Queries regards to Quran

[anajmi]

One other important observation according to me. We can discuss what Allah could've done better till the cows come home. What I have concluded is that if anything in the Quran had been different from what it is right now, for eg. if Allah had referred to himself as a "She" or if the Quran had been revealed in Sanskrit instead of Arabic, we would've had far more issues and conflicts than we have today. Allah knows the past, present and future. He chose Arabic because that would offer the path of least resistance and would prove to be the best medium for propagating Islam. He chose to refer to himself as He because that would be the best way to capture the hearts of both men and women.

This is just my observation and I apologize if I have been impolite towards any gender or any language. Please forgive me. I am really sorry.

[anajmi]

Also, on a lighter note, i think God must be a man, If God was a woman, then She would have made us men go through childbirth and chums every month

And if that were the case, then men would've had to have vaginas and wombs and men would've been known as women and we would be right back where we started. So I think that we should resolve this issue by declaring that man shall henceforth be known as woman and vice-versa. That way, God won't have to change the Quran and we can all sing kumbaya. Unless ofcourse, men have a problem with that and then we will be right back where we started.

[porus]

What is disconcerting is that this discussion never rises above the level of kindergarten.

What has polarities envisaged by humans, including ideas of male and female, anything to do with Allah?

Just desist in describing Him/Her/It. All you can do is worship Him/Her/It.

To re-phrase Lao Tzu, Allah that can be described is not Allah.

[anajmi]

To re-phrase Lao Tzu, Allah that can be described is not Allah.

Allah has chosen 99 attributes in the Quran to describe himself. If I were to believe Lao Tzu, I would have to say that Allah is telling me in 99 different ways that he is actually not Allah? You are right. Any higher than kindergarten and this discussion will go straight into the parallel universe.

[porus]

To re-phrase Lao Tzu, Allah that can be described is not Allah.

Allah has chosen 99 attributes in the Quran to describe himself. If I were to believe Lao Tzu, I would have to say that Allah is telling me in 99 different ways that he is actually not Allah? You are right. Any higher than kindergarten and this discussion will go straight into the parallel universe.

Allah can whatever he wants to do; even describing Himself/Herself/Itself. Did he ask you to describe Him/Her/It?

Do not imagine that by recitation Allah's attributes in Quran is 'your' description of Allah. It is Allah's description of Allah.

[anajmi]

Correct. Hence we should ignore Lao Tzu description of Allah that Allah cannot be described. We should change it to

Allah should not be described in languages other than Arabic and that too only as per the words of the Quran. Hence namaaz should be said in Arabic only and we shouldn't argue about the gender of Allah based upon Allah's description in other languages. That is really non-kindergarten stuff.

I am just hoping that humanbeing doesn't accuse you of being a rigid wahhabi mulla who prevents us from describing Allah in any language other than Arabic.

[porus]

Lao Tzu did not describe Allah. I was just paraphrasing his parallel words about the Tao.

With regard to Allah's attributes, as a scholar of Arabic, you should know that they are His names (al-asmaa ul-husna). He has given them to you so that you may call Him or call upon Him by those names. (7:180, 17:110 and other similar aayaat)

I am saying that it is not appropriate to attempt description of Allah even in Arabic. Allah cannot be confined within any description humans are able to give Him/Her/It.

[anajmi]

So you are a rigid wahhabi mullah who doesn't want people like humanbeing to understand the magnanimity of Allah in a language that they can understand?

[Aymelek]

Extract from Hz Ali's sermon as recorded in Nahj ul Balagha

Sermon 1:

"He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks.

The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and who recognises His like regards Him two; and who regards Him two recognises parts for Him; and who recognises parts for Him mistook Him; and who mistook Him pointed at Him; and who pointed at Him admitted limitations for Him; and who admitted limitations for Him numbered Him.

Whoever said in what is He, held that He is contained; and whoever said on what is He held He is not on something else. He is a Being but not through phenomenon of coming into being. He exists but not from non-existence. He is with everything but not in physical nearness. He is different from everything but not in physical separation. He acts but without connotation of movements and instruments. He sees even when there is none to be looked at from among His creation. He is only One, such that there is none with whom He may keep company or whom He may miss in his absence."

[anajmi]

Looks like Hazrat Ali (ra) never left kindergarten otherwise he would've known that he shouldn't be describing Allah even if he is doing it in Arabic. Too bad for the shias.

[humanbeing]

Hi Anajmi

Thanks for your response. It was educating and clearing my doubts.
------------------------------------------------------
Hi Anajmi


Relax ! my friend. Look at your responses man, whats with you yaar. Why are you irritated and sarcastic. Many types of people comes to this forum, ask questions tricky, controversial or silly. Unless those questions are not abusive..


Whatever I m sharing on this thread, you gotta pick that up add your sarcasm and throw it back. Please I don’t intend to teach or advise you anything. You seem to be a learned person, but arrogant. Do you read every question posed on islam or any other topic with a pinch of irritation and disgust. As if why questions exist in this world !!


You have shared your POV and understanding of Islam and reference from other sources to answer the queries. It was indeed very good. But what was the need of irritation. May be that is your personality, I don’t wish to poke at that. But just have a re look at your responses from the start on this thread.


I wasn’t kind either, I m sorry about that. But it was your responses which were nasty to begin with. Now please allow me to be clear honestly no sarcasm. I m not mixing knowledge you share on Islam with your disgust you expressed in your response. I m specifically mentioning the irritated and sarcasm part.


I did not ask you to apologize, All I asked was a polite response in good intention without mocking me. Read my post where I mentioned about a discussion with my friends. I spoke on same lines as you responded. That Namaz shall be offered in Arabic and its not difficult. However this is an Islamic related forum so I put my question on this thread. Did I anywhere mock, ridiculed sanctity of Islam or Allah.


Anajmi, I don’t wish to take any personal arguments with you further. My sincere apologies without any sarcasm or ridicule if I have offended your sentiments or ego.


Once again, thanks for your insightful share on question raised. It was helpful in understanding.

[TBG]

AoA,
I couldnt help but make a comment here. I sincerely apologize if my comments offend anyone. I am nowhere compared to any of you as far as religious knowledge is concerned but after reading all the posts the following dua kept coming into my head.

"O ALLAH! I seek refuge in You from knowledge that is not beneficial, and from a heart that does not fear(YOU), and from a soul that is not satisfied, and from a prayer that is not accepted."

In light of the first part of the dua i wonder what does it matter if Allah (swt) is highlighted as a man or a woman. Our perception, understanding and approach to him/her does not change. It seems to me the discussion is happening for the sake of discussion. It is like that if i call Allah(swt) him and after this discussion i start calling him her, not sure what will change in my life. Another point in my head is that not sure how trying to understand whether Allah(swt) is called a he/she adds to my spiritual enlightenment or wisdom or gets me closer to him. I understand that questions need to be asked and they should be asked, but in my view after a while it seems essence of the question is lost and we are into matters that do not add any value.

I apologize again for my comments, i am worst than a beginner in religious knowledge but i couldnt help share this thought. perhaps i missed the purpose of this whole discussion.

w salams

[anajmi]

"O ALLAH! I seek refuge in You from knowledge that is not beneficial, and from a heart that does not fear(YOU), and from a soul that is not satisfied, and from a prayer that is not accepted."

TBG,

If you had made this dua before this thread started, may be we wouldn'tve started this thread.

Jokes aside, how did you conclude that clarification about how Allah addresses himself in the Quran is knowledge that is not beneficial? humanbeing believes that the way Allah addresses Himself, might've led to male oppression of the female in Islam. Don't you think it is your duty to clarify this doubt in his mind? Ofcourse, in order to do this, you will need to sacrifice your higher education and choose to remain in the kindergarten because people like porus and mustafanalwalla who have graduated from the kindergarten, are not allowed to discuss Allah.

[porus]

Some extracts from an earlier post relevant to this thread.

Extract from Hz Ali's sermon as recorded in Nahj ul Balagha

Sermon 1:

"..... and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and who recognises His like regards Him two; and who regards Him two recognises parts for Him; and who recognises parts for Him mistook Him; and who mistook Him pointed at Him; and who pointed at Him admitted limitations for Him; and who admitted limitations for Him numbered Him.

Whoever said in what is He, held that He is contained; and whoever said on what is He held He is not on something else. "

And now consider this:

Looks like Hazrat Ali (ra) never left kindergarten otherwise he would've known that he shouldn't be describing Allah even if he is doing it in Arabic. Too bad for the shias.

It took anajmi just 2 seconds to respond to Ali's sermon. Which means that he responded without reading it or pondering on it. If he had, he would see that Ali is strongly discouraging any description of Allah.

The underlined sentence above is similar to Lao Tzu's saying: "Allah that is described is not (the) Allah"

[anajmi]

This is getting ridiculous. The statement "Allah that is described is not (the) Allah" is a paradox. How educated does one need to be to see that? Isn't that in itself a description of Allah that Allah has not chosen to mention about himself in the Quran? Who came up with this idea?

Consider what Hazrat Ali (ra) has written.

The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Is that an ayah of the Quran? Or is that Hazrat Ali (ra) describing Allah?

This idiocy is the reason why this discussion has lingered in the kindergarten. If one is to truly not describe Allah then this is how the conversation should go.

anajmi - Allah is most beneficient and most merciful.
porus -
anajmi - Allah is the one and only.
porus -
anajmi - Allah is Maliki Yaum-ud-Deen.
porus -

people to Hazrat Ali (ra) - Tell us something about Allah.
Hazrat Ali (ra) -
people to Hazrat Ali (ra) - Allah has two legs.
Hazrat Ali (ra) -
people to Hazrat Ali (ra) - Allah is 60 feet tall.
Hazrat Ali (ra) -

I hope I have made myself clear.

[porus]

Allah has described Himself in the Quran. You may repeat His description for 'barakat'. You can call upon Him using the names He calls Himself.

Ali wants you to be aware that even using Allah's names that He has Himself given us would be to confine Him.

And Ali is almost as great as anajmi.

[anajmi]

So Allah and Hazrat Ali (ra) want us to be parrots, but you too? I thought you were smarter than God.

[anajmi]

Ali wants you to be aware that even using Allah's names that He has Himself given us would be to confine Him.

That is stretching the sermon a little bit to bring it in line with Lao Tzu.

Consider this ayah of the Quran.

ٱلحَمدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ ٱلعَـٰلَمِينَ

Some authors translate this as "All Praise is For Allah".
Some, including our very own, porus, translate this ayah as "The Praise is For Allah".

Also consider,
بِسمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ
Some translate it as "In the name of Allah, The Most Beneficient, The Most Merciful".
Some translate it as "In the name of Allah, The Beneficient, The Merciful"

Which is better? The first one which doesn't place any restriction or the second one which does? This is the reason why some people prevent us from uttering the names of Allah (swt) in the Quran. Because they haven't understood their true interpretations. I know people with the names Rahman and Raheem but when referring to Allah, the scope has to be multiplied by infinity.
You might ask, why then didn't Allah just say "Most"? Because if he had, then we would've asked about who it was that Allah was comparing himself with.

So either Hazrat Ali (ra) has failed to understand the Quran, or he is talking about something completely different. I believe he is talking about something completely different. For eg. some people might say that Allah can see, hence he has eyes. This would be an attribute that would restrict Allah. Or that he is 60 feet tall or that he has powerful ears through which he hears our prayers.

[TBG]

AoA Anajmi,
I am reading for the first time that humans believe that the way Allah(swt) addresses himself may have caused male oppresion. I am trying to grasp how that came about.
We can discuss about Allah(swt) all we want, his attributes, his orders, his laws, his wisdom, but i dont understand how discussing whether he is a male/female is beneficial in anyway. Imam Ghazali said, creation of man represents Allah(swt)' mercy, his material wealth Allah(swt)'s love and his body Allah's wisdom. Now in this context what does it matter whether he is a male or female.
My understanding of Allah(Swt) does not change or get affected whether He calls Himself He or She. Infact it is only when i write or read where the gender comes into play, but in all other aspects of belief, faith, practice the concept of gender is missing.
w salams

[humanbeing]

Why does Quran address Allah as “HE” … is Allah male ??

Hi Friends

My sincere apologies to all members who are offended by questions raised here. I have mistakenly worded this question. This has lead to enough ridicule on this thead. I had posted this question in good faith, Out of few social discussions with friends outside, questions are asked about Islam, I posted on this forum to get more view points and have better understanding. I never thought it would turn into a pathetic mockery or ego fight.

By no intention I wanted to question Allah’s authority. I had asked questions with regards to interpretation by human kinds and their understanding. May be I m less perfect than so called highly intellectuals, no-doubts, complete knowledgeable, extremely devoted highly pious muslims.

Earlier during discussions, even I used to get offended when anything was questioned about Islam or bohra ideologies, Always thumping down human arrogance and showed Islam is perfect but with a wrong approach which would further distance people to understand what truly Islam is.

I m still discovering magnificence of Islam, from Quran and historical references. I believed whatever was dished out to me during Sabaks, Bayaans and Waaz. Recently discovering not everything is true what I was fed.

With reference to Allah’s expression in Quran and gender bias, leading to oppression or psychological dominance by men. These are some ideas, viewpoints or opinions which comes out during discussions. My whole idea of questions was to question the interpretation of Quran by Human kinds over the centuries.. By no means .. no intention .. I was questioning Allah or Prophet. Quran remains pure in the Arabic form. But translations vary. Meaning is not changed, but interpretation is taken by people as per their own convenience. Again please read my post. Its human which may be misinterpreting Quran. And Not Quran by itself.

Queries raised during a discussion which I m sharing here that made me think, so I thought of sharing on this forum with members I have befriended.

As its wrongly perceived that Allah is expressed by male gender. It has given a psychological edge to men to own Quran and dictate terms and conditions in Islam. So we see mullas and moulvis which are usually or majorly males issuing fatwas as per their understanding of Quran and Islam. Although women too have access to Quran and have knowledge, but in practical world we see oppression of women by men shielding behind quranic interpretations. With regards to Burqa, halalaa, multiple marriages, restriction on women in many sphere of life.. My point here is, quran does not convey any injustice for women. Ofcourse as the argument concludes, Allah will do justice to ones who have misused Islam’s teachings.

One point was also raised, by a non muslim (he does not have any ill intentions towards any faith) that Quran was revealed to Prophet and further Prophet narrated or explained to As’haabs to compile Quran. End of the day, Quran was compiled by group of Men, During Paganist Pre Islamic Arabia, further to that, Quran has been translated over centuries again by men. So expression of Allah is male oriented in any language.

I have defended this view points by many facts and points. I told this friend; that It was Quran and Advent of Islam that objected and stopped maltreatment of women, Quran commanded respect and granted equality to women as equal creation of Allah. However I m not learned about nitty gritty of grammar and use of Arabic language to address Allah in Quran. So I coudnt justify all the view points. Thus thought of sharing the question on this forum.


And I got the answers from the members, sadly packaged with smacks of ridicule and sarcastic politeness. Exception to those members who have answered understanding technicalities of my question. I dint want to put this whole saga in first place to justify me asking this questions, thinking that members would understand.

[Aymelek]

Imam Jafar Sadik said, "What God is man cannot think, and what man thinks, God is not. Yet man lives by God and God is nearer to him than himself."

[porus]

humanbeing,

Your posts tend to be personal rants which make for tiresome reading. I suggest you deal with one single idea in every post and reduce the length of your posts to a quarter of their length.

[humanbeing]

Hi Porus
Sorry about that long sagas. He he he.. Its kinda boring !! Advise taken, I will work on it.

[porus]

Imam Jafar Sadik said, "What God is man cannot think, and what man thinks, God is not. Yet man lives by God and God is nearer to him than himself."

That is similar to Lao Tzu's saying about the Tao:

Tao described (by humans) is not the Tao.

We may expect anajmi to disagree with Lao Tzu whom he does not consider very 'smart' at all. And, of course, his (anajmi's) intellect and scholarship exceeds in excellence in comparison to those of Ali and Jafar al-Sadiq combined.

[anajmi]

TBG,

but i dont understand how discussing whether he is a male/female is beneficial in anyway.

I am not sure you followed the discussion. I am just trying to clarify that based upon the way Allah chooses to address himself, we shouldn't be assuming one way or another. By, the way, why are you talking about this? Is this beneficial to you in anyway? As per Lao Tzu, it is not. You just wasted a lot of your time.

Here is how Lao Tzu has changed his saying about Tao over time

Tao that can be talked about is not the Tao
Tao that can be described is not Tao (reverse engineered from porus' paraphrase)
Tao described (by humans) is not the Tao

I would wait for a few more years to see where Tao goes from here.

Imam Jafar Sadik said, "What God is man cannot think, and what man thinks, God is not. Yet man lives by God and God is nearer to him than himself."

Is Imam Jafar Sadik talking about God? Is he out of his mind? Does he know that as soon as he started talking about God, he was no longer talking about God but about something else? As soon as Imam Jafar Sadik said "God is nearer to him", he has made God finite. A blasphemy!!

[anajmi]

his (anajmi's) intellect and scholarship exceeds in excellence in comparison to those of Ali and Jafar al-Sadiq combined.

porus,

If you can be smarter than God, then I can definitely be smarter than everyone else right?

[porus]

his (anajmi's) intellect and scholarship exceeds in excellence in comparison to those of Ali and Jafar al-Sadiq combined.

porus,

If you can be smarter than God, then I can definitely be smarter than everyone else right?

Oh, I agree with that absolutely.

However, I did not say I was smarter than God; only that I would make a good one.

And remember the good/bad polarity is a human invention.

Alas, I am not God. But I think I would be a good one.

[anajmi]

However, I did not say I was smarter than God; only that I would make a good one.

potato potahto!

[TBG]

AoA and thank you bro anajmi for your comments,
You are right cent percent%, it was not beneficial as it did not add anything, and i usually dont comment. Only and unless i feel necessary to voice something.
best wishes

[porus]

Imam Jafar Sadik said, "What God is man cannot think, and what man thinks, God is not. Yet man lives by God and God is nearer to him than himself."

Is Imam Jafar Sadik talking about God? Is he out of his mind? Does he know that as soon as he started talking about God, he was no longer talking about God but about something else? As soon as Imam Jafar Sadik said "God is nearer to him", he has made God finite. A blasphemy!!

"God is nearer to him than himself".

Imam is only repeating what God Himself has said about Himself ( 50:16 - nahnu aqrabu ilayhi min Hablil wareed). We are allowed by God to call Him by names/descriptions that He has given to Himself. Who knows what mysteries lie in those names? That is, except you, of course.