Question for Danish ?

[Muddai]

Where do you draw the line ? (spare me the "Quran is a peaceful........" etc.)

In strict observance of the Quran, and without "human" intervention (common sense), what are your views on the following topics endorced by the Quran:

1. Slavery
2. Subjugation of women
3. Treatment of "infidels" / non-believers (violence)
4. ...well let's just start with the above

Looking forward to your post......

[Danish]

Muddai:

Where do you draw the line ? (spare me the "Quran is a peaceful........" etc.)

If you had read and understood my previous posts, then this question mustn't arise. Nevertheless, I draw the line based upon reading, studying, understanding and perceiving, not only the Quran but also by understanding, realizing and perceiving everything that surrounds me which GOD Almighty has created, Alhamdu-Lillah. Every single day I submit to GOD to guide me, teach me and have mercy on me. Some of the most crucial verses of the Qruan are outlined below:

[17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.
[17:37] You shall not walk proudly on earth - you cannot bore through the earth, nor can you be as tall as the mountains.
[31:27] If all the trees on earth were made into pens, and the ocean supplied the ink, augmented by seven more oceans, the words of GOD would not run out. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.

In strict observance of the Quran, and without "human" intervention (common sense), what are your views on the following topics endorced by the Quran:

I sincerely advice you to read the entire Quran yourself for the simple reason that you yourself will understand it better than anyone else can. You can then point to certain verses of the Quran if you like to discuss certain issues one at a time to better understand them. Asking several questions with various issues together simply won't work. Besides you must first read and understanding the Quran yourself so that we are on the same page. It is no use that I quote verses of the Quran to prove a point while you start quoting various ahadiths. It will only invite conflict as it is so apparent. Besides, Bukhari's or other scholars words cannot challenge GOD's words for they will, Insha-Allah, always fail no matter what. So far you don't seem to agree on anything that I've said in light of the Quran, so what makes you think that you will this time.

I once again, invite you and all others to read, study and undersand the Quran, GOD's MESSAGE TO THE WORLD, every single day and again and again and again.

One of the best sites ever that I recently came across so far that gives 5 well known and highly reputed English translations of the Quran side by side, including the Arabic version with literal meanings, word search, search alternate meanings to a particular words and so on, can be extremely useful for comparison study and relative understanding of each verses individually. Check it out:
http://yaqb.lrhazi.com/index.php?qtoc=on

GOD, there is no other god but GOD. HE has no partners and none equals HIM. Be HE Glorified.

[Muslim First]

.
Muddai

AS

Good luck

.

[porus]

Danish,

I remember that you took dim view of the Muslims reciting two sentences of the Kalima: 'la ilaha illallah, muhammadun rasulullah'. Even though the sentences do appear seperately in two verses of the Quran.

Would you say that each verse is to be understood independently without refrence to others in the Quran?

If so, what is your understanding of the ayat 74:30? It is commonly translated as "Over it/her (is/are) nineteen"

I would translate it as "The nineteen have responsibility over her" or "The nineteen have been charged to look after her"

Since the number 19 is famously associated with Rashad Khalifa's analysis of the Quran, what meaning does the ayt 74:30 convey to you?

[Danish]

Porus,

I remember that you took dim view of the Muslims reciting two sentences of the Kalima: 'la ilaha illallah, muhammadun rasulullah'. Even though the sentences do appear seperately in two verses of the Quran.

I don’t had a dim view but a strong stance towards the only Kalima: la illaha illallah.

Would you say that each verse is to be understood independently without refrence to others in the Quran?

Depends upon the subject matter to be understood.

If so, what is your understanding of the ayat 74:30? It is commonly translated as "Over it/her (is/are) nineteen".
I would translate it as "The nineteen have responsibility over her" or "The nineteen have been charged to look after her"
Since the number 19 is famously associated with Rashad Khalifa's analysis of the Quran, what meaning does the ayt 74:30 convey to you?

Firstly, your interpretation seems to be out-of-context. Who do you refer "her" to be? You must ask yourself "over what" is the number nineteen the Quran is talking about by understanding the overall message relayed by its adjacent verses in the context of the entire Quran (see below).

Secondly, as I understand it and although corrected, a few mistakes and problems had been found with the mathematical discovery of the Quranic structure and more are being investigated. Secondly, abuse have been associated with its infrastructure as it is always apparent in any given case. Thus for now, the truth is far off from believing as far as the 19 phenomenon is concerned. I have left this subject aside as it doesn’t deter my belief in the Oneness of GOD and it doesn’t refrain me from carrying out the righteous works with and/or without the Quran. For those who have total disbelief in GOD and for those who are not certain about HIS and HIS creation, and whose hearts are wavering with falsehood and conjecture, the Quran is the best and the only guidance to start with, and thus the mathematical structure.

[74:27] What retribution!
[74:28] Thorough and comprehensive.
[74:29] Obvious to all the people.
[74:30] Over it is nineteen.
[74:31] We appointed angels to be guardians of Hell, and we assigned their number (1) to disturb the disbelievers, (2) to convince the Christians and Jews (that this is a divine scripture), (3) to strengthen the faith of the faithful, (4) to remove all traces of doubt from the hearts of Christians, Jews, as well as the believers, and (5) to expose those who harbor doubt in their hearts, and the disbelievers; they will say, "What did GOD mean by this allegory?" GOD thus sends astray whomever He wills, and guides whomever He wills. None knows the soldiers of your Lord except He. This is a reminder for the people.
[74:32] Absolutely, (I swear) by the moon.
[74:33] And the night as it passes.
[74:34] And the morning as it shines.
[74:35] This is one of the great miracles.
[74:36] A warning to the human race.
[74:37] For those among you who wish to advance, or regress.
[74:38] Every soul is trapped by its sins.
[74:39] Except for those on the right.

The WARNING above and throughout the Quran bellows out with such profoundness that when one undertands and perceives them with utmost sincerity, it scares the hell out of you and that one simply shivers in tears and prostration to ask GOD for his forgiveness, HIS mercy and to thank HIM for giving you that ONE LAST CHANCE to redeem yourself. Such is GOD Almighty, the most Gracious, the most Merciful.

Praise be to GOD, Lord of the universe.
Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Master of the Day of Judgment.
YOU ALONE we worship, YOU ALONE we ask for help.
Guide us in the right path.
The path of those whom YOU blessed;
Not of those who have deserved wrath,
Nor of stayers.

GOD, there is no other god but GOD. HE has no partners and none equals HIM. Be HE glorified.

[porus]

Danish,

Despite the errors regarding 19, Rashad Khalifa's attempted analysis remains, in my view, quite brilliant.

I agree that verses are best understood if set within the context, not only of other verses, but also within the context of historical circumstances surrounding their revelation.

Rashad's translation of 74:30 does hint that 19 refers to the number of angels guarding "hell" described immediately in 74:31. In fact Rashad inserts 19 in parenthesis in his translation of 74:31. Why would this number of angels be singled out as "trial" for unbelievers is not very clear to me.

I use "her" in my translation of 74:30 because there is no "it" in Arabic and the context does not indicate whether it is an it or a she; and more so because most translators have ignored the possibility of an alternative translation.

"alayha tis'ata ashara" could also be translated as "She is responsible for the nineteen".

Neither 74:31 nor the immediately previous verses indicate satisfactory context for 19. I suggest that this an allegorical reference to something that only the Baatinists would attempt to elucidate.

[Danish]

Porus,

Again, I ask you to clarify your understanding of the word "her" as per the context of the verse/s as to WHO are you trying to refer to. In other words who are you pointing "her" or "she" to be?

Please also note the following verse:
[3:7] He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord". Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.

Knowledge is not strictly confined to studying and understanding the Quran, but also what surrounds within you and outside of you, i.e. HIS Creations.

[porus]

Originally posted by Danish:
Porus,

Again, I ask you to clarify your understanding of the word "her" as per the context of the verse/s as to WHO are you trying to refer to. In other words who are you pointing "her" or "she" to be?

Danish,

There is no justification for using "it" for the Arabic pronoun "ha" in alayha in 74:30. Unless, that is, it is absolutely clear that it refers to an inanimate entity that would be described by the pronoun "it" in an english translation. No such certainty exists.

The closest (not certain) reference is to "fire" in 74:31. The Arabic word for "fire" is "naar", which is a female word and therefore takes "ha" for pronoun. That is why some translators seem to think that nineteen refers to the number of angels guarding the "fire".

Because there is no certainty, then the word for word translation must be "she/her" for "ha".

This verse (74:30), I believe, falls into the allegorical category mentioned in 3:7. I do not nelieve that it refers to the number of angels. Why would God need angels, let alone nineteen of them , to guard "hell"?

No, I do not know what she/her refers to in the verse. As I wrote previously, only a Baatinist would try to explain this verse. I find no satisfactory explanation in the Quran itself. In the absence of certainty, translation rule should apply and "ha" should be rendered as "she/her". There is no word for "it" in Arabic.

Unless, of course, you have an explanation.

By the way, Rashad's is not a translation at all. I would call it an interpretation, and a highly unsatisfactory one at that.

[Danish]

Porus,

It is not possible to interpret any language word for word into another without giving the other language a proper flow of its grammatical use. Otherwise it would become rather arduous to comprehend in any given language.

Translation rule can only be applied if one can understand the overall picture. Consider this:
The very first couple of words in the second chapter (The Cow) of the Quran is: Zalikal or Dhalikal Kitab. This means "that book". If the verse is to be understood as "that book", then which book is the Quran referring to. But when we read the entire Quran and take other verses into consideration, then the Quran speaks of no other book but this book, meaning Quran only or Quran Alone. On the contrary, this or that in the context of this particular verse refers to the same object. If a table was placed in one corner of a living room and I was speaking to another person by saying, "hey, look at that table over there" or "hey, do you see this table over there". The "that" or "this" in this case refers to the same table. Thus "that book" refers to "this book" which is the Quran and nothing else.

Read the verse/s again and again where you find the "ha" to be "she/it" and see if you can comprehend. If not, then move on and don't dwell over it. It's possible that it might come back to you later. It happens with me all the time, taunting and haunting me and then voila!!!

By the way, Rashad's is not a translation at all. I would call it an interpretation, and a highly unsatisfactory one at that.

All translations are interpretations, keeping the above in mind, ie. the flow of English. As far as I am concerned, RK's the best overall translation so far.

[porus]

Danish,

OK. So, for the present, no satisfactory explanation for 74:30. Let us move on.

What is your take on verse 69:17?

The verse mentions eight angels carrying the lord's throne above them.

You will also note that Rashad's translation interpretes the verse to indicate that
Lord will have have dominion over eight universes. Another Rashad liberty with interpretation. Not very satisfactory!

Why eight angels or eight universes? Is the lord going to occupy the throne on the day of judgment?

Another allegorical verse? What do you think?

[porus]

Originally posted by Danish:

Consider this:
The very first couple of words in the second chapter (The Cow) of the Quran is: Zalikal or Dhalikal Kitab. This means "that book". If the verse is to be understood as "that book", then which book is the Quran referring to. But when we read the entire Quran and take other verses into consideration, then the Quran speaks of no other book but this book, meaning Quran only or Quran Alone.

There are two possible explanations for the "that book" in 2:2.

1. It refers to the original Quran as stated in verse 85:22. The original is on a preserved tablet somewhere in the heavens.

2. A Bohra scholar told me that it refers to Imam of the Age (Imam-uz-zamaan), who is considered to be the Quran Naatiq (Speaking Quran)

[porus]

I would add that Quran itself offers no clear explanation as to which book it refers to in 2:2. If you say it refers to the Quran you are currently reading, then that is ok, but is clearly an interpretation.

[Danish]

Porus,

1. It refers to the original Quran as stated in verse 85:22. The original is on a preserved tablet somewhere in the heavens.

Absolutely. And the copy is "perhaps" what we have. I have no doubts about the contents of the Quran as intellectually understood to be superbly authenticated, uncompromising, outspokenly challenged, non-contradictory, eloquently and poetically envisaged, scientifically inclined, spiritually reasoned and divinely inspired in its pristine condition. There is no other book that exists like it and there is none that equals it. This should be enough to "wake-the-dead". Masha-Allah, Alhamdu-Lillah.

We abide and we obey in what we have today and the judgment lies in the hands of GOD.

2. A Bohra scholar told me that it refers to Imam of the Age (Imam-uz-zamaan), who is considered to be the Quran Naatiq (Speaking Quran)

That is his wishful thinking. I abide by the Quran and nothing that indicates as such.

I would add that Quran itself offers no clear explanation as to which book it refers to in 2:2. If you say it refers to the Quran you are currently reading, then that is ok, but is clearly an interpretation.

Certainly. Verse 17:36-37.

Some final thoughts: Remember, nothing came out of thin air. Absolutely, everything is created and there MUST be a CREATOR (ONE AND ONLY), who created everything, what is in the heavens and the earth, everything within and everything beyond. That Creator we call GOD. Thus, remember your Creator all the time and do the best you can by understanding HIM and HIS Creation.

[Khairan]

A little while back, I asked a member of my family about the this/that question regarding "zalika alkitaab". He went on to speak to Arab colleagues of his, and the answer he came away with was that zalika can easily be taken to mean "this" if the context is appropriate.

Additionally, I haven't seen many translations of the Qur'an that comment on the haaza/zalika issue.
Curious as to why...

[porus]

Originally posted by Khairan:
....that zalika can easily be taken to mean "this" if the context is appropriate.

It is true that in common parlance among Arabs, 'dhalika' can mean either 'this' or 'that', this cannot apply to the Quran.

Considering that its source is the Almighty, Muslims take every letter and word to be of utmost significance. It is common belief among Muslims that no letter or word is misplaced and that they are there for a reason. Almighty would not use 'that' if he meant 'this'.

Certainly, the baatinists, which include Bohras, consider even the diacritical marks (like zabar and zayr) to be extremely important for they believe that the hidden meanings of the ayats would change significantly by alteration of even a single diacritical mark.

[Muddai]

Danish,

I guess I didn't undertsand your previous posts, and therefore I posed my initial question to you. With all due respect, you replied with some generic posts that could have been used by Hitler, David Koresh, and Charles Manson.

17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.
[17:37] You shall not walk proudly on earth - you cannot bore through the earth, nor can you be as tall as the mountains.
[31:27] If all the trees on earth were made into pens, and the ocean supplied the ink, augmented by seven more oceans, the words of GOD would not run out. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.

Awesome ! ...but how does that address my question of Slavery, Subjugation of women, and Treatment of "infidels" ?

Asking several questions with various issues together simply won't work. I agree, that we have to be specific. So how {specifically} can you apply the random quotes above to justify slavery, etc. ?

Looking forward to an enlightening reply as tall as the mountains [17:37]

[anajmi]

good questions, sure demonstrates the use of your intellect.

Please show me where the quran endorses

1) Slavery and
2) Subjugation of Women

"Treatment of Infidels/Non-Believers (Violence)"

Sure. All muslims have been killing non-belilevers for the last 14 centuries haven't they!! I am surprised there are non-believers left in the world at all. Infact the population of non-believers is probably 5 times that of the muslims. I wish Muslims would've understood the quran as well as you have :p

[Muddai]

Yo' Einstein !!!

yeah, yeah, Islam is a peaceful religion etc. etc.

Please show me where the quran endorses

1. Abolition of Slavery
2. Equality of Women
3. Peace {with the "infidels")

[anajmi]

Yo idiot.

Is that good use of intellect? awnsering a question with a question? I guess it is when you cannot answer one.

Quran does not abolish slavery and I never said that it did. I just asked you to tell me where it endorses it. I am sure you know the difference. Use your intellect!

Equality of women - I have cited numerous examples before, that men and women are not equal. They have different roles in society. Men will never be able to get pregnant, no matter how hard the west uses its intellect. I asked you to tell me where quran endorses subjugation of women. I am sure you know the difference. Use your intellect!

Peace.... you mean give up everything and become refugees right? I am sure you know the difference. Use your intellect!

[Muddai]

Let's start with the witness requirement in relation to rape (gang rape where 2 people confess or decide to be witness' is considered rape), talaq (divorce) how a man can obtain one compared to women, covering the women up so you don't get a hard-on, and the inheritance laws.

This is just a starter to get your intellectual juices flowing...(just like you figured out Men will never be able to get pregnant )

...don't drown now...... this century please

[Danish]

Equality of women - I have cited numerous examples before, that men and women are not equal.

A gross misconception amongst the so-called Muslims. Come to think of it, no wonder the women are treated so adversely and inhumanely by the Muslim clerics. Men and women are equally "balanced" in their own ways and yes, they are equal with all due respect.

Men will never be able to get pregnant, no matter how hard the west uses its intellect.

Women will never be able to get pregnant (without the men either), no matter how hard the east uses its intellect. Both need each other in one way or the other and thus they are balanced.

[3:195] Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female - you are equal to one another. Thus, those who immigrate, and get evicted from their homes, and are persecuted because of Me, and fight and get killed, I will surely remit their sins and admit them into gardens with flowing streams". Such is the reward from GOD. GOD possesses the ultimate reward.

[4:25] Those among you who cannot afford to marry free believing women, may marry believing slave women. GOD knows best about your belief, and you are equal to one another, as far as belief is concerned. You shall obtain permission from their guardians before you marry them, and pay them their due dowry equitably. They shall maintain moral behavior, by not committing adultery, or having secret lovers. Once they are freed through marriage, if they commit adultery, their punishment shall be half of that for the free women. Marrying a slave shall be a last resort for those unable to wait. To be patient is better for you. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

READ, READ AND READ THE QURAN AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN.

GOD, there is no god but GOD. HE has no partners and none equals HIM. Be HE Glorified.

[anajmi]

Rape - I did not understand the point you are trying to make. As always I guess!

Divorce - Women can divorce too. Just through different means. That is not inequality. In your tiny brains it may be.

Covering up the women so you do not get a hard on, is that subjugation, or showing her off so that you do get one, is that subjugation. Maybe you do not mind me looking at the women of your household and getting a hard on, but I sure do, as far as the women of my household are concerned.

[Muddai]

As always I guess!
Yeah, as always...lookup what I am referring to and do your research.

Women can divorce too. Just through different means.

D'uh that's exactly what I was saying.

showing her off
She is not your property to show off...or not to.

You just don't get it.

[Danish]

Muddai,

Awesome ! ...but how does that address my question of Slavery, Subjugation of women, and Treatment of "infidels"?

Before I can answer to your questions above, let me reverse them back onto you. In your own best understanding and perception, without bringing in any mullahs or any books whatsoever, and visualising it in a "reality" standpoint, in other words whatever you have seen and experienced yourself that has happened throughout your lifetime, what conclusions can you come up with regarding your own questions.

[Muddai]

Danish,

I am not sure where you are going with this, since my personal experiences are relative to, and based on, my personal surroundings and the prevalant culture I am / was exposed to. I am asking about the treatment of such in the Quran.

If you explain how it is relevant , in order for you to respond to my original question, I wouldn't mind relating my personal experiences to you.

[anajmi]

"You just don't get it. "

I do, read my entire post about the women in your family giving me a hard on and you will understand.

[Muddai]

Don't flatter yourself buddy boy...around you it is the men and goats I would be worried about..!

Read up on the mating habits of the Taliban and you will get my point....never mind....You just don't get it.

[Danish]

Muddai,

Now then, were you saying something on the "underground channel" where many of the inmates around there lie refuted and debased?

[Danish]

Muddai,

WIMP !

[anajmi]

no no no it is you who just doesn't get it. By the way, this is a good phrase to use in the end when you find your ass on the line. "You just don't get it".

As far as men and goats are concerned, that is probably all you are capable of. Is it any wonder you do not care if women dress or not? Cause they do not give you a hard on.