WILL OF ALLAH) TO TAKE THEM EITHER TO PARADISE OR HELL, THEY HAVE TO WORK TO EARN ONE OF THEM. Paradise with the grace of Allah and HELL with the wisdom AND JUSTFULNESS of allah. Volume 8, Book 77, Number 602: Narrated 'Ali: While we were sitting with the Prophet who had a stick with which he was scraping the earth, he lowered his head and said, "There is none of you but has his place assigned either in the Fire or in Paradise." Thereupon a man from the people said, "Shall we not depend upon this, O Allah's Apostle?" The Prophet said, "No, but carry on and do your deeds, for everybody finds it easy to do such deeds (as will lead him to his place)." The Prophet then recited the Verse: 'As for him who gives (in charity) and keeps his duty to Allah..' (92.5) PS: IF YOU TRULY WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE FREE-WILL AND THE DEVINE WILL, READ WHAT I POSTED, THEY MAY HELP YOU UNDERSTAND WITH THE HELP OF ALLAH IF YOU ARE HONEST. IF NOT, KEEP YOUR FREAKING QUESTIONS TO YOURSELF. You can't repeat the same questions over and over again. IT IS WASTE OF TIME. I will QUIZ YOU ON THE POSTS TO SEE TO SEE IF YOU READ THEM.
|
| | Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 01:37 am Do make sure you answer the question I asked? again you do not understand islam. you saying one tome the propthet is the outhoor of the quran and now you sound ypou are confusing that with the transtion of the quran. you read the quran from top to bottom but you do not understand and i know that from your above postings. if you undertand the quran you would divide the quran the way you did not, and lastly, i am finding you very inconsistant .
|
| | Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 02:35 am Sorry, I cannot follow you proberly. I will see you after a week or so. MM, If you can follow the Quarn beleave me you would not divided it the way you did it( above). I still see you that character who was trully wanted understand the quarn and dashed to the bookshop but after couple of days stop reading it. This is way i said to you do you think the quran contains only rules (shariah) and Adaab( the hell fire).
|
| | Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 02:53 am MM, . We guide who we want and not the others (the rough transalation of the ayah ) do not take that literary. The Quran is talking to everyone and by the time you pick and start reading it you are in the same position that the prophet was when he received it from allah. But if you keep reading the way you do I am telling you you will say the samething again and again. sorry about the gramamr and spelling i realised even i mispelt my name
|
| | Sunday, December 24, 2000 - 08:43 pm Assalamu Aleikum All my Muslim brothers and sisters! Idea, Did you live in Egypt? I detected the 'G' dialect in one of your posts, let me know! 'Cause I also lived there. To The Rest; MADMAC, has time and time again failed to prove anything, because he has nothing. He claims that the Qur'an was writen by Muhammad(SAW), and yet he has no evidences proving his remarks. He stands at the same position as all the other ones like him. It is human-nature to disbelief in any religion, because religions will impose rules and responsibilities. And humans hate both, a human would rather, not pray, drink to oblivious, party all week, and have as much sex as possible. And the only way to achieve this is to disassociate himself from any religion. And the above culprit fits this criteria. So, my word of advice, is to concentrate on discussing more important matters instead of wasting valuable time on such an individual. We Muslims have a duty to spread the truth about Islam, but we can not do more than that, our duty is to disprove lies such as the ones this person is claiming. But, regardless of what is said here, Islam is the world's fastest religion. Wether, MM runs around the streets of New York or Paris yelling "Islam is an evil religion." Or goes around the world, claiming such nonesense. His efforts will make no difference. Do what you all can for Islam, but do not waste your time on such nonesense. From what I understand this person has plenty of time in his hands. And according to Islam, time is very valuable. Please, protect Islam, but do not dwell too much proving this ignorant person wrong. He knows all there is to know. It is said that all non-believers of Islam, have a doubt in their hearts and know the truth of Islam. Allah (SWT) has created an unrest (a doubt) in them, deep down inside, they know what they're doing is not 100% the right thing to do. Even Christian priests and atheists know the truth, but disregard it. So, invest your time wisely. May Allah(SWT) give you rewards for all your good deeds, Aamiin. And have a wonderfull Eid! AWW
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 12:48 am OK, MAD MUllah Capitulates because she doesn't want to waste her time with me. Fair enough. F.G. You left me more confused than when you started. On the one hand there are posts that say our fate ir pre-ordained. That our free will is already divined by Allah. If it's free, but he already knows the outcomes, why would he create beings he knows are simply going to live a miserable existence??? Where's the sense in that??? On the other hand it seems clear that we are suppose to have free will, the Qur'an maintains we have it, but Allah can still deny the correct path. Now if that isn't conflicting guidance I don't know what is. Of course I read what you write, unless it's ridiculously excessive. I got through your posts here no problem. No one is making you respond to squat. If you don't want to discuss things with me you can pull pitch, Like MADMULLAH. I know Asad and Arawello will hang around (Galool and Common as well). Asad Here again your incorrect usage of the English language, excusable if you hadn't already been previously advised, is appalling. I may have been mistaken when I said Mohammed wrote the Qur'an, that does not mean I'm lying. A lie requires willfull deceipt, none of which was exercised here. I thought you said in earlier posts that Mohammed wrote it, but frankly I would not have registered much of a difference between wrote and dictated. The point is it came from Mohammed and that's how it got on to the paper. Talk about nitpicking - you guys know what I meant. Arawello Abai I still don't understand what you meant. I have been reading the Qur'an consistently since June. I rad some in 1999 as well. I've read most of it now, but because the text has a somewhat laborious style, like most documents of its type, I often have to look things up again - I can't memorize them very easily. Anyway, in the English language most people read from right to left and top to bottom. I still haven't figured out your question of how do I read the Qur'an. Anyone here want to pitch in on this one?
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 01:50 am MADMULLAH, lol @ 'G' dialect. Yes, i did. and you how long have u been there? by the way, i was digging in somali history---->i need help :-)
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 02:34 am MADMULLAH, salaam alaykum my sister, Can you please e-mail me at this fa112@hotmail.com I am so honored knowing such a brillant somali sister. Will be waiting :-)
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 07:14 am mad mac---- i told you that when you are caught, you can cry like a baby and say it is appalling-----you can blame others for your mis-information (your lies)-----you can even say the Quran agrees with your sayings (while in fact It contradicts your lies) all you want. but at end, your lying, you pleas, blaming games will not work. the truth is that the Quran came from Allah to muhammad and i told you how it got on paper. propagating and insisting incorrect information about islam (without brining evidences) is telling delibrate lies, mad mac.
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 01:22 pm Asad Again you are exagerating the issue. What difference does it make if Mohammed wrote the Qur'an himself or dictated it???? I already said that maybe you said dictated. So what??? Remember when I mentioned that Mohammed wrote the Qur'an it was not a central point to any thesis I was making - nor is it now. It is, in fact, wholly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Someone took that one innocent piece of verbiage and turned it into an issue. Whether you said dictated or wrote doesn't make the slightest difference. It came from Mohammed, that is what is relevant. The nitpicking reveals the desperation and the reluctance to take the issue itself head on - can't see the forest for the trees.
|
| | Monday, December 25, 2000 - 05:27 pm mad mac---- it is still a lie-----when you say that "muhamed definately wrote the Qur'an" i told you that muhammad did not write. you said you heard from me that mohammed could read and write. that was a lie. i never told you that. also, you say that the Quran "came from Mohammed". i keep correcting you and pointing out your lies. i am telling you that the Quran came from Allah, not from muhammad. i think you are talking about yourself when you are addressing the issue of nitpicking. you failed in your attemp to prove your points from the Quran. you said the Quran would support you, but as it happened many times, the Quran did not suport you; it did contradicted you. i already told you that you are the desparate one (cying like a baby when you are caught) and that you are the exagerating one (lying about the Quran). either ways, the crying and the lying will not help you.
|
| | Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 02:40 am Whoa whoa whoa. If Mohammed did not dictate the Qur'an then how did it get here on earth? If Allah can not personally deliver it, as you yourself definately did state????? Be advised if Mohammed dictated the Qur'an to someone else than, in any reasonable definition, it came from him. You may postulate that it came through him from Allah, but that becomes postulation - since that can not be verified. Furthermore, whether you said Mohammed wrote the Qur'an or not is ultimately irrelevant. I thought you said that. Therefore it is not a lie. You can maintain that what I said was inaccurate, but that does not make it a lie. You still have not yet mastered this phrase in the English language. Incredible!!!!
|
| | Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 03:15 am "Whoa whoa whoa. If Mohammed did not dictate the Qur'an then how did it get here on earth?" who said muhammad didn't dictate? "If Allah can not personally deliver it, as you yourself definately did state?????" again, lying will not help you. i stated no such things. "Be advised if Mohammed dictated the Qur'an to someone else than, in any reasonable definition, it came from him." the Quran is all Allah's words; It came from Him. it was revealed to muhammad. jibril delivered the Quran and muhammad transmitted the message of the Quran. muhammad did not own the Quran; it is Allah's. if the Quran were something a human (muhammad) could produce, there would be many contradictions and errors. "You may postulate that it came through him from Allah, but that becomes postulation - since that can not be verified." well, you believe(d) that muhammad wrote the Quran. was your believe a guess (postulation)? did you verify your sayings? did you verify Allah's existence if you believe His existence? didn't you say that there was no judgement day in the hereafter? did you postulate this believe of yours or did you verify it? "Furthermore, whether you said Mohammed wrote the Qur'an or not is ultimately irrelevant." well, i never told you that muhammad wrote the Quran. i was just pointing out your lies or misinformation (whether delibare or not). "I thought you said that." well, not only you thought wrong, but you lied too. "Therefore it is not a lie. You can maintain that what I said was inaccurate, but that does not make it a lie." it was wrong for you to say what i didn't tell you. i know you to be a lair. i caught your lies many times. "You still have not yet mastered this phrase in the English language. Incredible!!!!" it is not the english language, mad mac. it is you----your lies that it are easy to catch.
|
| | Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 04:30 am MAD, I will pull my pitch as you said. I don't have the abracadabra and the legerdemain to play the right into your mind. I am overjoyed by the young talented people on the net who encreasingly come to help a hand to islam and voice their unwavering support to it. We are all on the same sheet of melody and tune about this matter of islam. So, one represents the other. If I don't speak they will speak. That is how it works. You will always be confused as long you pretend to know what you are asking for. You ask then you pretend to know and dismiss what you are told as cheap. There is something wrong with that picture of yours. You flip flop in between here and there being unsure of your state of mind. You are not happy with your current state. A good sign?. Who knows. That is better than some people's state where they are happy with their disorientation of faith. May Allah help you see the light. The last day of Ramadan and a little squeeze on my account to do some shopping will do my day. If you excuse my boredom I am pulling out yankee boy.
|
| | Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 08:48 am MM, you simply want to confuse yourself. The message of the posting are clear. if you read the message carefully, it will tell you that Allah's knowledge is not confined by time. In regard to Allah, all the time is Now. We as humans can not perceive that. Mathematically, we can prove that there is infinite number of dimensions but our mind can only conceive 3 dimensions. Don't confuse the actual existence of something and the limitation of our minds(perceptions). To us there is beginning and ending but to Allah there is no beginning and no ending because beginning and ending are caused by time. so, what you have as a result of that? you have Allah who is All-knower, He knows what you did,what you are doing and what you will do.In other words Allah has your Plan. The Plan you will go through. That does NOT contradict you Free Will to choose. Froms the above posting: "We should bear in mind that the idea of past, present and future is something relative and is conceived by the inite mind of man. It is. however, a great now in the eye of the All-Seeing God. The whole expanse of eternity lies before Him in the shape of now. Knowledge is, therefore, an act of creative activity and not the mere reflection of it. When He decrees a thing it happens and He knows it before it happens" "Here the idea behind Taqdir is that the creation of this universe is not accidental but something preplanned and pre-conceived and it was shaped according to the Grand Design of the Greatest Designer.There is no element of chance in the creation of this Universe. Everything is well-set and well-planned" The key word here is that {before/after} is with respect to us. Allah gave human and Jinn an Aqli(understanding which leads to Free will) and that's where responsibility is coming from. Don't deny MM, that Allah set this process for Humans and Jinn as Allah set every thing else a process to follow( some times we call it Nature). But all our wishes and Free Will falls under the big Will of Allah. Remember he is the one who created you and your Free Will. With your free will, there is no way you can get out from His Will and you will be accountable for what you CHOSE for yourself after the Truth came to you. Although, Allah gave humans an Aqli and understanding, He promised(in the Quran) that He will not punish some one to whom His message did not come. Allah Also promised that he will be fair.This means that you will only be punished for what you've done or didn't, after you were told to do it or not to do it. That what the accountability means and that what Aqli and Understanding brings. MM You are given an Aqli which is very capable of understanding the Haq(Truth) and in the day of Reckoning you will be asked what have you done with your Aqli. Did you became arrogant and misused the Aqli?. Allah knows best EID Mubarak my dear sisters and brothers. I wish you all reach the next Ramadan with good health and high Muslim spirit. Amin
|
| | Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 09:47 pm Asad OK, let me ask you this in the simplest terms: What are the origins of the Qur'an? Who actually wrote it down on paper and where does Islam say it came from?? Without being too verbose, can you kind of give me the A-Z on this??? Because I'm getting a lot of conflicting information. Formerguest. Sahib, the phrase is pull pitch. It comes from rotary wing aviators. When they pull pitch they take off (i.e. an analogy for leaving). When we are egressing off of an objective we say we're pulling pitch - meaning we're getting out of here. So for proper employment of this phrase you would say "I'm going to pull pitch" or just "I'm pulling pitch". Just an FYI sort of thing. Nour Interesting concept concerning time and space in relation to Allah. I'll have to give this one some thought. I've spent some time considering time and space but my lack of physics knowledge makes this harder to conceptualize than might otherwise be the case. But worth pondering for sure.
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 06:07 am "Asad, OK, let me ask you this in the simplest terms:" okay. "What are the origins of the Qur'an? Who actually wrote it down on paper and where does Islam say it came from?? instead of lying about the Quran, these questions of yours would have been appropriate. "Because I'm getting a lot of conflicting information. wrong again. i told you that blaming others would not help you. i mean, it is you who is promoting mis-information (lies). no one told you about what you are claiming. "Without being too verbose can you kind of give me the A-Z on this???" i hope this information below is not too verbose (effusive)------in order to discredit what you say about the Quran." "Transmission of the Qur'an: Oral & Written. There are hundreds of religions flourishing around the world: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Bahaism, Babism, Zoroastrianism, Mormonism, Jehovas Witnesses, Jainism, Confucianism etc. And each of these religions claim that their scripture is preserved from the day it was revealed (written) until our time. A religious belief is as authentic as the authenticity of the scripture it follows. And for any scripture to be labeled as authentically preserved it should follow some concrete and rational criteria. Imagine this scenario: A professor gives a three hour lecture to his students. Imagine still that none of the students memorized this speech of the professor or wrote it down. Now forty years after that speech, if these same students decided to replicate professor's complete speech word for word, would they be able to do it? Obviously not. Because the only two modes of preservation historically is through writing and memory. Therefore, for any claimants to proclaim that their scripture is preserved in purity, they have to provide concrete evidence that the Scripture was written in its entirety AND memorized in its entirety from the time it was revealed to our time, in a continuous and unbroken chain. If the memorization part doesn't exist parallel to the written part to act as a check and balance for it, then there is a genuine possibility that the written scripture may loose its purity through unintentional and intentional interpolations due to scribal errors, corruption by the enemies, pages getting decomposed etc, and these errors would be concurrently incorporated into subsequent texts, ultimately loosing its purity through ages. Now, of all the religions mentioned above, does any one of them possess their scriptures in its entirety BOTH in writing AND in memory from the day of its revelation until our time. None of them fit this required criteria, except one: This unique scripture is the Qur'an - revelation bestowed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) 1,418 years ago, as a guidance for all of humankind. Transmission of the Qur'an: Oral & Written 1. Memorization: 'In the ancient times, when writing was scarcely used, memory and oral transmission was exercised and strengthened to a degree now almost unknown' relates Michael Zwettler.[1] Prophet Muhammad (S): The First Memorizer It was in this 'oral' society that Prophet Muhammad (S) was born in Mecca in the year 570 C.E. At the age of 40, he started receiving divine Revelations from the One God, Allah, through Archangel Gabriel. This process of divine revelations continued for about 22.5 years just before he passed away. Prophet Muhammad (S) miraculously memorized each revelation and used to proclaim it to his Companions. Angel Gabriel used to refresh the Quranic memory of the Prophet each year. 'The Prophet (S) was the most generous person, and he used to become more so (generous) particularly in the month of Ramadan because Gabriel used to meet him every night of the month of Ramadan till it elapsed. Allah's Messenger (S) use to recite the Qur'an for him. When Gabriel met him, he use to become more generous than the fast wind in doing good'. [2] 'Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet (S) once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he (Prophet) died'. [3] The Prophet himself use to stay up a greater part of the night in prayers and use to recite Quran from memory. Prophet's Companions: The First Generation Memorizers Prophet Muhammad (S) encouraged his companions to learn and teach the Quran: 'The most superior among you (Muslims) are those who learn the Qur'an and teach it'. [4] 'Some of the companions who memorized the Quran were: 'Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Ibn Masud, Abu Huraira, Abdullah bin Abbas, Abdullah bin Amr bin al-As, Aisha, Hafsa, and Umm Salama'. [5] 'Abu Bakr, the first male Muslim to convert to Islam used to recite the Quran publicly in front of his house in Makka'. [6] The Prophet also listened to the recitation of the Qur'an by the Companions: 'Allah Apostle said to me (Abdullah bin Mas'ud): "Recite (of the Quran) to me". I said: "Shall I recite it to you although it had been revealed to you?!" He Said: "I like to hear (the Quran) from others". So I recited Sura-an-Nisa' till I reached: "How (will it be) then when We bring from each nation a witness and We bring you (O Muhammad) as a witness against these people?"' (4:41) 'Then he said: "Stop!" Behold, his eyes were shedding tears then'. [7] Many Quranic memorizers (Qurra) were present during the lifetime of the Prophet and afterwards through out the then Muslim world. 'At the battle of Yamama, many memorizers of the Quran were martyred. 'Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al Ansari, who was one of those who use to write the Divine Revelations: Abu Bakr sent me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra (those who memorized the entire Quran) at other place…"' [8] 'Over the centuries of the Islamic Era, there have arisen throughout the various regions of the Islamic world literally thousands of schools devoted specially to the teaching of the Quran to children for the purpose of memorization. These are called, in Arabic, katatib (singular: Kuttab). It is said that the Caliph 'Umar (634-44) first ordered the construction of these schools in the age of the great expansion'. [9] Second Generation Memorizers: "…Quranic schools were set up everywhere. As an example to illustrate this I may refer to a great Muslim scholar, of the second Muslim generation, Ibn 'Amir, who was the judge of Damascus under the Caliph Umar Ibn 'Abd Al-Aziz. It is reported that in his school for teaching the Quran there were 400 disciples to teach in his absence". [10] Memorizers in Subsequent Generations: The Number of Katatib and similar schools in Cairo (Egypt) alone at one time exceeded two thousand. [11] Currently both in the Muslim and non-Muslim countries thousands of schools with each instructing tens of hundreds of students the art of memorizing the entire Quran. In the city of Chicago itself, there are close to 40+ Mosques, with many of them holding class for children instructing them the art of Quranic memorization. Further Points of Consideration: Muslims recite Quran from their memory in all of their five daily prayers. Once a year, during the month of Fasting (Ramadan), Muslims listen to the complete recitation of the Quran by a Hafiz (memorizer of the entire Quran) It's a tradition among Muslims that before any speech or presentation, marriages, sermons, Quran is recited. Conclusion: Quran is the only book, religious or secular, on the face of this planet that has been completely memorized by millions. These memorizers range from ages 6 and up, both Arabic and non-Arabic speakers, blacks, whites, Orientals, poor and wealthy. Thus the process of memorization was continuous , from Prophet Muhammad's (S) time to ours with an unbroken chain. "The method of transmitting the Quran from one generation to the next by having he young memorize the oral recitation of their elders had mitigated somewhat from the beginning the worst perils of relying solely on written records…" relates John Burton. [12] "This phenomenon of Quranic recital means that the text has traversed the centuries in an unbroken living sequence of devotion. It cannot, therefore, be handled as an antiquarian thing, nor as a historical document out of a distant past. The fact of hifz (Quranic Memorization) has made the Qur'an a present possession through all the lapse of Muslim time and given it a human currency in every generation never allowing its relegation to a bare authority for reference alone" reflects Kenneth Cragg. [13] 2. Written Text of the Quran Prophet's Lifetime: Prophet Muhammad (S) was very vigilant in preserving the Quran in the written form from the very beginning up until the last revelation. The Prophet himself was unlettered, did not knew how to read and write, therefore he called upon his numerous scribes to write the revelation for him. Complete Quran thus existed in written form in the lifetime of the Prophet. Whenever a new revelation use to come to him, the Prophet would immediately call one of his scribes to write it down. 'Some people visited Zaid Ibn Thabit (one of the scribes of the Prophet) and asked him to tell them some stories about Allah's Messenger. He replied: "I was his (Prophet's) neighbor, and when the inspiration descended on him he sent for me and I went to him and wrote it down for him…" [14] Narrated by al-Bara': There was revealed 'Not equal are those believers who sit (home) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah' (4:95). The Prophet said: 'Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the ink pot and scapula bone.' Then he (Prophet) said: 'Write: Not equal are those believers…' [15] Zaid is reported to have said: 'We use to compile the Qur'an from small scraps in the presence of the Apostle'. [16] 'The Prophet, while in Madinah, had about 48 scribes who use to write for him'. [17] Abdullah Ibn 'Umar relates:… 'The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Do not take the Qur'an on a journey with you, for I am afraid lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy"' [18] During the Prophet's last pilgrimage, he gave a sermon in which he said: 'I have left with you something which if you will hold fast to it you will never fall into error - a plain indication, the Book of God (Quran) and the practice of his Prophet…' [19] 'Besides the official manuscripts of the Quran kept with the Prophet, many of his companions use to possess their own written copies of the revelation'. [20] 'A list of Companions of whom it is related that they had their own written collections included the following: Ibn Mas'ud, Ubay bin Ka'b, Ali, Ibn Abbas, Abu Musa, Hafsa, Anas bin Malik, Umar, Zaid bin Thabit, Ibn Al-Zubair, Abdullah ibn Amr, Aisha, Salim, Umm Salama, Ubaid bin Umar'. [21] 'The best known among these (Prophet's Scribes) are: Ibn Masud, Ubay bin Kab and Zaid bin Thabit'. [22] 'Aisha and Hafsa, the wives of the Prophet had their own scripts written after the Prophet had died'. [23] Conclusion: The complete Quran was written down in front of the Prophet by several of his scribes and the companions possess their own copies of the Quran in the Prophet's lifetime. However the written material of the Quran in the Prophet's possession were not bounded between the two covers in the form of a book, because the period of revelation of the Qur'an continued up until just a few days before the Prophet's death. The task of collecting the Qur'an as a book was therefore undertaken by Abu Bakr, the first successor to the Prophet. Written Qur'an in First Generation At the battle of Yamama (633 CE), six months after the death of the Prophet, a number of Muslims, who had memorized the Quran were killed. Hence it was feared that unless a written official copy of the Quran were prepared, a large part of revelation might be lost. Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)…so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'…So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)…" [24] Now, a committee was formed to under take the task of collecting the written Quranic material in the form of a book. The committee was headed by Zaid bin Thabit, the original scribe of the Prophet, who was also a memorizer of the complete Quran. '…Zaid bin Thabit had committed the entire Quran to memory…' [25] The compilers in this committee, in examining written material submitted to them, insisted on very stringent criteria as a safeguard against any errors. 1. The material must have been originally written down in the presence of the Prophet; nothing written down later on the basis of memory alone was to be accepted. [26] 2. The material must be confirmed by two witnesses, that is to say, by two trustworthy persons testifying that they themselves had heard the Prophet recite the passage in question. [27] 'The manuscript on which the Qur'an was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with Umar (the second successor), till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, 'Umar's daughter (and wife of the Prophet)'. [28] This copy of the Quran, prepared by the committee of competent companions of the Prophet (which included Memorizers of the Quran) was unanimous approved by the whole Muslim world. If they committee would have made a error even of a single alphabet in transcribing the Quran, the Qurra (memorizers of the Quran) which totaled in the tens of hundreds would have caught it right away and correct it. This is exactly where the neat check and balance system of preservation of the Quran comes into play, but which is lacking for any other scripture besides the Quran. Official written copy by Uthman The Quran was originally revealed in Quraishi dialect of Arabic. But to facilitate the people who speak other dialects, in their understanding and comprehension, Allah revealed the Quran finally in seven dialects of Arabic. During the period of Caliph Uthman (second successor to the Prophet) differences in reading the Quran among the various tribes became obvious, due to the various dialectical recitations. Dispute was arising, with each tribe calling its recitation as the correct one. This alarmed Uthman, who made a official copy in the Quraishi dialect, the dialect in which the Quran was revealed to the Prophet and was memorized by his companions. Thus this compilation by Uthman's Committee is not a different version of the Quran (like the Biblical versions) but the same original revelation given to the Prophet by One God, Allah. Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham (Syria) and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azherbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said to Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and Christians did before'. So Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, 'Send us the manuscripts of the Quran so that we may compile the Quranic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you'. Hafsa sent it to Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, 'In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Quran, then write it in their (Quraishi) tongue'. They did so, and when they had written many copies, Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other Quranic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt…" [29] Again a very stringent criteria was set up by this Committee to prevent any alteration of the Revelation. 1. The earlier recension (Original copy prepared by Abu Bakr) was to serve as the principal basis of the new one. [30] 2. Any doubt that might be raised as to the phrasing of a particular passage in the written text was to be dispelled by summoning persons known to have learned the passage in question from the Prophet. [31] 3. Uthman himself was to supervise the work of the Council. [32] When the final recension was completed, Uthman sent a copy of it to each of the major cities of Makka, Damascus, Kufa, Basra and Madina. The action of Uthman to burn the other copies besides the final recension, though obviously drastic, was for the betterment and harmony of the whole community and was unanimously approved by the Companions of the Prophet. Zaid ibn Thabit is reported to have said: "I saw the Companions of Muhammad (going about) saying, 'By God, Uthman has done well! By God, Uthman has done well!" [33] Another esteemed Companion Musab ibn Sad ibn Abi Waqqas said: "I saw the people assemble in large number at Uthman's burning of the prescribed copies (of the Quran), and they were all pleased with his action; not a one spoke out against him". [34] Ali ibn Abu Talib, the cousin of the Prophet and the fourth successor to the Prophet commented: "If I were in command in place of Uthman, I would have done the same". [35] Of the copies made by Uthman, two still exist to our day. One is in the city of Tashkent, (Uzbekistan) and the second one is in Istanbul (Turkey). Below is a brief account of both these copies: 1. The copy which Uthman sent to Madina was reportedly removed by the Turkish authorities to Istanbul, from where it came to Berlin during World War I. The Treaty of Versailles, which concluded World War I, contains the following clause: 'Article 246: Within six months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, Germany will restore to His Majesty, King of Hedjaz, the original Koran of Caliph Othman, which was removed from Madina by the Turkish authorities and is stated to have been presented to the ex-Emperor William II". [36] 'This manuscript then reached Istanbul, but not Madina (Where it now resides)'. [37] 2. The second copy in existence is kept in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. 'It may be the Imam (master) manuscript or one of the other copies made at the time of Uthman'. [38] It Came to Samarkand in 890 Hijra (1485) and remained there till 1868. Then it was taken to St.Petersburg by the Russians in 1869. It remained there till 1917. A Russian orientalist gave a detailed description of it, saying that many pages were damaged and some were missing. A facsimile, some 50 copies, of this mushaf (copy) was produced by S.Pisareff in 1905. A copy was sent to the Ottoman Sultan 'Abdul Hamid, to the Shah of Iran, to the Amir of Bukhara, to Afghanistan, to Fas and some important Muslim personalities. One copy is now in the Columbia University Library (U.S.A.). [39] 'The Manuscript was afterwards returned to its former place and reached Tashkent in 1924, where it has remained since'. [40] Conclusion 'Two of the copies of the Qur'an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph Uthman, are still available to us today and their text and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to do, with any other copy of the Quran, be it in print or handwritten, from any place or period of time. They will be found identical'. [41] It can now be proclaimed, through the evidences provided above, with full conviction and certainty that the Prophet memorized the entire Quran, had it written down in front of him through his scribes, many of his companions memorized the entire revelation and in turn possess their own private copies for recitation and contemplation. This process of dual preservation of the Quran in written and in the memory was carried in each subsequent generation till our time, without any deletion, interpolation or corruption of this Divine Book. Sir Williams Muir states, " There is otherwise every security, internal and external, that we possess the text which Muhammad himself gave forth and used". [42] Sir William Muir continues, "There is probably no other book in the world which has remained twelve centuries (now fourteen) with so pure a text". [43] This divine protection provided to the Quran, the Last Reveled Guide to Humanity, is proclaimed by One God in the Quran: 'We* (Allah) have, without doubt, send down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption)' (Quran - Chapter 15, Verse 9). *('We' is the plural of Majesty, and not the Christian plural of trinity) Compare this divine and historical preservation of the Quran with any literature, be it religious or secular and it becomes evident that none possess similar miraculous protection. And as states earlier, a belief is as authentic as the authenticity of its scripture. And if any scripture is not preserved, how can we be certain that the belief arising out of this scripture is divine or man made, and if we are not sure about the belief itself, then our salvation in the hereafter would be jeopardized. Thus this above evidence for the protection of the Quran from any corruption is a strong hint about its divine origin." http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm ------------------------------------- "Who Wrote the Holy Quran" ------------------------------------- Quran, in Arabic, could only have been written by ONE of 3 possible sources: 1 the Arabs 2 Mohammad (peace be upon him) 3 Allah (GOD) (NOTE: The first part is not meant to be a rigorous proof. It is something to ponder upon. However, the second part, about Mohammad [pbuh] wrote it' contains more extensive proof.) Besides the above mentioned sources, Quran couldn't possibly have been written by ANYONE else. No other source is possible, because Quran is written in pure, rich, and poetic Arabic, which was not known to anyone other than the above mentioned sources, at that time. The Arabic language was at its peak in expression, richness, vocabulary, artistic, and poetic value during the time the Quran was being revealed. Anyone speaking the classical Arabic ( the Arabic of Quran at the time it was revealed) would argue that a non-Arab entity couldn't possibly have written such an extensive and brilliant piece of literature in the Arabic language. Quran could only have been written by an Arabic speaking entity. An entity, who's knowledge, style, vocabulary, grammar, and way of expression was so powerful that it impacted the entire Arabian peninsula, the east, the west, and continues to impact people all over the globe today! At no other time, in the history of Arabic language, had it ever achieved its peak in expression, literature, and development, than the time of Arabia during the 6th Century, the time when Quran was being revealed. At no other time in the history of Arabic language had the language ever achieved its highest potential than the time of Arabia during the 6th Century, the time when Quran was being revealed. The language reached its peak in richness, artistic value, and poetry, during that time. With the Arabic language at its peak, and the best of Arabic writers, poets present in Arabia, it is impossible that a non-Arabic speaking entity would write a book like Quran and have such a dynamite impact on the Arabs! So only an Arabic speaking entity could have write Quran. With that in mind, we're left with three choies: 1 - the Arabs wrote it 2 - Mohammad (pbuh) wrote it 3 - Allah (swt) wrote it Lets examine the three choces one by one. (1) Arabs Wrote it ? --------------------- What Quran teaches goes DIRECTLY against the pagan Arab culture, religion, and gods, that existed before the Quran was revealed. Quran condemns idol worshipping, but the Arabs, loved their idol gods, and worshipped them regularly. Quran raised the status of women; the Arabs treated women next to animals. The Arabs would never write something that goes against their most important belief of idol worshipping. Quran goes against most of the social habbits (such as backbiting, slandering, name calling, etc) which the Arabs were heavily indulged into. For example, the Arabs would call insulting nicknames such as Abu Jahal (the father of ignorance). Quran condemns and prohibits taking interest on money, whereas, the Arabs freely levied heavy interest rates in loans and businesses. Quran condemns and prohibits Alcohol drinking, whereas, the Arabs consumed alcohol freely. The Quran condemns and prohibits gambling, whereas, the Arabs were some of the worst gamblers. The Arabs would never write something so comprehensively against just about all of their customs and culture and religious beliefs, as the Quran is. During the time of the Holy Prophet (pbuh), the Arabs would indulge in all the social habbits that the Quran condemns and prohibits. How can Arabs then write something that would negate their entire society's norms and ideologies ? Did a group of Arabs or an individual Arab write Quran? Perhaps a rebel Arab beduoin, or a society's misfit, or someone with different ideals and norms decided one day to write Quran? The answer to those questions are also 'no'. Because, if we read Quran, we notice that there is no author ! No individual has his/her name written on the cover of Quran! Anytime an individual writes a book, he/she writes his/her name on the cover. The author's name always appears on his/her book, and there is always an author who is credited for writing that book. No one in the history of the world has EVER claimed to have written the Quran, nor anyone's name ever appeared in front of the Quran as bein the 'author'. This is the only book in the world without an author. No one in the world has ever been accused of writing the Holy Quran, except the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), by non-muslims. Quran has no author, and no group or individual in Arabia ever claimed to have written it, nor any group or an indvidual recited, taught, and explained Quran except the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and his followers. The Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) was the only Arabian who first practiced, explained, and preached Quran, and ended up making a lot of Arab tribes enemies. Any historian, Muslim or non-Muslim would argue that the only possible source of Quran can be the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), the man responsible to recite it, teach it, and expalin it to the people of Arabia. In fact, many historians today still think that only Mohammad (pbuh) could possibly have written it. This leads one to conclude that the Prophet (pbuh) must have written it ! (2) Mohammad (pbuh) wrote it ? ------------------------------ First, he was illiterate !! How can an illiterate person come up with such a rich, poetic, intellectual, and inspiring text that it rocked the entire Arabia ? Mohammad (pbuh) never went to school ! No one taught him. He had no teacher of any kind in any subjects. How can he have the knowledge of all the science, astronomy, oceanography, etc that is contained in the Quran ? ( For example, the mention of ocean currents, stars, earth, moon, sun and their fixed paths in Soorah Rahman; and many other scientific statements that are found in Quran, that I cannot state in this short article) When Quran was revealed, the Arabic language was at its peak in richness, poetic value, literature, etc. Quran came and challenged the best literature in Arabic, the best poetry in Arabic of the time. Mohammad (pbuh) being illiterate couldnt possibly have come up with something so immaculate that it even exceded the best of poetry, and literature in Arabic at the time of the language's PEAK development. Arabic language had never been so rich in expression, poetic value, vocabulary, and variety in literature, as it was in the time of Quran. At a time like this, Quran came and exceeded the best of Arabic in all aspects of the language: poetry, literature, expression, etc. Any classical Arabic speaker would appreciate the unbeatten, unchallenged, and unmatched beauty of the language of Quran. An illiterate man is simply not capable of writing such a book. Mohammad (pbuh) had no reason to come up with something like Quran, and cause the entire society of Arabia to become his enemy. Why would he do something like that? Why would he write something going against almost all of the norms of the society, and lose his family, relatives, friends, and other loved ones , and not to mention all the wealth he lost ? Quran was revealed over a period of 23 years ! A very long time! Is it possible for someone to maintain the same exact style of Arabic speech , as demonstrated in Quran, for over 23 years ? Also, what the prophet Mohammad (saaw) used to say is recorded in what we call his hadeeth (sunnah). If we look at the Arabic style of the hadeeth, and compare it with the style of Quran, we can clearly see that they are clearly DIFFERENT, and DISTINGUISHABLE Arabic styles. The prophet (saaw) spoke in public. It does not make sense that a man has two UNIQUE, Distinguishable, and completely different styles of speech in public. Yet another reason why Mohammad (saaw) couldn't possibly have written Quran. Quran was revealed over a period of 23 years ! A very long time! Is it possible for someone to maintain the same exact style of Arabic speech , as demonstrated in Quran over 23 years ? Here's what our famous Muslim Scholar, Ahmad Deedat said: [From Ahmed Deedat] WAS QURAN WRITTEN OR INSPIRED? ------------------------------ "Behold! The angels said: "O Mary! God has chosen you and purified you - Chosen you above the women of all nations." Qur'an-3:42 THE SOURCE OF HIS MESSAGE "Chosen you above the women of all nations." Such an honour is not to be found given to Mary even in the Christian Bible! ........... Knowing full-well, and believing as we do, that the whole Quran is the veritable Word of God, we will nevertheless agree, for the sake of argument, with the enemies of Muhammed (pbuh) for a moment, that he wrote it. We can now expect some cooperation from the unbeliever. Ask him, "Have you any qualms in agreeing that Muhammed (pbuh) was an Arab?" Only an opinionated fool will hesitate to agree. In that case there is no sense in pursuing any discussion. Cut short the talk. Close the book! With the man of reason, we proceed. "That this Arab, in the first instance, was addressing other Arabs. He was not talking to Indian Muslims, Chinese Muslims, or Nigerian Muslims. He was addressing his own people - the Arabs. Whether they agreed with him or not, he told them in the most sublime form - words that were seared into the hearts and minds of his listeners that Mary the mother of Jesus -A JEWESS- was chosen above the women of all nations. Not his own mother, nor his wife nor his daughter, nor any other Arab woman, but a Jewess! Can one explain this? Because to everyone his own mother or wife, or daughter would come before other women. Why would the Prophet of Islam honour a woman from his opposition! and a Jewess at that! belonging to a race which had been looking down upon his people for three thousand years? Just as they still look down upon their Arab brethren today. SARAH AND HAGAR The Jews get their cock-eyed racism from their Holy Bible, where they are told their father, Abraham, had two wives -Sarah and Hagar. They say that they are the children of Abraham through Sarah, his legitimate wife; that their Arab brethren have descended through Hagar, a "bondwoman", and that as such, the Arabs are inferior breed. Will anyone please explain the anomaly as to why Muhammed (pbuh) (if he is the author) chose this Jewess for such honour? The answer is simple - HE HAD NO CHOICE - he had no right to speak of his own desire. "IT IS NO LESS THAN AN INSPIRATION SENT DOWN TO HIM." (Qur'an, 53:4). SURA MARYAM There is a Chapter in the Holy Quran, named Sura Maryam "Chapter Mary" (XIX) named in honour of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ (pbuh); again, such an honour is not to be found given to Mary in the Christian Bible. Out of the 66 books of the Protestants and 73 of the Roman Catholics, not one is named after Mary or her son. You will find books named after Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul and two score more obscure names, but not a single one is that of Jesus or Mary! If Muhammed (pbuh) was the author of the Holy Quran, then he would not have failed to include in it with MARYAM, the mother of Jesus, his own mother - AMINA, his dear wife - KHADIJA, or his beloved daughter - FATIMA. But No! No! this can never be. The Quran is not his handiwork! Another Muslim writes: -----------------------------------------------FORWARDED ARTICLE--- From: Abu Abdullah; Subject: Re: Mohammad Wrote the Quran ?? [KORAN] Date: Sat, 05 Aug 95 12:44:14 EDT -------------------------------------------------------- I was reading about the charge that the prophet, Mohammed (pbuh), has written the Quran himself. Before you go any further in reading this post, please ask yourself whether you are a honest truth seeker or just another argumentative person, if the former, continue, otherwise, save your time and jump to the next post. Islam is based on faith that is supported by a number of strong miracles such as knowing what events to take place ahead of time or coming up with supernatural deeds in front of people. The holy Quran has these signs and much more. First, The holy Quran predicted many events to take place ahead of the time of the revelation of that verse; for example, predicting the destruction of Persian empire at a time where the later had a monumental victory over Rome. If the prophet, as some people claim, has written the Quran, then he would have put his future in real jeopardy (50% chance) since neither satellite photos nor on-ground intelligence personnel were available to him at the revelation time. Further, numerous details about many natural phenomena were detailed in the Quran and, until recently, they were proven by experts to be amazingly accurate. For example of the physical development of the fetus inside the womb along with timing given by many verses matches exactly what leading authorities in Embryology are claiming to be recent discoveries. Moreover, verses that gives descriptions about the creation of the universe and the function of mountains in balancing earth and many other descriptions/explanations are available to be read and to be understood. If the prophet was the author, wouldn't he be prone to make weak inferences similar to those who claim that earth is square and whoever says otherwise should be killed? The prophet also has demonstrated many supernatural miracles not by his own power, but by the power of the creator. He went to Jerasalem back in one night and gave a detailed description of the carnival that was traveling on that route and also specific accedint happend to them at that noght (in those days, it takes a month or so for a round-trip). In another ocasion, he provided water for an entire army from a small plate between his hands. There are many other miracles that require serious truth seeker to read about and to think about it. From the above, it reasonable to conclude that the Quran is not the PROPHET CREATION. HE HAD NO WAY TO PREDICT ALL THESE EVENTS AND TO BE RIGHT ALL THE TIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN KNOWING THAT THE PROPHET HIMSELFE WAS ILLITERATE !!! -----------------------------end-forwarded-article--- ------------------------------------------------------------ Embryology and Life Sciences in Quran ------------------------------------------------------------- "The Developing Human. Clinically Oriented Embryology" K.L. Moore 5th Edition, Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Co. (1982) ISBN 07216 4662-X $33.95 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The work by Prof. Keith Moore is probably the most detailed study of the subject. Prof. Keith Moore is Professor and Chairman of the Department of Anatomy, University of Toronto. His books on anatomy and on embryology are used at many medical school as standard instruction books. The Yale Medical school uses both his books. The Yale Bookstore phone number for Medical books is: (203) 772-2081. Their general information number is (203) 432-4771. (New Haven, Connecticut) He is *the* authority on embryology. I strongly recommend the latest edition of the latter book as it mentions how accurately the Qur'an describes embryo development. Prof. Moore has said: "It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Qur'an about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammed from God or Allah because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Mohammed must have been a messenger of God or Allah." Prof. Marshal Johnson, Professor and Chairman of the Department of Anatomy and Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia He says: "The Qur'an describes not only the development of external form but emphasizes also the internal stages -- the stages inside the embryo of its creation and development, emphasizing major events recognized by contemporary science.... If I were to transpose myself into that era, knowing what I know today and describing things, I could not describe the things that were described. I see no evidence to refute the concept that this individual Mohammed had to be developing this information from some place, so I see nothing in conflict with the concept that Divine Intervention was involved...." ------------------------------------------------------------- To receive a copy of the article that Moore wrote about 'Highlights of Human Embryology in the Koran and Hadith' please e-mail me at adam3@netcom.com -------------------------------------------------------------- That leaves us to our third option: God wrote it ! May Allah Guide Us All to Straight Path. Ameen. QURAN: Chapter 4, Verse 82: "Do they not consider (ponder) on the Quran? If it had been from anyone except Allah, they would surely have found in it much discrepency (contradictions)." ALLAH CHALLENGES: Still unsure or doubtful ? Quran is the word of Allah. Allah challenges to His creations: Chapter 2, Verses 23 & 24 2: 23. "And if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed to our servant, Then produce a Chapter like thereunto; And call your witnesses or helpers besides Allah, If you are true." 2: 24. "But if you cannot, and surely you cannot, Then fear the fire Whose fuel is men and stones, Which is prepared for those who reject." Try reading and understanding the meaning with explanation of the following verses also ! Chapter 10, verse 38 Chapter 11, verse 13 Chapter 17 verse 88 http://www.jannah.org/articles/quranwrote.html http://www.muslim-answers.org/proofs-t.htm
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 12:22 pm Anon If this was supposed to bore us to hell, you almost succeeeded!
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 02:18 pm MM. Thanks. visit this website to read more about the history of the Quran, the collection of it, and all related subjects like, Textual integrity, logical consistency, sources, miraculous nature, supernatural eloquence, scientific nature, Prophecies and a lot more. It is really very informative website, which satisfies your curiousity. This is the website: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/ Galool. Do you have better things to say?.
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 03:55 pm galool--i thought you said (knew) that i was a *sedative*.
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 04:20 pm COMPARISON BETWEEN ISLAM AND FARRAKHANISM ISLAM, and so-called “NATION OF ISLAM” are two complete different religions. The Only thing common between them is the jargon, the language used by the both. “The nation of Islam” is a misnomer; this religion should be called Farrakhanism, after the name of its propagator. The religion of Elijah Muhammad and W. D. Muhammad, integrated the community with the Muslim community at-large, following the Qur’an and Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Louis Farrakhan joined W.D. Muhammad and gave his pledge of allegiance to him after Elijah Mohammad’s death; he later rebelled and broke his oath with impunity, or without paying any expiation, and restarted “THE NATION OF ISLAM.” Examine the following comparisons between Islam and Farrakhanism with regard to the belief or practice in each. BELIEF /PRACTICE ISLAM FARRAKHANISM God / Allah Alone ISLAM: One Unique, never appeared in any physical form; hence, no physical representation is possible. He is recognized through his 99 names. FARAKHANISM: “…Allah (GOD) appeared in the Person of Master W. Fard Muhammad, July 1930; the long awaited ‘Messiah of the Christian and the ‘Mahdi” of the Muslim.” Prophet / Messenger ISLAM: Muhammad (pbuh) is the last Prophet and the last Messenger. No Messenger or prophet will come after Muhammad (pbuh). FARAKHANISM: Elijah Muhammad was a “Messenger of Allah.’ Are there anymore messenger or Prophet after Muhammad (pbuh). The Last Day /The Life hereafter ISLAM: The life on earth as we know it will come to an end; it will be followed by the life hereafter, which includes physical resurrection of the entire humankind, judgment and the life of paradise or hell. FARAKHANISM: “…BELIEVE in the resurrection of the dead - not in physical resurrection, but in mental resurrection.” “No already physical dead person will be in Hereafter; that is slavery belief, taught to slaves to keep them under control.’ “When you are dead, you are DEAD.” The Qur’an ISLAM: It was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) between 610 and 632 C.E. It is the last revelation of Allah to mankind. FARAKHANISM: Contradictory beliefs, On one side” …BELIEVE in the Holy Qur’an and in the scriptures of all the Prophets of GOD,” and on the other side, “We, the original nation of the it is done by twenty-four of our scientist.” “Both the present Bible and the Holy Qur’an must soon give way to the Holy Book..” The Bible ISLAM: It was revealed to prophets and messenger from Moses (pbuh) to Jesus (pbuh) but was corrupted. Authenticity of statements in the Bible are judged by the Qur’an. FARAKHANISM: (See their beliefs above regarding the Qur’an) Shahadah ISLAM: It means what it say, that is, Allah is Unseen. HE is the Creator, the Sustainer. Mankind is accountable to Him Alone, and Prophet Muhammad of Arabia (pbuh) is the final and ultimate ROLE MODEL; no one can substitute. FARAKHANISM: A cover up deceived gullible Muslim. “Allah (God) appeared in the persons of Master W. Fard Muhammad,” and Muhammad of Arabia was one of the prophet, not role model for our times. The real role model and lawgiver for our times is Elijah Muhammad. Salah ISLAM: Five times a day is required; SALAH (prayer) includes QIYAM (Standing), RUKUH’ (bowing), SAJDA (Prostration), JALSA (Sitting on the floor) and recitations. FARAKHANISM: No five times daily SALAH (prayer); prayer, when done has no RUKU’ or SAJDA. Friday is a major congregation prayer day, nor for SALAH, but to say DU’A and to listen to a Minister. Zakat ISLAM: Require on accumulated wealth after. Having in possession for one year above the NISAB (certain limits), as defined in SHARI’A (Islamic Law). FARAKHANISM: It is a tax as “poor due” on income, similar to income tax. Who benefits? Sawm/Hajj ISLAM: Fasting is required in the month of Ramadan, ninth month of Islamic calendar. FARAKHANISM: Required once in a lifetime if conditions of finances, health and safety of travel are met. Fasting is required in December only. Fasting in the Month of Ramadan is optional No Hajj requirement. Farrakhan and his cronies take trips to Saudi Arabia, and by the way, to Makkah for the main purpose of image building and to raise funds from gullible rich Arabs. Lawful (Halal) / Unlawful (Haram) ISLAM: Determined by Allah, the God Alone, announced in the Qur’an or by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Recorded in the authentic Hadith sources. FARAKHANISM: Determine by W.D. Fard and announced by Elijah Muhammad. The Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) have neither relevance nor authority with regard to lawful and unlawful. FOR MORE INFO. go to www.troid.org
|
| | Wednesday, December 27, 2000 - 04:29 pm COMPARISON BETWEEN ISLAM AND FARRAKHANISM ISLAM, and so-called “NATION OF ISLAM” are two complete different religions. The Only thing common between them is the jargon, the language used by the both. “The nation of Islam” is a misnomer; this religion should be called Farrakhanism, after the name of its propagator. The religion of Elijah Muhammad and W. D. Muhammad, integrated the community with the Muslim community at-large, following the Qur’an and Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Louis Farrakhan joined W.D. Muhammad and gave his pledge of allegiance to him after Elijah Mohammad’s death; he later rebelled and broke his oath with impunity, or without paying any expiation, and restarted “THE NATION OF ISLAM.” Examine the following comparisons between Islam and Farrakhanism with regard to the belief or practice in each. BELIEF /PRACTICE ISLAM FARRAKHANISM God / Allah Alone ISLAM: One Unique, never appeared in any physical form; hence, no physical representation is possible. He is recognized through his 99 names. FARAKHANISM: “…Allah (GOD) appeared in the Person of Master W. Fard Muhammad, July 1930; the long awaited ‘Messiah of the Christian and the ‘Mahdi” of the Muslim.” Prophet / Messenger ISLAM: Muhammad (pbuh) is the last Prophet and the last Messenger. No Messenger or prophet will come after Muhammad (pbuh). FARAKHANISM: Elijah Muhammad was a “Messenger of Allah.’ Are there anymore messenger or Prophet after Muhammad (pbuh). The Last Day /The Life hereafter ISLAM: The life on earth as we know it will come to an end; it will be followed by the life hereafter, which includes physical resurrection of the entire humankind, judgment and the life of paradise or hell. FARAKHANISM: “…BELIEVE in the resurrection of the dead - not in physical resurrection, but in mental resurrection.” “No already physical dead person will be in Hereafter; that is slavery belief, taught to slaves to keep them under control.’ “When you are dead, you are DEAD.” The Qur’an ISLAM: It was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) between 610 and 632 C.E. It is the last revelation of Allah to mankind. FARAKHANISM: Contradictory beliefs, On one side” …BELIEVE in the Holy Qur’an and in the scriptures of all the Prophets of GOD,” and on the other side, “We, the original nation of the it is done by twenty-four of our scientist.” “Both the present Bible and the Holy Qur’an must soon give way to the Holy Book..” The Bible ISLAM: It was revealed to prophets and messenger from Moses (pbuh) to Jesus (pbuh) but was corrupted. Authenticity of statements in the Bible are judged by the Qur’an. FARAKHANISM: (See their beliefs above regarding the Qur’an) Shahadah (testimony of faith) ISLAM: It means what it say, that is, Allah is Unseen. HE is the Creator, the Sustainer. Mankind is accountable to Him Alone, and Prophet Muhammad of Arabia (pbuh) is the final and ultimate ROLE MODEL; no one can substitute. FARAKHANISM: A cover up deceived gullible Muslim. “Allah (God) appeared in the persons of Master W. Fard Muhammad,” and Muhammad of Arabia was one of the prophet, not role model for our times. The real role model and lawgiver for our times is Elijah Muhammad. Salah (prayer) ISLAM: Five times a day is required; SALAH (prayer) includes QIYAM (Standing), RUKUH’ (bowing), SAJDA (Prostration), JALSA (Sitting on the floor) and recitations. FARAKHANISM: No five times daily SALAH (prayer); prayer, when done has no RUKU’ or SAJDA. Friday is a major congregation prayer day, nor for SALAH, but to say DU’A and to listen to a Minister. Zakat (charity) ISLAM: Require on accumulated wealth after. Having in possession for one year above the NISAB (certain limits), as defined in SHARI’A (Islamic Law). FARAKHANISM: It is a tax as “poor due” on income, similar to income tax. Who benefits? Sawm (fasting) /Hajj (pilgramage) ISLAM: Fasting is required in the month of Ramadan, ninth month of Islamic calendar. FARAKHANISM: Required once in a lifetime if conditions of finances, health and safety of travel are met. Fasting is required in December only. Fasting in the Month of Ramadan is optional No Hajj requirement. Farrakhan and his cronies take trips to Saudi Arabia, and by the way, to Makkah for the main purpose of image building and to raise funds from gullible rich Arabs. Lawful (Halal) / Unlawful (Haram) ISLAM: Determined by Allah, the God Alone, announced in the Qur’an or by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Recorded in the authentic Hadith sources. FARAKHANISM: Determine by W.D. Fard and announced by Elijah Muhammad. The Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) have neither relevance nor authority with regard to lawful and unlawful. FOR MORE INFO. go to www.troid.org
|
| | Thursday, December 28, 2000 - 12:05 am Asad Mahadsannid. You failed in your effort to keep it concise, but at least it answered the question. Some of the information entialed therein has some flaws in it, but that's Ok. In general it addresses the point. As I said, Mohammed wrote the Qur'an (or dictated it - whichever you prefer. Dictate is more precise). I assume that Gabriel was only witnessed by Mohammed himself. That only Mohammed interacted with Gabriel. Is this correct???? If you read the origins of the Mormon faith you will find they have a background just as compelling. You ought to just check it out, if nothing else. I'm not a Mormon, but I do believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet. Where I think the Mormon Church has gone wrong is not accepting that the Bible is a flawed (useful, but flawed) document and in trying to maintain an "elected" Prophet, a ridiculous concept everybit as ridiculous as the Catholic Churches election of the Pope.
|
| | Thursday, December 28, 2000 - 04:35 am "You failed in your effort to keep it concise, but at least it answered the question." well, i'm not here to succeed and bore anyone to hell. since i failed to make you understand in my own concise words---------"the Quran is all Allah's words; It came from Him. it was revealed to muhammad. jibril delivered the Quran and muhammad transmitted the message of the Quran. muhammad did not own the Quran; it is Allah's. if the Quran were something a human (muhammad) could produce, there would be many contradictions and errors.",--------and since you asked for more information, i gave you more. "Some of the information entialed therein has some flaws in it, but that's Ok. In general it addresses the point." well, as usual, the information which you say is flaw to you-----does not mean it is actually flaw information. you pick and choose from the Quran whatever you want to believe, but i accept all of the Quran. i believe the Quran does not have any flaws, but you believe it does. that is what makes you kufar and me a muslim. "As I said, Mohammed wrote the Qur'an (or dictated it - whichever you prefer. Dictate is more precise)." you can choose to say sometimes "muhamed definately wrote the Qur'an" and other times he dictated, but the fact is that the prophet neither knew how to write nor read------and that the Quran did not come from Him; It came down from Allah to muhammad. "I assume that Gabriel was only witnessed by Mohammed himself. That only Mohammed interacted with Gabriel. Is this correct????" yes, i believe every prophet who received revelation from Allah had interaction with jibril. jibril was the deliverer of the messange of Allah to the prophets and Allah made it possible for jibril to come down with the books (Allah sometimes brough the written words of His to the prophets and most of times He made jibril to dictate to the prophets). Allah made jibril to reveal himself to the prophets he was sent to. ordinary people like you and me can not see angals, mad mac. Allah did not choose us. "If you read the origins of the Mormon faith you will find they have a background just as compelling. You ought to just check it out, if nothing else." why don't you bring the information of mormon to here so we can take a look and do comparative religion between islam and mormon? "I'm not a Mormon, but I do believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet. Where I think the Mormon Church has gone wrong is not accepting that the Bible is a flawed (useful, but flawed) document and in trying to maintain an "elected" Prophet, a ridiculous concept everybit as ridiculous as the Catholic Churches election of the Pope." well,ridiculous or not, i believe there is nothing like the Quran and i'm sure you read the reason i believe that. i'm not going to bore you again why the Quran is different than other religous books----be it the bible or the torah. i do not believe a man who says he is a prophet or a messenger from Allah after muhammad. i believe muhammad was the last messenger and prophet of Allah. anyone who claims to be one is a lair (kadaab).
|
| | Thursday, December 28, 2000 - 05:26 am I was reading some of the preface of the translation by Abdullahi Yusuf Ali and he highlights the inprecision of language. He tries to explain this at some length, since in some languages it is very difficult even to convey the correct meanings in the Qur'an, let alone get a good solid translation. I'm sure you've had this experience moving from Somali to English. I know I have movig from English to German and vice versa. This alone guarentees that: a. The English version of the qur'an is not the word of Allah. It is the best approximation that the translator could achieve. b. Meanings are lost in translation. c. Languages change. The Arabic of the 6th century is a distant cousin of current Arabic. Just as the English of the 10th century I wouldn't even understand now. Beowulf, in its raw form, is unintelligable to me. Even Abdullahi Yusuf Ali is clear on this point, that there is often debate as to true meanings of certain things because the language itself has changed over the years. Now let me take this one step further. Ali says that the original Qur'an was transmitted orally. It went from Mohammed to some of his followers and initially this oral tradition was kept alive. Many of these translators were subsequently killed in some of the early Jihads. however, enough survived to maintain an intact "chain of custody" if you will. Have you ever played that game "telephone" as a kid? You know, you make a circle and then someone whispers something into your ear, then it goes to the next kid and so on? By the time it gets to the other end the message is all distorted. Don't you think some distortion is possible from this cause alone?? This all relates to my original theory, that there's a grain of truth in what most prophets have to say, but that often the message itself gets distorted. I know you don't by this and I'm not trying to convince you of it. I'm only explaining to you what my thought process is here.
|
| | Friday, December 29, 2000 - 11:00 am mad mac----i'm sorry to disappoint you that the Quranic transmission of oral & written is not like the game (the telephone game) you played as a kid and besides all of your guessing and wishful thinking, the fact is that the Quran in arabic is the same Quran the prophet had and recited. nothing was changed. It is Allah who mentioned in the Quran------the Quran being protected. if there was some changes in the Quran (as you wish), there would be contradictions and errors.
|
| | Friday, December 29, 2000 - 04:40 pm Maa-sha-allah ANON, How true...May Allah protect you my muslim brother
|
| | Friday, December 29, 2000 - 05:17 pm Idea------wa iyaakum.
|
| | Friday, December 29, 2000 - 08:04 pm Yes, Anon is right may allah give him his blessings. Allah promised to protect the Quran. Who keeps his promise better than Allah?. Allah said: "75:16. Move not your tongue concerning the (Qurán) to make haste therewith. 17. It is for Us to collect it and to recite it: 18. But when We recite it, follow thou its recital (as promulgated): 19. Nay more, it is for Us to explain it (and make it clear): For the Reader: I came across a very interesting example given between the people of belief versus the people of disbelief. One can only see the light of Allah if Allah intended so. Perhaps that is why A disbeliever insists in seeing Darkness where others see light and blessings in the Quran. Walaa yaziidu thalimiina ila tabaaran. This is the example: 24:35-40 contain a series of similitudes, contrasting the people of faith with the people of disbelief. The contrast is drawn in terms of light and darkness. Verse 35 makes the point that the light of divine guidance is given to one who has kept the natural goodness of his heart intact. Already possessing an inner light, such a person is prepared to receive 'the light of God'. His natural goodness reinforced by faith, he comes to possess 'light upon light'. The verse reads: "God is the light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of his light is as if there is a niche, in which there is a lamp, the lamp in a glass; the glass looks as if it is a bright star. It [the lamp] is kindled from a blessed olive tree that is neither of the east nor of the west, one whose oil all but lights up, even though no fire has touched it. Light upon light! God guides to His light whomever He likes. God strikes similitudes for people, and God has knowledge of all things." The niche is the heart of the good man, and in that niche is a lamp that burns with the light of his innate goodness. The high degree of the purity and brightness of the light is emphasised. First, the lamp is enclosed in a glass, so that it has a steady and bright flame and is not put out by the wind. Second, the glass is not dirty but clear and shiny. It is like 'a bright star' so that it reflects the light well. Third, the lamp is fed with olive oil that has been extracted from a tree that was planted not on the fringe of the garden - 'neither of the east nor of the west' - but right in the middle of it, so that, being secure against the fury of the elements, it has yielded the purest kind of oil. The oil, in fact, is so pure that it would catch fire before coming into contact with fire. And when the oil, or the inner goodness of a man, does come into contact with fire or divine guidance, the result is 'light upon light'. Possessing this 'double light', one sees the heavens and the earth lit up, acquiring the master key to all knowledge and understanding, for, as the opening part of the verse says, 'God is the light of the heavens and the earth.' While verse 35 describes the state of the people of faith, verse 40 speaks of the condition of the people of disbelief. Here there is no light, only utter darkness: "or [their situation is] like layers of darkness out on a deep sea [the surface of] which is covered by a wave, on top of which there is another wave, on top of which there are clouds; layers of darkness piled one upon the other; when he [the disbeliever] puts out his hand he can hardly see it. And one who is not furnished with light by God has no light." As in verse 35, so in verse 40 the details progressively heighten the effect. A sharper contrast between light and darkness could hardly be imagined. End Quote. By Muntasir Mir, The Quran As Literature. That is the difference between A believer and a disbeliever. See what you may, think what you may, Allah spoke the truth.
|
| | Friday, December 29, 2000 - 09:00 pm MM, it is interesting to note that your arguments (and Galool's) against the Quran and/or Islam in general are the same arguments offered by the pagan Arabs some 1400 years ago and all the counter arguments are found in the Quran as FG and ANON (may Allah reward them immensely) have pointed out. So, the "i'm only explaining to you what my thought process is here" loses resonance coming from you. Please come up with new arguments or save us the boredom.
|
| | Saturday, December 30, 2000 - 01:48 am If the Qur'an was protected by Allah then why weren't previous books protected??????? The Scholar I cite, Abdullahi Yusuf Ali does not say that the Qur'an has changed (I say that it is possible there were changes from Gabriel to Mohammed and Mohammed to others during this oral tradition) he says that the Arabic language has changed. And if it hadn't then it would be the only language around that hadn't. Languages evolve constantly. Hence OUR INTERPRETATION of the Qur'an, our understanding of meaning, is suspect. That was Alis contention. He maintains that the broad meaning is clear, but on some of the specifics there is room for dissent (and indeed there is dissent, hence Wahabiism, Druze, Shiites, etc. etc.).
|
| | Saturday, December 30, 2000 - 07:26 am mad mac----since the Quran is the last book from Allah and since there is no other book to come (or no messenger to come after muhammad), the protection is stated in the Quran. besides, other books were sent to particular people and tribes only. however, the Quran was sent for all people---till the end of time. as for muhammad's transmission of the Qur'an in oral and written to others, the people memorized the Quran and he dictated the Quran to others while they wrote. i told you that the two ways in which the Quran was transmissted to others in oral (memeory) and in written (dictation), the prophet made sure they got it right. i told you that the Quran we have now in arabic is the same Quran the prophet had and recited. nothing was changed and wishful thinking and conjecturing on your part would not change that fact. also, saying that it is possible that there were changes in the Quran from Gabriel to Mohammed is another wishful thinking of yours. besides the protection of the Quran, it was not possible for jibril to make mistake in the transmission of the Quran from Allah to muhammad. you see, mad mac---angels do not err. they are programmed to do things. they do not disobey either, they are not like human beings (the jews and christians who kept changing the message).
|
| | Saturday, December 30, 2000 - 10:08 am Asad For the moment let's disregard my argument here. What about the issue of the evolution of linguistics? How do you account for this??? Second questionn: If the Qur'an was for everyone then why didn't the Chinese civilization also get such a perfect prophet and a perfect book? I mean, there were more of them than there were of Semites. Why did they get blown off and have to wait hundreds of years for the first examples to arrive and a thousand years for a real translation? Why only in the Arabic language, which is a language spoken even today by a serious moinority of the globes population??? This makes no sense. Why didn't this perfect message get sent multiple times to multiple cultures, as it did to the semites???
|
| | Saturday, December 30, 2000 - 02:03 pm "Asad For the moment let's disregard my argument here." okay, but i know that your arguments (antics) are going no where are fruitless. "What about the issue of the evolution of linguistics? How do you account for this???" mad mac, i don't think you are hearing what i'm saying to you. i do not care if people change their language and the way they speak in their language. what you are not getting is this: the the language in the Quran (the arabic in the Quran) IS THE SAME QURAN THE PROPHET RECITED. DID YOU GET THIS, MAD MAC? people can change their language. all arabs do not speak the kind of langauge in the Quran. they have different dailects, but the arabic Quran is the same langauge the prophet used. NOTHING WAS CHANGED----THAT IS EVERY LETTER AND EVERY VOWEL. "Second questionn: If the Qur'an was for everyone then why didn't the Chinese civilization also get such a perfect prophet and a perfect book? I mean, there were more of them than there were of Semites. Why did they get blown off and have to wait hundreds of years for the first examples to arrive and a thousand years for a real translation?" mad mac, since the prophet is for everyone, he could only come from one people, right? if he would have came from the chinese people, the arabs would use the kind of *cheap* arguments you are using by saying why there was no prophet from them, right? what about the africans; the europeans....... "Why only in the Arabic language, which is a language spoken even today by a serious moinority of the globes population??? This makes no sense. Why didn't this perfect message get sent multiple times to multiple cultures, as it did to the semites???" mad mac, as usual, what you said makes no sense to you does not really mean it is incorrect. in your thinking , you are saying for the Quran to be perfect, chinese people should have gotten the message first. this argument of yours is the same argument the jews and arab pagans in maka and madina employed. the arab pagans said why the Quran was not send down with angels and the jews said why the Quran was given to an illiterate arab. they said it did not make sense for the Quran to be sent to muhammad. in their thinking (as mad mac's thinking) they created doubt about the Quran and they created schism among themeselves by denying out of jeliousy and out of replelain the Quran and the prophet after recognizing him and what was given to him (the miracle of the Quran). then, they (jews) were told this: "Do you envy that any one (other than this arab prophet-----who is not of your race or tribe) should be given the like of what was given to you; or do you fear, that those others might overcome you in argument before you Lord?(and hense your frenzied and frantic envious attacks on those doctrines). Say thou, surely the grace (the gift of prophethood) is in the hand of Allah. He bestows it on whom He will and Allah is Bountiful, Knowing (unstinting in the conferment of His grace. He can bestow the gift of HIs prophecy on anyone. knowing well when and on whom to confer His grace. He makes the recipient of His grace only him who is fitted to receive it) He singles out for His mercy whom He will (so all these envious antics are fruitless) and Allah is the Owner of Mighty grace (there is no dearth of grace and mercy on His part. He can exalt any people, and raise any person He likes).3:73 "And We have sent down the Book to thee (oh muhammad) with truth and confirming what has preceded it of the Book (confirming the truth of the previous Revelations) and as a GUARDAIN over it (it's protector----that is one of the outstanding merits of the Holy Quran). So judge thou between them according to what Allah sent down, and do not follow their DESIRES away from what has come to thee of the truth. To every one of you We have ordained a law and a way, and had Allah so willed (in conformity with HIs universal Plan----the Will of Allah, which is the course of His physical law, is not to be confsed with the goodwill or pleasure of Allah, which is the course of His moral law-----'what is' is always very distant from, and at times, quite opposed to, 'what ought to be'), He would have made you all a single community (by forcing on you the religion of islam; by leaving you no option but to tread the path of Truth and Faith), but He willed it not (this enforced uniformity), in order that He may try you by what He has given you (as to who is obedient to Him by the exercise of His choice and who is not). Hasten therefore to virtue (by the right use of your limited free-will, o mankind), to Allah is the return of you all; then He shall declare to you regarding what you have been disputing (without any justification whatever). 5:48
|
| | Saturday, December 30, 2000 - 02:49 pm Allah is the one who chooses his messengers. Not on the basis of a disbeliever's want and need. Unto every nation a messenger or a prophet was sent(check the earlier posts). Mohammed is the last of all messengers that were subsequently being sent to different people. "57.25 We sent aforetime our messengers with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is great might, as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allah may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and His messengers: For Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might". "3.144 Muhammad is no more than a messenger: many were the a messengers that passed away before him. Is it that if he died or were slain, will you then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah. But Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) withgratitude." For a muslim, enough is Allah's word that he sent those messengers to people and they don't need the identity of those messengers to be counted for book keeping. No one is twisiting no ones' arm to belief in islam. For certain, Allah concluded the chapter of messengerhood and prophethood untill the judgement day comes. Whether Arabic is spoken by minority or not, Arabs account for 20% of islamic population. And islam will encrease as the time goes by. As for the Linguisitic exaggerations, Every lanuguage has classic and non-classic part in itself. English speakers don't speak the classical english. They have to learn the standard english to be understood by all. Quran is the perfect Arabic which doesn't have any localized dialect in it. It is intended to have no influence from no one and therefore has no discrepancies . No one claims to have contributed to it but all benefitted from it. Allah chose arabic for his last religion for its perfection and beauty that we may learn wisdom: "12.2 We have sent it down as an Arabic Qurán, in order that you may learn wisdom." Allah wanted it to be Arabic as an authority thus we have no dispute with Allah like disbelievers do : "13.37 Thus have We revealed it to be a judgment of authority in Arabic. Were you to follow their (vain) desires after the knowledge which has reached you, then would you find neither protector nor defender against Allah." We don't follow the vain desires of those who ask for chinese and jinni languages, we follow Allah's choice and Allah is not questioned for what he does, for the world belongs to him, and Allah does what he likes at any given time. All other languages WERE not SUITED FOR the message of islam. May those who have grievances against Arabic DIE for their grievance. "39.28 (It is) a Qurán in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein): in order that they may guard against Evil."
|
| | Tuesday, January 09, 2001 - 02:08 am Asad First, you didn't answer my first question. If we assume (and this is a safe assumption) that the Arabic spoken in the 7th Century is markedly different from the Arabic spoken today,then it's going to be as difficult for Arabs today to decipher the true meaning of the Qur'an just as it would be if I were trying to decipher 7th century English. I didn't say the Qur'an changed - I said we did!!! Secondly. don't you think more people would have received this message and it would have much more validity if a desinted prophet was emplaced in China, South America, North America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe all at the same time. With the exact same message - a divine Qur'an that translates exactly. THAT would be hard to ignore. Think about it. Columbus arrives in South America and finds a bunch of Muslims. The Arabs arrive in Spain and find a bunch of Muslims. Islam spreads out of China at the same time it comes out of Arabia. Why, if this message is so important, didn't Allah MAKE SURE it took hold in the 3rd millenium BC in China as civilization really started sprouting there???? This is one of many reasons why I believe my theory is correct.
|
| | Tuesday, January 09, 2001 - 08:02 am "Asad First, you didn't answer my first question." what question? "If we assume (and this is a safe assumption) that the Arabic spoken in the 7th Century is markedly different from the Arabic spoken today,then it's going to be as difficult for Arabs today to decipher the true meaning of the Qur'an just as it would be if I were trying to decipher 7th century English. I didn't say the Qur'an changed - I said we did!!!" we have the written words of the Quran in arabic. the written arabic of yesterday and today are the same------those who speak in their arabic language (the different forms of arabic) and those who learned the arabic have the same written Quran and the true meaning of the Quran---tafsiirs to understand. "Secondly. don't you think more people would have received this message and it would have much more validity if a desinted prophet was emplaced in China, South America, North America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe all at the same time. With the exact same message - a divine Qur'an that translates exactly. THAT would be hard to ignore. Think about it." yes, Allah could have revealed the Quran on different prophets from different countries or He could have chosen angels to bring the messange in every house------but that didn't happen. if validity of the massage depended on the prophet's location, most prophets who preached the messange would have gotten all the people they were sent to. i mean, there are many prophets whose people didn't even accept the message, but ignored. "Columbus arrives in South America and finds a bunch of Muslims. The Arabs arrive in Spain and find a bunch of Muslims. Islam spreads out of China at the same time it comes out of Arabia. Why, if this message is so important, didn't Allah MAKE SURE it took hold in the 3rd millenium BC in China as civilization really started sprouting there???? This is one of many reasons why I believe my theory is correct." i told you that the argument you are making is the same argument the jews and arab pagans in maka and madina employed. the arab pagans said why the Quran was not send down with angels and the jews said why the Quran was given to an illiterate arab. they said it did not make sense for the Quran to be sent to muhammad. "And We have sent down the Book to thee (oh muhammad) with truth and confirming what has preceded it of the Book (confirming the truth of the previous Revelations) and as a GUARDAIN over it (it's protector----that is one of the outstanding merits of the Holy Quran). So judge thou between them according to what Allah sent down, and do not follow their DESIRES away from what has come to thee of the truth. To every one of you We have ordained a law and a way, and had Allah so willed (in conformity with HIs universal Plan----the Will of Allah, which is the course of His physical law, is not to be confsed with the goodwill or pleasure of Allah, which is the course of His moral law-----'what is' is always very distant from, and at times, quite opposed to, 'what ought to be'), He would have made you all a single community (by forcing on you the religion of islam; by leaving you no option but to tread the path of Truth and Faith), but He willed it not (this enforced uniformity), in order that He may try you by what He has given you (as to who is obedient to Him by the exercise of His choice and who is not). Hasten therefore to virtue (by the right use of your limited free-will, o mankind), to Allah is the return of you all; then He shall declare to you regarding what you have been disputing (without any justification whatever). 5:48
|
| | Tuesday, January 09, 2001 - 10:42 pm I'm not saying it doesn't make sense for the message to have been sent to Mohammed. It actually makes excellent sense. The Arabs of the time were a backward people. They needed the message. What I'm saying is that a lot of other people needed the message and didn't get it. That's what I'm saying. That doesn't pass the common sense test. You are wrong about linguistic development. The Arab language of today is not the same as the Arab language of yesterday. You need to read the commentary written by the scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali who is quit clear on this point. That's one of the reason that there is dispute about the meaning of certain Qur'anic text - which has led to different Islamic movements. If an Arab of today were to read the Qur'an he would draw in parts a different message than an Arab of the 7th century - because the language has changed and the meaning of words has morphed as well.
|
| | Wednesday, January 10, 2001 - 06:02 am "I'm not saying it doesn't make sense for the message to have been sent to Mohammed. It actually makes excellent sense. The Arabs of the time were a backward people. They needed the message." yes, they needed the message, but that was not the only reason the quran makes sense. yes, the arabs were a backward people, but if the arabs could accept the Quran, anyone else could and can. ;-) What I'm saying is that a lot of other people needed the message and didn't get it. That's what I'm saying. That doesn't pass the common sense test. again, since the prophet is for everyone, he could only come from one people, right? if he would have came from the chinese people, the arabs would use the kind of *cheap* arguments you are using by saying why there was no prophet from them, right? what about the africans; the europeans....... "You are wrong about linguistic development. The Arab language of today is not the same as the Arab language of yesterday. You need to read the commentary written by the scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali who is quit clear on this point. That's one of the reason that there is dispute about the meaning of certain Qur'anic text - which has led to different Islamic movements. If an Arab of today were to read the Qur'an he would draw in parts a different message than an Arab of the 7th century - because the language has changed and the meaning of words has morphed as well." i didn't say it is the same. i said the linguistic in the Quran is the same one the prophet had that we have now. not only the non-arabs have to learn this linguistic arabic in the Quran, but the arabs themselves have to learn it.
|
| | Wednesday, January 10, 2001 - 09:44 am "Alif. Lam. Ra, These are the verses of a Book luminous. Verily We! We have sent it (Quran) down---an arabic recitation, that perchance you reflect" yusuf 2. "And assuredly We know that they (the makkan pagans) say: it is only a human being who teaches him (pointing to a certian christian slave or a christian monk). The speech of him to whom they incline is foreign (the propeht to compose the Quran) while this is plain arabic speech. Verily those who do not believe in the signs of Allah-----Allah shal not guide them, and to them there shall be a tormenet afflictive. It is only those who do not believe in the signs of Allah who FABRICATE A LIE, and those! they are the LAIRS." nahl 103. ---the answer of the Quran to the arab pagans is in effect this: apart from all considerations of the excellence of its teachings which you ain your ignorance areunable to appreciate and value, look at the incomparable perfection of its language and diction. it is conceivable that a foreigner should even so much as approuch a style so chaste, so pure, so inimitable? christians and jews and pagans naturally made much of those kind of charges(and other about the Quran) and they are still making, but there is not th least evidence in support of the accusation made against the Quran and muhammad. the fact is that the arabic in the Quran is the purest language. Allah preserved it from contamination by non-semitic languages and has thus saved it from the fate of other semitic languages such as assyrian and hebrew. the classical language dodelled by the Quran is followed closelyl everywhere. at the time of muhammad there was no work of the first order in arabic prose. the Quran was therefore the earliest, and has ever since remained the model prose work. its langauge is rhythmical and rehetorical, and but poetical. its rhymed prose has se the standard which almost every conservative arabic writer of today conciously strives to imitate. so those lairs.....the most brazen-faced lairs are precisely they who unable to give their charge even a semblance of substantiality still cling to the factioin, that there must be somone to help the prophet in the composition of the Quran--- therefore, the arabic recitation in the Quran is written an eloquent arabic------the most pure language of the arabs-----to mankind in general, but the arabs at that time happened to be the immediate audience of the Holy discourse.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 01:05 am I love that tactic. Time honored tradition. You don't like what someone else has to say, brand him something bad. He's a liar. He's a hypocrite. He's under the influence of Satan. He's a witch. Etc. Etc. Etc. Asad, Islam betrays insecurity when it stoops to this level. If Allah must do that to get people to believe in him, there's something really wrong with the Qur'an. Secondly, you didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I said that DEVINE Prophets, giving the SAME message at the same time in different cultures should have been delivered so that everyone got the message. Not just one people. How long did it take for the Chinese to get a copy of the Qur'an? How long did it take the North American Indians??? Hell, the first decent English translation wasn't available until about 80 years ago. Know what I mean? Why did God blow of billions of people for 13 centuries if this message and way of life is so important??? That makes about zero sense.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 05:10 am MAD. It used to happen before. Prophets preaching at the same time in different areas or towns. Such prophets were ABRAHAM and LUT. We saw in the Quran that once Allah decided to punish the Homosexuals of LUT, the obstinate transgessors(and LUT is clear of them), The Angels detailed for the punishment visited and came to Abraham as guests before they went on to punish the people of Lot who went against the message and pioneered this act of illicit perversion. Read chapter:11 It is really good. 11:70 But when he saw their hands not reaching towards the (meal), he felt some mistrust of them, and conceived a fear of them. They said: "Fear not: We have been sent against the people of Lüt." The angels are telling Abraham that he shouldn't fear or mistrust them because of their refrain from the food. They were angels who don't eat. And their mission was to punish the people of LUT. My point in the verse is to show you that two prophets could live at the same time in a different places. As you were told many times, The Quran says that some of the prophets are accounted for and their stories, And others were not. What you are after is a long list of those prophets to make your decision may be?. Or other wise blame Allah for the immagined inconvinience of yours?. There is no insecirity in islam. Muslims are themselves prone to everything natural that would be done by a human being. Be he/she a believer or not. I guess Islam is judged by the Quran and the Sunnah of the prophet not by what we do. Listen, why not wipe off the dust from your Quran and read a little more from it?. I am sure you would have seen: "4.164 Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;-" We don't have all the messengers accounted for in the Quran as the Quran is saying. If that is hard to understand I don't know the answer to your concern. Believe me, there could have been all kinds of prophets from all races. Nobody knows because we aren't told their specific race(except few). We are told unto every nation was sent a messenger. Does that make any sense to you?. "10.47 To every people (was sent) a messenger: when their apostle comes (before them), the matter will be judged between them with justice, and they will not be wronged". Hope that helps.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 05:38 am MadMac, I think you are mad now. The transalation of the Quran into English is not a big problem. Muslims around the world do not speak inarabic. There is a system that is well-know by all the muslims we learn the transilation of the quran. look Somalia, Islam in Somalia dates back to the time of the Propet pbum we are not arabic speakers and infact theofficial somali language was written not long ago but the somalis( the reloius learned poeple) knew the meaning of the Quran and the hadith. that goes to pakistan etc. About Europe, Islam is not knew to europe, the earopeans used to convert in Islam long time ago and they used to learn arabic. though, many of them would disapper into muslim countries. This was coupled with at that time Muslims did not have borders. About you saying the language of the Quran is different the language spoken by the Arabs. First, we should know there two kind of Arabic language; Fusha and dailect and most of the poeple in the arabic countries speak daelect. Would you say Morrocans speak Arabic.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 06:24 am "I love that tactic. Time honored tradition. You don't like what someone else has to say, brand him something bad. He's a liar. He's a hypocrite. He's under the influence of Satan. He's a witch. Etc. Etc. Etc." it is not a tactic; it is the true. the Quran offered many challenges to the liars. if the lairs can not bring evidence of what they claim, they are lair. saying the Quran has flaws, contradictions, muhammad wrote it, christians and jews helped muhammad, satan was involve in it's saying-----is not enough, you must bring evidence, otherwise you are only conjecturing----lying. ;-) "Asad, Islam betrays insecurity when it stoops to this level." no, it challenges the mind. ;-) "If Allah must do that to get people to believe in him, there's something really wrong with the Qur'an." Allah does not need you to believe the Quran. if you are challenged and was told you are a liar when you lie about the Quran, is Allah trying to make you believe or He is telling your state of mind-----the fact that you are a lair? didn't He create you? ;-) "Secondly, you didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I said that DEVINE Prophets, giving the SAME message at the same time in different cultures should have been delivered so that everyone got the message. Not just one people. "How long did it take for the Chinese to get a copy of the Qur'an? How long did it take the North American Indians??? Hell, the first decent English translation wasn't available until about 80 years ago. Know what I mean? Why did God blow of billions of people for 13 centuries if this message and way of life is so important??? That makes about zero sense." i told you that "should have been delivered" and the Will of Allah is difference. 'what is' is always very distant from, and at times, quite opposed to, 'what ought to be'. Allah would have made all people a single community (by forcing on you the religion of islam; by leaving you no option but to tread the path of Truth and Faith), but He willed it not (this enforced uniformity)---in order that He may try you by what He has given you (as to who is obedient to Him by the exercise of His choice and who is not).
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 10:16 am F.G. Thanks for the quotes. I was aware of some but not others. Here's the rub I have. The ostensible reason that Mohammed was able to develop a following is because Allah wanted it that way. Well, then why didn't Allah ensure a following in China???? Why not finluence a following in South America??? Where's the Incan prophet preaching Islam?? I mean, there should be a record of that occuring - a South American history of Monotheism at least. But there's not. There's no Chinese history of it either. I'm not talking about a Qur'anic reference to same, I'm talking about another, independent reference. Why isn't that in the historical record? That's what's bugging me. Arawello Do a little homework abai. Or ask some of the brothers here on the net. The first accurrate translation of the Qur'an wasn't available until the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Translations prior to that were done by Christians more or less trying to discredit Islam. Do the Morrocans speak Arabic?? Well, as a matter of fact they do. Arabic, not Berber, is the official language of Morocco. Furthermore, Arabic is the dominant spoken language. Why?? Because the Arabs invaded in the 8th century. The European Muslim development was based on incentive. Muslims received certain tax benefits under the Ottomans - and that made a big difference. In Spain the Moors of course stopped expansion after their defeat by Charles Martel. Their occupation of Europe was done by military force, just as their expulsion was. In Spain, due to the inquisitions, Islam was exterminated. But in the Balkans vestiges remained. I am not insinuating that none of the convertions were legitimate, but let's be honest here. Islam expanded in areas controlled first by the Arabs and then by the Ottomans. The exception to this was the mass movement which took place eastward. This was much more a religious movement than a military one. Asad While I appreciate your take it or leave it approach to the Qur'an, there is no way I can go that way. If it doesn't make sense to me, then I could never buy into it.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 10:54 am "Asad While I appreciate your take it or leave it approach to the Qur'an, there is no way I can go that way." free choice, mad mad, free choice. lakum diinakum waliyadiin. "If it doesn't make sense to me, then I could never buy into it." but lying about things you do not know--- would not make sense either. ;-)
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 11:07 pm Asad I would never lie. A Norwich cadet does not lie, cheat, steal, or conspire to deceive. somewhere in here (I can't find it now) you wrote that those who conjecture are liars. Asad, turn on your brain buddy - or pull out a dictionary. Conjecture is not lying, not even a facsimile. I can conjecture without facts and that is not a lie. In fact my conjecture might be correct, I just can't prove it. Lack of proof does not a lie make. I do not lie about the Qur'an or Islam. I am simply not convinced it is the unadulterated word of God. And the more I have conversed with Muslims, the more I have read the Qur'an, the more convinced I am. I think it's divinely inspired, but not divine.
|
| | Friday, January 12, 2001 - 12:17 am "Asad I would never lie." that, in it self, is a a lie. you said something like that before, but i caught you many lies after words. ;-) "A Norwich cadet does not lie, cheat, steal, or conspire to deceive." well, if you say the Quran is wrong, you are a lair. ;-) "somewhere in here (I can't find it now) you wrote that those who conjecture are liars. Asad, turn on your brain buddy - or pull out a dictionary. Conjecture is not lying, not even a facsimile. I can conjecture without facts and that is not a lie. In fact my conjecture might be correct, I just can't prove it. Lack of proof does not a lie make." well, if someone does not accept the truth when he is told the truth and he keeps conjecturing whatever come to his brains, he is lair. ;-) "I do not lie about the Qur'an or Islam." i can not count how many times i caught your lies about islam. ;-) "I am simply not convinced it is the unadulterated word of God." that is fine, but when you say the Quran is wrong and you can not prove what you are saying, then you are a lair. ;-) "And the more I have conversed with Muslims, the more I have read the Qur'an, the more convinced I am." maybe the more you hear the truth, the more your disbelieve increases-----because of the disease in your heart. ;-) "I think it's divinely inspired, but not divine." yes, you just think, but you are wrong. ;-)
|
| | Friday, January 12, 2001 - 07:30 am MadMac, No, this is the area I do not need to check. Have you not understood what I ahve said? I did not say the quran was not translated long ago into Europen countries. In fact, it was recenlty when the islamic scholars agreed that the quran should be transaled. what I am saying is that the transilation have not to be in writing. there are other methods that the muslims use. ask the somalis they hardly read the transilation in Somali they learn word by word. and that is an excellent strategy to learn the quran that preserved the quarnic teachings. what I also said is the eauropean muslims did the same thing. about the conversion ; damb, I do not like this continues debate of how Islam spread in the b Balkans. Ps have you read my postings under JIHAd
|
| | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 12:04 am Arawello The oral tradition is a very effective one in some cultures, not in others. In western Europe if it's not written down it doesn't reach anyone. In pre-Gutenberg Western Europe the Church held a monopoly on all religious thought because most people could not read and write and anyone preaching anything contrary to the Bible was killed - sort of like what happens in Saudi Arabia today if you preach anything contrary to the Qur'an. Asad If I say the Qur'an is wrong and can not prove it, that is not a lie. Again, you are struggling wirth definitions here. If Galileo said the world was round, but coud not conclusively prove it, does that mean he was lying??? If Einstein theorizes that people can never travel faster than the speed of light, is he lying if he can't prove it??? Of course not. You know, given the tremendous oral tradition in Islam and Arabia, it is possible that someone prior to Mohammed (someone very gifted) using older Aramaic scripts, wrote the Qur'an and taught Mohammed to Memorize it. Or that Mohammed did the same - created it in his mind. I don't believe that. But it's possible. The only time you can say I'm "lying" is when you discover that I am deliberately trying to deceive.
|
| | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 12:20 am MM dear sir. Have you seen who the Quran is revealed, the style of its prose and poetry?. Does it corralate with how other texts are written?. If you or me..or indeed someone far greater were to tell a story, it would becasue of our conceptions of time, be told in a certain way, that is a fundermental point of logic, we cannot escape our own understanding and dimensions of time. Now if you look at how other texts are written in their available form, you will notice how events are described in the Quran and in the Bible for example. Text that is cumbersome and explained in a one dimensional linar understanding of time ie: once a upon a time there was a etc etc. Is revealed in a completely superior mannor. Yes the arabs at the time were clever, and accustomed to poetry and had a health oral tradition, they could not, cannot and never will be able to produce the Quran a human can't. Furthermore your assertion that Saudia Arabia functions like pre reformation western europe is unfair, while Saudia Arabia is many things, it does not deny people the right to read the Quran, by systematically blocking the education of its people and the ban of translation of the bible from a obsolete langauge to more poular ones and the punishment of death for doing so. So it is not "sort of what like happens in Saudi Arabia", you are sort of lying, what did i tell you about approaching the Islamic faith, the Islamic world, the Deen, from a Christian perspective saxiib, i told you it is not condusive for any understanding,how did you respond? you called me intolerant <shaking my head>
|
| | Monday, January 15, 2001 - 08:13 pm "Asad If I say the Qur'an is wrong and can not prove it, that is not a lie." mad mac, if you do not have prove and make up things, you are inventing a lie, especially ....when the things you are denying is in front of you. ;-) "Again, you are struggling wirth definitions here." i'm not. i know a lair when i see one. ;-) "If Galileo said the world was round, but coud not conclusively prove it, does that mean he was lying???" but if he galileo had people who could disprove his findings----if people had something to disprove his sayings, he would be caught lying then. ;-) "If Einstein theorizes that people can never travel faster than the speed of light, is he lying if he can't prove it??? "Of course not." again, mad mac, predicting unknown things can be false or truth, but there is no discrepancies to prove or disprove it. if what einstein said was going against what people had full of knowledge and was something true, he would be caught lying then. ;-) "You know, given the tremendous oral tradition in Islam and Arabia, it is possible that someone prior to Mohammed (someone very gifted) using older Aramaic scripts, wrote the Qur'an and taught Mohammed to Memorize it." again, you have no prove for your lies. your lies are just your wishful thinking, but we have evidence that no one had the Quran before muhammad. the Quran could not come from a human being; Allah said it is from Him. ;-) "Or that Mohammed did the same - created it in his mind." again, lying and wishful thinking will not help you. ;-) "I don't believe that." that is because it is a lie. ;-) "But it's possible." lies do not become facts, mad mac. . maybe in your book, it is possible that lies become true when the truth can not be made wrong. ;-) "The only time you can say I'm "lying" is when you discover that I am deliberately trying to deceive." you have to have prove against the Quran; if you do not, you are lying. ;-) btw, mad mac, do you know that all the kufars (including you and those who deny Allah's existence or Allah's words) are all lairs? you see, in the day of judgement, Allah will ask them questions-----what were their excuses of denying the truth that was in the Quran (their lying excuses). ;-)
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 05:38 am Asad There you go again. "All who do not believe in the Qur'an are liars". A perjorative. OK, you think I'm a liar, I say you are naive and therefore worthy of my mentorship - whether you want it or not. This is one of the ways colonialism was justified. "We had to mentor the poor, stupid Africans with their primative religious lore." Calling people who don't agree with your religious faith perjorative names is just as offensive as the above mentality. This attitude, supported by the Qur'an, is the evidence against it. Allah need not resort to the perjorative. Common I said "sort of like" what happens in Saudi Arabia. Not exactly alike. Jeez. Do you know that the penalty for prostelytization in Saudi Arabia is death??? That was the penalty during the inquisition and that was the comparison I was making. The Saudis systematically control, through threat of physical violence, what Saudis may read and see. And they're fanatical about it. When I was there it was totally out of hand.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 07:24 am MM sort of like comparisons can get out of hand, i take your point though
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 08:41 am "Asad There you go again. "All who do not believe in the Qur'an are liars". denying the Quran and saying that the Quran didn't come from Allah is a lie. telling a lie makes you a lair. ;-). a kufar is one who covers the truth with lies. kufar rejects or covers the truth. ;-) "A perjorative." telling the truth is not a derogatory; lying about what Allah said is both pejorative and blasphemy ;-) "OK, you think I'm a liar" no, i believe you are a liar-----when you say the whole Quran didn't come from Allah or is not Divine. ;-) "I say you are naive and therefore worthy of my mentorship - whether you want it or not. This is one of the ways colonialism was justified. "We had to mentor the poor, stupid Africans with their primative religious lore." " in the day of judgement, Allah will ask those who lied about the Quran-----what were their excuses of denying the truth that was in the Quran....they will say (in their excuse while lying) we were *naive*; didn't really know; we didn't know the truth; satan led us to believe that we were right and the Quran was wrong; they will beg and plea for mercy....and say please take us back to the world so we believe the truth now; they will say they wished they had not denied the truth and listened the advice of the believers (wished had taken these poor africans/somalis/muslims as my mentors and never had thought they were stupid people for believing the Quran). Allah will say to them....NO WAY. today is no the day of lying or making exucess; you had your chances. so face the consequence of your lies. ;-) "Calling people who don't agree with your religious faith perjorative names is just as offensive as the above mentality." again, although telling the true hurts sometimes, telling the truth is not a derogatory or effensive. however, lying about what Allah said is both pejorative and blasphemy ;-) "This attitude, supported by the Qur'an, is the evidence against it. Allah need not resort to the perjorative." Allah does not need anything------that is for sure is the truth------but Allah is not ashamed of calling the truth------like it is. ;-) the kufars (those who cover up the truth) sell their lies everyday and they think muslims are stupid people who need mentoring---when muslims tell the truth that is in the Quran, the fact is that the kufars make themselves deaf and blind to the truth and they are lairs and fools. ;-) "And when it is said to them (the kufars): believe as people have believed, they say: shall we believe as the fools have believed? Surely, it is they who are the fools, and yet they know not. And when they meet those who have believed they say: we believe. And when they are alone with their devils, they say: surely, we are with you; we were but mocking. Allah *mocks* back at them, and lets them wander bewildered in their *insolence*. These are they, who have *purchased error for guidance*, but their commerce (error and lies) profited them not, nor have they ever become guided (to the truth because of they rejected the truth). Their likeness is as the likeness of him who kindled a fire, then when it lit up what was around him, Allah took away their light and left them in darkness where they see not----deaf, dumb, blind, wherefore they will not return to light.........................Surely, Allah is not *ashamed to use a similitude*, be it a gnat or of a aught above it. Then as to those who believe, they know that it is the *truth* from their Lord. And as to those who disbelieve, they say: what did Allah intend by this similitude? Many He sends astray thereby and many He guides thereby, and He sends not astray thereby except the transgressors (the kufars ----lairs)...............2:13------" ;-)
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 09:01 am "Verily those who do not believe in the signs of Allah-----Allah shal not guide them, and to them there shall be a tormenet afflictive. It is only those who do not believe in the signs of Allah who FABRICATE A LIE, and those! they are the LAIRS." NAHAL 103.
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 11:40 pm Now check this out. For people who don't believe or people who are chronic liars God is going to condemn them to an eternity of damnation. But someone who is a repentent rapist or murderer, well he's a believer so he's good to go. Assuming you believe in a day of justice do you think that's just???? Give me a break. That's the height of injustice. You know where the Qur'an and I diverge is I believe God is my friend and mentor. I don't fear God. God is not my enemy. Furthermore, as I said before, regardless of the justification, labeling 5/6ths of the world as liars and devil-worshipers is only likely to incur the wrath, not the friendship or empathy of that 5/6ths. If Islam insists on insulting the world and devaluing its non-Muslim members, it can not complain when certain elements are paranoid about it and act against its interests.
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:32 am "Now check this out. For people who don't believe or people who are chronic liars God is going to condemn them to an eternity of damnation. But someone who is a repentent rapist or murderer, well he's a believer so he's good to go. Assuming you believe in a day of justice do you think that's just???? Give me a break. That's the height of injustice." yes, the most brazen-faced lairs are precisely those (the kufars) who choose not to believe in the signs of Allah and then fabricate lies about Allah-----while unable to give their charge even a semblance of substantiality still cling to their fiction---which makes them say words of blasphemy or makes them to do some outward acts of infidelity. these kufars have no one to blame but themselves for choosing the path to eternal damnation. however, those who believed and did not confound their belief with wrong-doing (the worst form of which are fabricating lies against Allah and acts of polytheism---atheist) and ask Allah forgiveness for their misdeeds (any kind of sin) and stop wrong-doings that harm others ----Allah will pardon their past deeds and their past infidelity. Allah will guide these to the right course for they were heedless of their end and will be given security from punishment in the hereafter. Allah is a Just God and He is most forgiving and most merciful. Allah is the sole author and absolute master of every being and subject to no superior will or higher law; no action of His can (in any conceivable circumstance) be *unjust* or iniquitous. in other word, according to the human standard of justice, His judgments is never unjust. ;-) "You know where the Qur'an and I diverge is I believe God is my friend and mentor. I don't fear God. God is not my enemy." the Quran is clear about Allah being the one who guides people, but those who lie about Him, Allah shall not guide them. in fact, the kufars are not the friends of Allah; they are the enemies of Allah. kufars can claim to believe in Allah, but they do not actually believe in Him when they reject and deny His law. "And of mankind are some who say: we believe in Allah and in the last day, yet they are not believers. They would deceive Allah and those who believe, whereas they deceive not save themselves, and they perceive not. In their hearts is a disease, so Allah has increased unto them that disease, and for them shall be a torment afflictive for they have been LYING" 2:9-10. "And when it is said to them (the kufars): believe as people have believed, they say: shall we believe as the fools have believed? Surely, it is they who are the fools, and yet they know not. And when they meet those who have believed they say: we believe. And when they are alone with their devils, they say: surely, we are with you; we were but mocking. Allah *mocks* back at them, and lets them wander bewildered in their *insolence*. These are they, who have *purchased error for guidance*, but their commerce (error and lies) profited them not, nor have they ever become guided (to the truth because of they rejected the truth). Their likeness is as the likeness of him who kindled a fire, then when it lit up what was around him, Allah took away their light and left them in darkness where they see not----deaf, dumb, blind, wherefore they will not return to light" 2:13 "Verily those who do not believe in the signs of Allah-----Allah shall not *guide* them, and to them there shall be a torment afflictive. It is only those who do not believe in the signs of Allah who FABRICATE A LIE, and those! they are the LAIRS." NAHAL 104. "Furthermore, as I said before, regardless of the justification, labeling 5/6ths of the world as liars and devil-worshipers is only likely to incur the wrath, not the friendship or empathy of that 5/6ths." that is very funny------>likely to incur the wrath, not the friendship or empathy of that 5/6ths. that exactly contradicts your statement that says "God is my friend" ;-) besides, i told you before that telling the truth does hurt and if it is going to incur wrath and enmity between the believers and the non-believers, so be it. it is silly to compromise the truth and then lie about what Allah said-----because you want my friendship. ;-) "If Islam insists on insulting the world and devaluing its non-Muslim members, it can not complain when certain elements are paranoid about it and act against its interests" again, telling the truth is not insulting or is not derogatory. the really is that lying about Allah is an insult and blasphemy. ;-) besides, who cares if you are paranoid about the truth of not and do you think we are going to be pananoid and going to be fearful of what you might do against us if we tell the truth? ;-)
|
| | Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:55 am "Now check this out. For people who don't believe or people who are chronic liars God is going to condemn them to an eternity of damnation. But someone who is a repentent rapist or murderer, well he's a believer so he's good to go. Assuming you believe in a day of justice do you think that's just???? Give me a break. That's the height of injustice." yes, the most brazen-faced lairs are precisely those (the kufars) who choose not to believe in the signs of Allah and then fabricate lies about Allah-----while unable to give their charge even a semblance of substantiality still cling to their fiction---which makes them say words of blasphemy or makes them do some outward acts of infidelity. these kufars have no one to blame but themselves for choosing the path to eternal damnation. however, those who believed and did not confound their belief with wrong-doing (the worst form of which are fabricating lies against Allah and acts of polytheism---atheist) and ask Allah forgiveness for their misdeeds (any kind of sin) and stop wrong-doings that harm others ----Allah will pardon their past deeds and their past infidelity. Allah will guide these to the right course for they were not heedless of their end (the hereafter) and will be given security from punishment in the hereafter. Allah is a Just God and He is most forgiving and most merciful. Allah is the sole author and absolute master of every being and subject to no superior will or higher law; no action of His can (in any conceivable circumstance) be *unjust* or iniquitous. in other word, according to the human standard of justice, His judgment is never unjust. ;-) "You know where the Qur'an and I diverge is I believe God is my friend and mentor. I don't fear God. God is not my enemy." the Quran is clear about Allah being the one who guides people, but those who lie about Him, Allah shall not guide them. in fact, the kufars are not the friends of Allah; they are the enemies of Allah. kufars can claim to believe in Allah, but they do not actually believe in Him when they reject and deny His law. "And of mankind are some who say: we believe in Allah and in the last day, yet they are not believers. They would deceive Allah and those who believe, whereas they deceive not save themselves, and they perceive not. In their hearts is a disease, so Allah has increased unto them that disease, and for them shall be a torment afflictive for they have been LYING" 2:9-10. "And when it is said to them (the kufars): believe as people have believed, they say: shall we believe as the fools have believed? Surely, it is they who are the fools, and yet they know not. And when they meet those who have believed they say: we believe. And when they are alone with their devils, they say: surely, we are with you; we were but mocking. Allah *mocks* back at them, and lets them wander bewildered in their *insolence*. These are they, who have *purchased error for guidance*, but their commerce (error and lies) profited them not, nor have they ever become guided (to the truth because they rejected the truth). Their likeness is as the likeness of him who kindled a fire, then when it lit up what was around him, Allah took away their light and left them in darkness where they see not----deaf, dumb, blind, wherefore they will not return to light" 2:13 "Verily those who do not believe in the signs of Allah-----Allah shall not *guide* them, and to them there shall be a torment afflictive. It is only those who do not believe in the signs of Allah who FABRICATE A LIE, and those! they are the LAIRS." NAHAL 104. "Furthermore, as I said before, regardless of the justification, labeling 5/6ths of the world as liars and devil-worshipers is only likely to incur the wrath, not the friendship or empathy of that 5/6ths." that is very funny------>likely to incur the wrath, not the friendship or empathy of that 5/6ths. that exactly contradicts your statement that says "God is my friend" ;-) besides, i told you before that telling the truth does hurt and if it is going to incur wrath and enmity between the believers and the non-believers, so be it. it is silly to compromise the truth and then lie about what Allah said-----because you want my friendship. ;-) "If Islam insists on insulting the world and devaluing its non-Muslim members, it can not complain when certain elements are paranoid about it and act against its interests" again, telling the truth is not insulting or is not derogatory. the really is that lying about Allah is an insult and blasphemy. ;-) besides, who cares if you are paranoid about the truth or not and do you think we are going to be pananoid and going to be fearful of what you might do against us if we tell the truth? ;-)
|
| | Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 03:16 pm AS-SALLAMU CALAYKUM BROTHERS AND SISTERS, FIRST OF ALL THIS PAGE WAS COMPOSED TO EXPOSE THE NATION OF ISLAM. I WOULD HAVE NEVER THOUGHT THAT A SIMPLY REFUTATION BY ILSAM (QUR'AN &SUNNA) COULD BECOME SO CONTRAVERSIAL.IDRIS IS WISE FOR SHOWING US NOT JUST WHAT IS BEING EXPOSE AND THAT WE ALREADY KNOW IT NOT TO BE TRUE BUT HOW IT IS EXPOSED SO PLEASE MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS LET'S NOT INDULGE IN CONVERSATION THAT INVITES INDIRECT INSULTING OR SHOWING OFF.THE DIIN IS HERE NOT ONLY TO TEACH THE TRUTH BUT TO REFUTE LIES AND BID'CA IF NECESSARY.IF YOU CONNOT REFUTE BY QUR'AN & SUNNA THEN WHATEVER WAS TO BE INTIALY REFUTED MUST BE EXCEPTED.THE NATION OF ISLAM OR FOR A BETTER TERM THE NATION OF KUFR HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPOSED BY IDRIS AND BY MANY OTHER MUSKIMS.SO WE ALL KNOW THAT F.G IS WELL VERSED IN THE DIIN FROM HIS FORMAL POST AND MAD MAC NEEDS TO PRESENT HIS Q: A LITTLE MORE ON THE SUTTLE SIDE.THIS POST IS NOT INTENDED TO INSULT ,CREATE DISCOARSE,OR INSITE ANY CONFLICT IN ANY FORM WHATSO EVER IT IS JUST TO REMIND (WHICH IS OUR DUTY AS MUSLIMS ANYWAY) YOU BRO.& SIS. TO BE CAREFUL AND NOT GET TO CRAZY WITH YOURSELFS. WA-SALAAMU CALAYKUM.
|
| | Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 07:57 pm good page
|