Messages

436

General Discussions / Re: Feedback on Q&A: Who named us muslim

« on: January 10, 2014, 05:20:27 AM »

w/salaam KZ,

Thanks for the reply.

1. I fail to see why the word Muslim is rendered as a meaningless title if Prophet Ibrahim is the one suggesting it? What is your basis for that?

2. As to the usage by the Prophet Ibrahim, then that would most certainly would have been by whatever tongue Prophet Ibrahim spoke.

3. S-L-M is an old Semitic root - it predates Arabic and Hebrew. It is perfectly possible they used the same root!

Almost seems to give Abraham omnipresence-like attribute.

  How? What? For choosing a name/title? It is perfectly possible he had that authority given to him by the Almighty. We, Sufi/Sunni believe that the Prophet Muhammad [Peace Be Upon Him] had legislative and other powers granted by Allah, and that in no way would give the Prophet any omnipresence-like attribute.

Re: 1)
My basis is that if Abraham coined the name "Muslim" did he invent it or use an existing word in whatever his language was?
If one answers invented it, then it is a meaningless invented word/name, e.g. if he then met someone and said "I'm a Muslim" the other person would have no idea what "Muslim" meant.
But brother Joseph clarified his view, that in his Abraham-naming theory, whatever the equivalent was would have been used in his language, and similarly whatever the equivalent was in Aramaic/Hebrew/Greek/etc would have been used.


###


Let me clarify what I meant by omnipresent-like attribute. My quote below:

Also, in such a theory, the wording seems awkward:
"...he (Abraham) named you al muslimeen from before AND in this (millat)..."
i.e.
Abraham named you (i.e. followers of this) al muslimeen from before AND Abraham named you al muslimeen in this creed/millat

Almost seems to give Abraham omnipresence-like attribute. And not to mention "this millat/creed" was the same as before, so why differentiate then and now.

In the Abraham-naming theory, it is as follows:

1) Abraham named you (i.e. followers of this) al muslimeen from before
AND
2) Abraham named you al muslimeen in this (creed/millat)

How do explain parts 1 and 2? i.e. this millat is the same as Abraham's so why does it differentiate? In case my point is still not clear one simply needs to answer how Abraham named us from before AND how Abraham named us in this millat.

If one can explain that without giving Abraham omnipresent-like attribute, I'd welcome an explanation.

437

General Discussions / Re: Feedback on Q&A: Who named us muslim

« on: January 09, 2014, 06:24:40 AM »

w/salaam br. Joseph,

Thanks for the reply.

If one accepts the traditional position (which I do not dismiss at all as a strong possibility as I intimated in my post), a contention may arise in the form of another theological question as to whether there is any evidence from the previous scriptures that God has ever named anyone as 'Muslims'. To my knowledge hitherto, I do not think this is the case. It is useful to remember that this is an actual naming or title also supported by use of the definite article 'al'. (i.e. The Muslims) and the naming process given by the verb 'sammakumu'. From a Judeo-Christian perspective this could be a contention based on 'historicity' against the Quran to prove from previous scriptures where this has happened especially when the Quran acknowledges that God has named individuals before which is clearly evident in the Bible and the Quran. e.g. See Abram to Abraham (Genesis 17:5) and Yahya (Quran 19:7) respectively.

If I have understood you correctly, you are suggesting that since the actual word "Muslim" is not found in previous scriptures then this  implies God is not the one "naming" them/us "Muslim". That is not how I personally understand the verse, I understand the "naming" to refer to what it happens to be in Arabic (i.e. language of Quran). In another language, whatever is the equivalent of the Arabic word "muslim" would have been used.

I did some quick research on this, e.g. source

Rabbi Jochanan responds: "He was a Benjaminite. Yet he was called a Yehudi because he rejected idolatry--and anyone who rejects idolatry is called a Yehudi."

The commentaries explain that the name Yehudah shares the same root as the Hebrew word hoda'ah, which means acknowledgement or submission. One who acknowledges G‑d's existence and submits to His authority--to the extent that he is willing to sacrifice his life for the sanctification of His name--he is called a Yehudi.

I don't know if the above is true or not, but it is interesting and potentially useful.



The conceptual (and perhaps logical) problem I have with the Abraham naming theory is that it seems to require the word "Muslim" to be a meaningless title, e.g. if the word "Muslim" was used in Aramaic/Hebrew/Greek it would have no intrinsic meaning. In other words, to them it would be a made-up word. So in such a theory, did Abraham invent this word, or did he select it from existing words in whatever the language was in his day?
If he invented this unique word, how did Noah come to use it? It seems an impossible coincidence.
If he selected it from existing words, was Noah's language similar, did he also use it by coincidence? Did this word then die out amongst Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek but somehow lived on in Arabic with it's related words and verbs, e.g. islam, aslama, salaam etc and its just a coincidence it seems to fit in with these verbs/words?


Also, in such a theory, the wording seems awkward:
"...he (Abraham) named you al muslimeen from before AND in this (millat)..."
i.e.
Abraham named you (i.e. followers of this) al muslimeen from before AND Abraham named you al muslimeen in this creed/millat

Almost seems to give Abraham omnipresence-like attribute. And not to mention "this millat/creed" was the same as before, so why differentiate then and now.


It's difficult for me to get my head around the Abraham-naming theory.

438

General Discussions / Feedback on Q&A: Who named us muslim

« on: January 06, 2014, 05:04:19 AM »

Dear brother Joseph,
salaam.

Reference: http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1080.0

In my view, the evidence suggests it is God who "named" us "muslimeen". Here is my reasoning/evidence:

1) in 22:78 the other "huwa" usage always refer to God
2) the verse continues throughout from the same perspective/subject-address. If "huwa" refers to God, then the verse flows without a switch in "huwa"
3) to my knowledge, "huwa" is never used as a reference for Abraham elsewhere in Quran

439

General Discussions / Re: Al Hajj, and the three, famous prohibitions.

« on: December 31, 2013, 09:09:43 PM »

w/salaam,

(2)   The calling one another by names of reproach.

How did you determine the meaning for the above?

I understand it as wickedness/transgression.

440

Islamic Duties / Re: Salath ul Wasta

« on: December 19, 2013, 05:07:41 AM »

It was recently discussed here:
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1046.msg4116#msg4116

441

Discussions / Re: THE QUR’AN AS IT EXPLAINS ITSELF, QXP, Fourth Edition

« on: December 10, 2013, 09:38:20 PM »

salaam sardar,

All translations are an interpretation to some degree. However QXP is primarily an interpretation.

This means that Dr Shabbir inserts his understanding into the text more so than translations. And he does revise his understandings from time to time, which is natural.

Whenever reading Quran I always recommend adopting a sound approach AND utilising study tools/resources, e.g. see www.StudyQuran.org

442

General Discussions / Re: Crucifixion

« on: December 06, 2013, 07:07:27 PM »

peace all,

I strongly recommend reading all posts and linked to articles in this thread:
http://salaatforum.com/index.php?id=325

In my view, summary:

Please see the following article:
http://www.mostmerciful.com/substitution.htm

THEN also see:
http://www.free-minds.org/jesus-dead-or-alive


 Taking the above into account, in terms of what is most likely, it seems that it appeared to them that Jesus had died on the cross, but likely became unconcious/fainted. He then probably lived a period after before dying.

Not only does the above fit with The Quran, but also explains The Biblical/Christian interpretation of him being raised alive, and its associated myths.

I strongly recommend reading the above links and all should be clear.

443

General Discussions / Re: An attempt at understanding 2:238

« on: December 06, 2013, 07:05:02 PM »

peace all,

The above views can be reconciled quite easily:

Guard/preserve on/over the bonds*; and the most balanced/equitable/just bond; and stand/observe dutifully for God. [2:238]

*in life, there are many, including oaths to one's spouse, marriage contract etc.

A mumin/believer simply needs to ask themselves, what is the most equitable/just/balanced bond? The answer to me is obvious, and that is to God and His deen, hence what follows in 2:239 which is a reference to the regular/timed salat/bond. To me it seems a specific mention of this bond is said as this is not a personal one between people, and if this central bond is upheld, all others will naturally be guarded.

444

Discussions / Re: THE QUR’AN AS IT EXPLAINS ITSELF, QXP, Fourth Edition

« on: November 19, 2013, 03:34:44 AM »

peace all,

QXP like all translations is imperfect. It is reasonable, however the main problem for the reader is that QXP is primarily an interpretation so almost nothing can be concluded based on reading it. One would have to actually verify it first.

Lastly, it is unfortunate but the ourbeacon forum seems to be restricted in terms of free speech, e.g. critical discussions.

445

General Discussions / Re: Sign or Mark on forehead

« on: November 10, 2013, 11:42:40 PM »

peace,

You may find this helpful:

48:29 Muhammad is the messenger of God, and those who are with him are stern against the concealers/rejecters/ingrates, but merciful between themselves. You see them inclining/humbling and SuJaD, seeking bounty from God and pleasure/approval. Their distinction is in their faces/attentions/considerations/wills/purposes, from the trace/teaching/influence of the SuJuD. Such is their example in the Torah. And their example in the Injeel is like a seed/crop which sends forth its shoot then strengthened it then becomes thick then stands upon its stem, pleasing to the sowers. That He may enrage the rejecters/concealers with them. God promises those who believe and do good works a forgiveness and a great reward.

It is interesting to note the preposition "fi" (in) not "ala" (on), making it "their distinction/mark is IN their faces/wills/purposes/considerations". Minority usage of "fi" can mean on/at however.
The word "athar" (root: Alif-Tha-Ra) basically means "that which is left behind from something" hence its meanings such as trace/mark/impression/teaching/influence and is not necessarily a physical thing, see 5:46, 18:6, 20:96, 30:50.
The word "seema" (root: Siin-Waw-Miim) means an identifying feature (e.g. could be the way someone looks or acts) see 2:273, 7:46, 7:48, 47:30, 55:41. Perhaps the majority of people would not have a trace of prostration on their face from physically prostrating in prayer for example, even if it was done many times per day, so this understanding, whilst superficially plausible, actually falls short. Some translators, e.g. Asad, do not take it to mean a physical mark on one's face.
It should be noted that "inclining and SJD" seems to relate to "seeking bounty from God and pleasure/approval" whose other occurrences relate to worldly benefits/provisions.
It should be noted that in the prior context, 48:25, it clearly implies some believers were unknown/unrecognisable, which makes it even more unlikely it is referring to a physical mark on one's face.
The "them" refers to the believers undergoing such growth. It may also imply that actualising oneself under the guidance of God's system leads to self-growth and benefits. There is an implication that the act of SJD can function as a catalyst to such growth, as it leaves an impression/influence upon such a person, thus the demeanor stems from that act/mindset, and results in fruitful growth and reward, and this is the message encapsulated in the example at the end. To achieve such effective growth, one's will/consideration/purpose/attention should be traceable back to the act of SJD.

Source

446

Islamic Duties / Re: New Article: what is 'al hajj' according to The Quran?

« on: November 07, 2013, 05:54:01 AM »

peace optimist,

Thanks for the info, however I'd point out:

and hence Kabah has been made the Qiblah

Quran does not state that, although that is the commonly taken interpretation.

447

Islamic Duties / Re: feedback on Joseph Islam's article on hajj and umrah

« on: November 05, 2013, 01:17:58 AM »

Dear Brother Joseph,
Peace.

Apologies for my delay in reply, however I was working on my own article on hajj thus wanted to wait till it was done before replying.

It is not unusual to find it tedious to find explanations for certain 'ritual' practices. For example, why even circumambulate around a house? Why even go to Arafat? (2:198). Why remember God at the 'Mash'ari-lharami' (2:198). Why Safa and Marwa? Why the infatuation with hair?  I feel it is helpful to remember that it is the spirit behind the rite, the devotion to God when we carry out certain practices in His name that remains key. So when a prescribed rite is incomplete, then there is usually a recompense due of some sort.

I think these questions are reasonable, as The Quran itself says:

We have sent down to you a decree/writ in which is your remembrance/mentioning. Then, will not you use reason? [21:10]

And do not follow what you have no knowledge of; surely the hearing, the sight and the heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that. [17:36]

"Will they not ponder over the Quran?" [4:82]

And We have cited in this Quran every example for the people. But man was always most argumentative. [18:54]


I have discussed some of these issues in my article. See this thread:
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1025.0

448

Islamic Duties / New Article: what is 'al hajj' according to The Quran?

« on: November 05, 2013, 01:04:46 AM »

peace/salaam all,

Summary of article below:


al HaJJ ~ the symposium/feast/homage/commemoration


When
occurs within the ashur(plural of shahr) well known i.e. the four inviolable/restricted months [2:197, 9:2-5]
the crescent/new moons are used as set times for it [2:189]

Guidelines
the principal requirement: the position of the shelter and of those hosting it is that nothing is associated with God i.e. monotheism [22:26, 22:31]
can take place at a shelter wherein this criteria is met [3:96, 22:26]
done for God [3:97, 2:196]
during this time there is an amnesty/truce in place if there are warring parties (self-defence is still allowed however) [9:2, 2:191]
this type of event will nurture a sense of brotherhood amongst monotheists/believers, provide opportunity to witness benefits, remember/mention/thank/magnify God, spend in the way of God and do good [2:195-198, 9:18-20, 22:25-28, 22:35]

Participants
it is open to all mankind (who are willing to abide by the laws of the land) - for whoever is able to make a way to it [3:97, 9:18, 22:27]
if you wish to go but are prevented then send whatever is easy of gift/offering (with a representative) - if unable to do this then one can redeem by way of abstinence/charity/sacrifice [2:196]

Undertaking HaJJ
for monotheists - those wishing to uphold the salat/bond and bring forth betterment [22:31, 22:35, 9:18, 9:28]
no sex/wrongdoing/quarreling - this may aid the positive atmosphere and one's spiritual experience [2:197]
bring provision [2:197]
one's state of mind should be piety/conscientiousness/forethoughtfulness/taqwa and sincere/straightforward [2:189, 2:197, 2:203, 22:32, 22:37]
can be done in 2 days but typically would be 3-10 days, and one's obligation is fulfilled after the act of animal slaughter and feeding those in need [2:200, 2:203, 22:29, 22:34]

Visitors
if you enjoyed in the visit to the HaJJ then give whatever is easy of gift/offering - if unable then abstinence 3 days during + 7 when you return = 10 complete [2:196]

Activities
one may seek bounty (i.e. worldly benefit, e.g. trade), get to know one another, go about the place, remember/mention/thank/magnify God, if doing HaJJ slaughter an animal to eat and share with the needy [2:198, 2:200, 2:203, 22:28, 22:34, 22:36]


The HaJJ seems to be a vehicle through which commemoration of God, spending in the way of God, experiencing benefits for oneself/others and brotherhood are actualised. Such an undertaking/event would also serve as an excellent example for visitors, and thus perhaps help spread the message. Humans are by nature social beings and there is nothing more powerful than seeing the truth for oneself, and this effect could tie in with some of the other meanings of the root Ha-Jiim-Jiim: e.g. "overcome another by/in argument/evidences/testimonies".

###
Source
###


All feedback welcome, especially corrections. Thanks.

449

Islamic Duties / Re: feedback on Joseph Islam's article on hajj and umrah

« on: August 18, 2013, 11:38:44 PM »

Dear brother Joseph,
Peace.

Thank you for the reply.

Re: 8 )
If I have understood you correctly, you are saying that in the location Abraham was in, one rite was to circuit "the ancient house", and this rite is re-established at Makkah using the Kaabah BUT since you do not see "the ancient house" as a reference to the Kaabah by your own admission, this rite is not an explicitly stated rite, but somewhat implicit.

One must be consistent, i.e. not pick and choose what rite they do or how they do it, for example in the article you linked to you said, bold mine:

022.033
"Therein are benefits for you for an appointed term; and afterward they are brought for sacrifice to the Ancient House (Arabic: bait-il-ateeq)"

It is well known that no sacrifice is performed in the Holy precinct of the Masjid Haram. This was a practice performed by the previous prophets in the ancient temples. Ancient Jews have been known to sacrifice in the temple.
 
The very next verse, 22:34 informs the reader of the connection with these ancient rites by faith and dedication to God. Each nation was given such rites as a devotion to God. Prophet Abraham (pbuh) and his people were no different. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his followers were also to be no different if they were to follow in their footsteps. The connection being amongst all of them, the dedication and devotion to God.

And see your response here:

However, with the 'ancient house' mentioned in verse 22:33, the place of sacrifice was 'at' the ancient house as you will note from the Arabic and the crucial preposition 'ila'. i.e. mahilluha ila 'lbayti'lateeq. (their place of sacrifice is at the Ancient House).

Thus, on the one hand you choose to re-establish Abrahamic practice for circuiting "the ancient house" but when it comes to slaughter at "the ancient house" you seem to favour re-establishing it elsewhere - why?

Consistent ---> circuit the ancient house, slaughter at the ancient house
Inconsistent ---> circuit the kaabah, slaughter elsewhere


Re: 9)
I look forward to an explanation in future, GW.

Re: 11)
I was hoping for a real life example/scenario, or ideally a couple of examples - explained.

Re: 13)
You said:

I shared in my response to you:

Verse 2:196 – “…and do not shave your heads until the offering reaches its destination. And whoever among you is sick or has an ailment of the head must pay a ransom (Arabic: fidya) of fasting or charity or sacrifice (offering)…”

I respectfully feel the meaning is clear.

I respectfully disagree. Your interpolation is:

Verse 2:196 – “…and do not shave your heads until the offering reaches its destination. And whoever among you is sick or has an ailment of the head (which has necessitated the cutting of the hair BEFORE the sacrifice reaches its destination) must pay a ransom (Arabic: fidya) of fasting or charity or sacrifice (offering)…”

This seems unusual to me. Can you clarify what situations/conditions wherein sickness or ailment of the head necessitates cutting of the hair?

2:196 says:
Give X/hadiy

do not Y until the X reaches its destination

whoever was sick or ailment of head ----> thus could not comply with: 1) giving X  or 2) do not Y until the X reaches its destination

Is it referring to (1) or (2)? If we choose (1) the following is not an issue:

In your understanding one who gave an offering then became ill or ailment of head and had to cut their hair before it reached its destination now ALSO have to ransom by way of abstinence/charity/observance. So the ill person has to do more than the healthy person. Why?

It seems to me in such a view the hair is playing an unusually special and important role - for some unknown reason.


Re: 14)
Thanks for the example. I think "to" could fit there also.

Re: 16)
Your wording is the problem.

required  past participle, past tense of re·quire (Verb)
Verb
Need for a particular purpose; depend on for success or survival.
Cause to be necessary.
Specify as compulsory

Re: 17)
Thanks for clarifying. I'm not sure if by "extra circuits" you mean only one, or more the better. If the latter, then even though number of circuits is not mentioned, it is assumed doing extra circuits is better. I wonder if one could then extrapolate and say the more the better, i.e. a person doing 100 is better than 10. Perhaps, but I have a different view of 2:158.


#####

I hope the above is taken with the intent it was written, and that is to explore each view and thus better understand the verses in question.

Regards,
Wakas

450

Islamic Duties / Re: feedback on Joseph Islam's article on hajj and umrah

« on: August 16, 2013, 03:48:23 AM »

Dear brother Joseph,
Peace.

Thank you for the reply.

Re: 8 )
You said: "I do not see the ancient house as a reference to the ‘Ka’aba’. "
But this seems to contradict your article, quote:

TAWAAF (CIRCUMAMBULATION) IS AN ANCIENT RITE INSTITUTED AT THE KA'ABA

Please note there is no mention of the requirement for 'seven circuits' around the Ka'aba. One should do as many circuits as one is able in complete with complete devotion to God.

022.029 "Then let them complete the rites prescribed for them, perform their vows, and circumambulate the Ancient House (Arabic: bil'bait-il-ateeq)."

Re: 9)
The main reason why I reject the common understanding of 2:196 is the critical questions 1 and 2 in the article I linked to. If you (or others) have an explanation for this I would welcome it.


Re: 11)
Thanks for clarifying, however it seems you are implying that if one is prevented from completing and gives hdy but it does not reach it's permitted place, then one does not shave the head or cut hair. If so, can you explain how this could come about, e.g. real life scenario. See also (9) above and (13) below.

Re: 13)
Let me clarify, I am referring to the part in caps bold:
You said: "..If there is a sickness or an ailment of the head which has necessitated the cutting of the hair BEFORE the sacrifice reaches its destination, then a ransom..."
Where does Quran say this?

Re: 14)
Thanks for clarifying you take "ila" to mean "followed by / until", although it more commonly means "to". In Arabic "hatta" more commonly means "until" which is also used in 2:196. I think during my Quran studies I have seen different uses of "ila" but do you have another wherein a clear example of "followed by / until" is meant?


Re: 16)
Thanks for clarifying.
You said: The rites required for Umrah can be deduced from the Quran which require a pilgrim only to complete the circumambulation of the Kaaba and the 'tawaaf' of Safa and Marwah.

I think your use of the word "require" is causing the problem, as you clearly say tawaf of safa/marwah is optional in umrah. "required" implies obligatory.
I still do not see how one can deduce umrah "requires" circuiting of Kaaba. I think the only thing that can be reasonably deduced, in your view, is umrah is visitation in months other than the inviolable months and one is not required to do anything, but may opt to volunteer good, and do some/all of the hajj activities.


Re: 17)
Thanks for the explanation in general terms, but I meant in regards to 2:158, or do you feel it is general and unrelated to context?



Regards,
Wakas