Messages

46

General Discussions / Re: Proofs that PUNISHMENT IN THE GRAVE is REAL

« on: April 14, 2016, 12:48:07 AM »

Salam ZKAB90,

You said:

The punishment that will occurr in the barzakh will affect only the soul, not the body. So, probably the punishment will be only a nightmare, and this is in line whith the soul affected by punishment.

Firstly, can I ask you to cite which verse/s you base that view/belief on?
Secondly, if, as you've said, it is only the soul and not the body which will receive punishment in barzakh, then do you also believe that Allah is referring to the souls and not the bodies of the martyrs when He says of them that they are not dead, but rather alive?:

Do not think of those who are killed in the way of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive...[Quran 3:169]

And thirdly, even if it is the soul/s and not the body which is to recieve punishment during barzakh that still doen't explain how:
1) One can be punished without, first, having received a fair trial before his Lord? 
2) If Allah will punish the sinners in their graves without first having given them a fair trial, then of what point is there in having a trial on Judgment day?

47

General Discussions / Re: Proofs that PUNISHMENT IN THE GRAVE is REAL

« on: April 13, 2016, 04:16:53 PM »

Salam ZKAB90,

But disappoint you, he hasn't debunked the article which I copied from a Muslim site [and which I added some personal opinions].

Joseph Islam's article does address some of points raised in your answer as well as the article you've shared.

For example, one of the "proof" (or Quranic verse) you (or the author of the article you've shared) give in support of your position is as follows:

“They are exposed to the fire morning and evening. On the day when Doomsday comes, it will be said, “Make the dynasty of Pharaoh enter the severest torment!”

Yet, as Jospeh Islam mentioned in his article:

Regrettably, without reconciling the Quranic narratives in full and due to beliefs stemming from popular traditions, one often finds use being made of isolated Quranic verses to authenticate doctrines not taught by the Quran.
 
With regards the example of Pharaoh, the following verse is often cited to justify the concept of ‘punishment in the grave’.
 
040:046
“In front of the Fire will they be brought, morning and evening: and (the sentence will be) on the Day that Judgment will be established: "Cast ye the People of Pharaoh into the severest Penalty”
 
If read in context, it becomes absolutely clear that this is a reference to the Day of Judgment.
 
040:047
“And when they shall contend one with another in the fire, then the weak shall say to those who were proud: Surely we were your followers; will you then avert from us a portion of the fire?”
 
For this reason given the context, it is difficult to accept 40:46 as a reference to a ‘punishment in the grave’. Mutual disputes between the people of Pharaoh in the fire clearly indicate a state of communal punishment and not a punishment in separate graves.
 
The very next verse provides further clarity:
 
040:048
“Those who were proud shall say: Surely we are all in it: surely God has judged between the servants”
 
This judgment can only be one made on the Day of Judgment.
 

With respect to the following comment which you've made in response to a question raised in Joseph Islam's article:

"If there was such an unjust concept of grave punishment, how could one reconcile the period of the Azaab (punishment) of someone who died as a disbeliever 5000 years ago and one that dies 2 minutes before the Day of Resurrection? It seems awfully unjust that someone who dies 5000 years ago should receive a greater period of punishment in the grave than someone who died moments before the Day of Resurrection and who may actually be a greater sinner. In parallel, it seems equally unfair to the individual born 5000 years ago that due to his period of birth, his punishment would be prolonged"

But as I posted in the above article, "Allahu ta’âlâ certainly knows who committed what offence and who will go to Paradise and who will go to Hell. In fact, He had known these even before humans were born.

That still doesn't address the question, though. That question being:

how could one reconcile the period of the Azaab (punishment) of someone who died as a disbeliever 5000 years ago and one that dies 2 minutes before the Day of Resurrection? It seems awfully unjust that someone who dies 5000 years ago should receive a greater period of punishment in the grave than someone who died moments before the Day of Resurrection and who may actually be a greater sinner.

How can one be punished without, first, having received a fair trial before his Lord? If Allah will punish the sinner in his grave without first having given him his fair trial, then of what point is there in having a trial on Judgment day?

48

General Discussions / Re: Proofs that PUNISHMENT IN THE GRAVE is REAL

« on: April 12, 2016, 07:45:03 AM »

Salam ZKAB90,

I am not sure if you are aware, but brother Joseph Islam's has written an article pertaining to this issue which address (and refutes) every point you ( or that author) made in your previous post. Here the article which I am referring to:

http://quransmessage.com/articles/grave%20punishment%20FM3.htm

Please also consider the relevant questions Brother Joseph asks at the end of the article.

Peace.

49

General Discussions / Re: Are Qur'an Centric Muslims Literalists or Contextualists? A Quranist, BUT WRONG?

« on: April 06, 2016, 01:48:12 PM »

Salaam Zack,

I believe option b is what brother Joseph Islam is referring to when he uses (and prefers) the term Quran-Centric.:

"THE ‘QURAN-CENTRIC’ APPROACH

This approach, whilst arguing that the PRIMARY source of interpretation and the SOLE criterion to judge with central religious AUTHORITY remains the Quran, genuinely allows for other vestiges of knowledge to be studied from the ‘lens’ of the Quran. This is particularly true of any writings or literature that the Quran implicitly supports such as the Biblical narratives or any resources required to understand the Arabic language of the Quran. Thus the approach is inherently 'engaging' as opposed to being unduly 'restrictive' without warrant. It has the capacity to reject or accept any notion once studied from the Quran as central criterion and authority.

This is arguably the only approach the Quran itself sanctions, whilst unequivocally calling itself the 'furqan' (the 'criterion' between right and wrong and to make judgments from)

TWO CRUCIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE 'QURANIST' (ISM) AND 'QURAN-CENTRIC' APPROACH:
https://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/542672849203180

Quran-centric - a powerful position indeed!:
https://www.facebook.com/joseph.a.islam/posts/330796700390797

And I fully concur, for reasons he's outlined in those posts.

50

General Discussions / Re: are "foremost people" few in later times ?

« on: March 26, 2016, 12:36:26 PM »

Salaam ilker,

You asked:

Why is that ? Does this mean that the people from old times were more successful than us in terms of faith or knowledge ?

I think you may be right in your assessment. A similar assessment is shared by Muhammad Assad when he gives the following commentary on those verses:

"stress on the 'many' and the 'few' contains an allusion to the progressive diminution, in the historical sense, of the element of excellence in men's faith and ethical achievements."

Peace.

51

General Discussions / Re: Thank you brother Joseph!

« on: March 22, 2016, 09:03:31 AM »

I, as well, fully concur with both MiaStar and IjazAhmad's statements.

Thank you greatly brother Jospeh Islam.

52

General Discussions / Re: Im hypocrite destined to the Hell :/

« on: March 13, 2016, 10:06:29 AM »

Salaam all,

not to divert the serious issue at hand here which I greatly look forward to brother Joseph Islam's answer, but I would like to share something with sister MiaStar (and all who may be interested).

MiaStar, you said:

Zawadi.... says--

"Why don't we have any record of early Muslims completely rejecting hadith?"

Who says that we NEED to have a record of early Muslims rejecting hadiths? Records of early Muslims rejecting hadiths would only be found in hadiths. And we don't believe that hadiths hold any religious authority. So this argument is paradoxical in itself.

While I agree with your rebuttal to Zawadi question, I would like to share with you some writing which show that there were, indeed, records of early Muslims objecting to the Hadith. Perhaps Zawadi would be interested in them as well?:

THE OPPONENTS OF THE WRITING OF TRADITION IN EARLY ISLAM
http://www.hadith-studies.com/opponents-tradition-cook.pdf

http://meine-islam-reform.de/index.php/component/attachments/download/119.html

http://www18.georgetown.edu/data/people/brownj2/publication-51827.pdf

53

General Discussions / Re: Allah commands Muslims not to be friend Jews & Christians

« on: March 11, 2016, 05:01:57 AM »

salaam Sardar,

As brother Joseph explained on another thread:

This assertion is usually a result of an isolated reading of Quranic passages such as verses 5:51 and 3:28 which advance a general prohibition.

Verse 5:51 that you have kindly shared (as well other verses such as 3:28) cannot be read in isolation. This theme is clarified in other verses where the prohibition is only against those (non-Muslims) that are bent on making a mockery out of the religion and causing strife.

Those astute with Quranic methodology should be aware that many verses of the Quran are elaborated in other parts of the Quran and any 'summary' verses should ALWAYS be understood in light of the more elucidatory verses.

If one just relied on verses 5:51 and 3:28 alone, one could/would conclude that the prohibition was absolutely against not only the disbelievers but also the People of the Book without distinction.

However, verse 5:57 provides the elucidatory narrative and the complete context:

"O ye who believe! take not for friends / allies / protectors (awliyaa) those who take your religion for a mockery or sport / ridicule or fun (Arabic: huzuwan wala'iban), whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject faith; but fear ye God, if ye have faith (indeed)" [Quran 5:57]

The above verse clearly clarifies both verses 5:51 and 3:28  by including both categories and makes it clear that the prohibition is ONLY restricted to those that take religion for a mockery or sport / ridicule or fun (Arbaic: huzuwan wala'iban).

The same word 'awliyaa' that was used in 5:51 is again used in the above verse (5:57) but the context has been clearly elucidated (in 5:57) against those who are deemed 'trouble-makers'.

But as for those who have never shown any difficulty or animosity whether from the People of the Book (meaning Jews and Christians) or Disbelievers, Muslims are expected to show them kindness and deal with them justly, as evident in the following verse:

"God does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely God loves the doers of justice" [Quran 60:8]

With that said, The Quran is best understood when verses do not conflict with one another (or when a command in one verse does not conflict with or contradict the command of/in another verse). So the idea that we (Muslims) are forbidden from taking Jews and Christians as friends is in clear contradiction of the Quran. And here's why: God has told us Muslims that we are free to marry from The People of the Book (as per verse 5:5); so how can the Quran/Islam, on the one hand, supposedly forbid taking non-Muslims (in particular Jews and Christians to be exact) as friends while, on the other hand, making it lawful for Muslims to marry members from those religions (5:5)?

Please always bear in mind that: We must always be aware of reading passages in an 'isolated manner' and should be prepared to subject the Quran to a thorough reading / understanding of its complete narratives.

And, always bear in mind that: many verses of the Quran are elaborated in other parts of the Quran and any 'summary' verses should always be understood in light of the more elucidatory verses.

54

General Discussions / Re: arousal without thinking bad

« on: March 09, 2016, 02:50:03 PM »

Salaam Sstikstof,

you asked:

are we unintentionally violating the implicit indications of Quran by having wet dreams?

Not necessarily. Wet dream occur while we are subconscious (i.e asleep), hence there's nothing one can do to control or stop wet dreams. So we (those of us who have them) are not in anyway violating the message of the Quran; for how could we sense we have no control over it?). Thus, Allah only holds us accountable for those things which we do intentionally while conscious.

55

General Discussions / Re: Boundaries of following Sunnah?

« on: March 08, 2016, 07:08:34 PM »

Salaam Sstikstof,


there is no single agreed upon definition of Sunnah. Some individuals/sects say that whatever the Prophet (PBUH) said or did in private, or in public, is his Sunnah. Others say that whatever is in the books of hadith comprise the Sunnah. Still others say whatever the Prophet (PBUH) did in his capacity as a man/father/husband is not Sunnah; only the things which he did in his capacity as prophet/messenger comprise the Sunnah. It is, therefore,  safe to conclude that there are as many variations in the definition of Sunnah as there are sects and sub-sects in Islam. Each sect thinks its definition is the right one.

I, personally, believe the Quran to be sufficient enough for us as a guide. But I have no problem with people upholding the Sunnah of Muhammad (pbuh) provided that it:
1)Is not seen nor accepted as something 'Divinely appointed' in the name of God's ordained religion of Islam incumbent upon us all to uphold.
2)Provided that it does not in any way contradict the message of the Quran.

56

General Discussions / Re: Gambling

« on: February 29, 2016, 04:33:17 PM »

Salam mia666,

In gambling, it is common that a sort of enmity is/will-be built between the participants. The person who loses his money to his opponent is bound to resent him and have a feeling of vengeance. Thus, the dominating influence on the gamblers is that of hatred and enmity.

Furthermore, in gambling (in game of chances) the person who wins, upon making a lot of easy money, will inevitably look for ways and means to self-indulgence in his ill-gotten wealth; thus further leading to unlawful evils.

Hence the main reason, in my opinion, why gambling and games of chances are forbidden is because of the risk involved in them (some of them alluded to above).

So with regards to the two scenarios you presented I, personally, do not see them as haram; for the simple reason that there isn't a level of risk involved in partaking in them.

Hope that helps.

57

General Discussions / Re: how enter faith in my heart ?

« on: February 29, 2016, 02:14:27 PM »

Salaam mia666,

With regards to your question when you asked:

is there a way to modify your username?

In order to modify your username all you need to do is:

1) Login i to your account;
2) On the top left side of the page find where it says Profile;
3) Hover your mouse over it; it'll give you three drop-down options; click on the second one: Account settings
3) Then a new page will appear, then just type your (new) desired name in the name box.
4) Then click Change Profile on the bottom right-side of that exact page to save your changes.

58

General Discussions / Re: Satan

« on: February 29, 2016, 02:07:40 PM »

Salaam Nura,

I agree with much of what you wrote.

You asked:

Why do you think Allah created satan

Satan (also refered to in the Quran as Iblis) was one among the Jinns (see: Quran 18:50). So he was created when the Jinn were. To the best of my limited knwoledge and understanding, Allah did not create Satan/Iblis with the intent of him (Satan/Iblis) one day disobeying Allah and working to mislead mankind. So, having established that, I am not quite sure why Allah created him (and Adam for that matter) to being with.

You also asked:

If it is satan who misleads us then who misled him?

What mislead Satan/Iblis was his refusal to bow down to Adam out of sheer pride, because he thought he was "superior" to Adam (Quran 15:28-33; 7:12). It was then that Allah condemned him for his pride and thus became among the mislead.

You asked:

Does satan only lead humans astray

It is my believe that Satan/Iblis atempts to mislead the Jinn, as well; as per the following verse:

"And that the foolish one among us used to speak concerning Allah an atrocious lie." [Quran 72:4]

You asked:

It is not that he does not whisper to good jinns to lead them astray?

As alluded to above, I do believe that he does attempt to mislead the Jinn but (just as in humans) there are those among the Jinn whom his evil whispers fail to sway:

"Say, [O Muhammad], "It has been revealed to me that a group of the jinn listened and said, 'Indeed, we have heard an amazing Qur'an. It guides to the right course, and we have believed in it. And we will never associate with our Lord anyone. [Quran 72:1-2]

"And among us are the righteous, and among us are [others] not so; we were [of] divided ways." [Quran 72:11]

Peace.

59

General Discussions / Re: how enter faith in my heart ?

« on: February 27, 2016, 12:52:01 PM »

You said:

But what I know is that scholars dict fatwas, and are pro-physical travel and not the philosophical or spiritual "journey".

First off, this is an appeal to authority. In other words, you insist it is true simply because the scholars have said so. I, too, could cite you several other scholars who, too, lay out their arguments in favor of a spiritual journey.
Secondly, what undeniable proof do those scholars have to support their view. I am asking for proof and not conjecture.
And thirdly, do those views find unequivocal support from the Quran?

On the contrary, I not take seriously because HE IS perennialist. And perennialist arguments had been refuted by serious Salafi scholars long time ago

I don't see how you can claim his arguments have been refuted, considering I have only presented you with one argument from Mr. Assad. Also, may I ask: Do you know who Muhammad Assad is? I ask because you keep accusing him of being a perennialist without any support for said claim.

I would also like to address some statements you've made in your reply to mia666.

You said:

But the rejection of the travel in the Heaven is considered like being the rejection of the generally understanding of the sura

Not necessarily. How can the rejection of a physical ascend be equated with outright rejection of that sura (especially seeing as how much of the details of a physical ascend find no support from the Quran)? The Quran's take on this event is short, simple and succinct. So, I personally reject the supposed travel to heaven to have been a physical one yet that has not lead me to reject that sura.

there are people who (sincerely or not, isn’t the problem) understand, after a lecture, that the travel really happened.

And similarly there are people who believe that the travel was ONLY a spiritual one and not a physical one. You have every right to adhere to one view or the other, but at least first observe the arguments made by each views adherents.

The other problem is that rejecting the Travel is like rejecting the majesty of Allah because if He created the Earth from nothing, He can easily move his Messenger from a city to another in the unseen and unknown dimensions of the live.

Again, not true. Those, such as myself, who reject it as haven been a physical ascend are not rejecting it on the basis that Allah is unable to move his messenger from city to city.

And discuss about it with any random Muslim, whoever is (Ahmadi, Sunni orthodox, Reformist, Shia, Wahabi, Sufi ,Alevi, even Quranist) will be seen like a negation of the power of God.

How so?

The salah... is realized by Muhammad, and the processus is explained in the Hadiths, not in the Qu’ran. So, affirm this will scandalize everyone, even the most tolerant and open-minded people.

I complelty dis agree with you when you assert that the salat is explain in the Hadith and not in the Quran. Allow me to explain why below:

Allah refers to the Quran as a book (full) of guidance/a guidance for mankind (see: 2:2-3; 2:185) and one which guides to a path which is most firm, right, straight and stable (31:3; 17:9; 2:2-3; 17:9; 16:89). For a book to guide it would follow that said book would contain all rituals, practices, info, and details necessary for our guidance and which would therefore lead to that guidance. But if we are to accept the argument that the salat, which are necessary for our guidance, cannot be found in the Quran and can (therefore) only be found in other sources, is to concede to the idea that the Quran is not necessarily a book “of guidance” (as all info, details and practices necessary for our guidance cannot be found in there). Because how can it on the one hand claim/call itself a "book of guidance/a guidance for mankind", yet on the other hand omit things (such as the salat) necessary for our guidance? In such instance the Quran would only contain “half guidance."

So, by claiming that the Quran does not contain ALL the rituals/info/practices (in particular the salat) fundamental to the religion AND necessary for our guidance (despite Allah having referred to it is as a book full) of guidance/a guidance for mankind -see: 2:2-3; 2:185), is to suggest that Allah has told a lie (Allah be free from such).

Allow me to ask you several question:

1) What reason does Allah have to tell us in the Quran to pray the salat, yet not even given mention as to how it is to should be performed? It would be unjust for Allah to command us to do something in the Quran (i.e. praying salat) and yet not teach (in that same book) how such command should be carried.

2) What are we to think of a scripture (i.e the Quran) that repeatedly emphasizes a certain act/practice (such as the salah) but never explains (as claimed by you) how to perform said act/practice? The conclusion drawn would be that said scripture is a terrible omission (and in that case it cannot be from God).

3) If, as claimed by you, the Hadith teaches one how to pray then how do you explain the different method each sect (and sub-sect) offers their prayer, each claiming to find support from their Hadith (associated to the prophet)?

Please consider reading the following article which explains the salat solely from a Quran perspective:

http://quransmessage.com/articles/prayer%20without%20hadith%20FM3.htm

60

General Discussions / Re: how enter faith in my heart ?

« on: February 27, 2016, 11:59:18 AM »

Salaam ZKAB90,

You said:

This is not the belief of the majority of Muslims

First off, on what grounds can you claim to know which view the majority of Muslims adhere to with respect to Isra and Mira? Unless you have spoken with every single Muslim and gotten their views/beliefs with respect to Isra and Mira you have no ground to assert what the majority beliefs.

Secondly, even if the majority of Muslims adhered to the belief that Isra and Mira were physical (and not spiritual) journeys undertaken by the prophet that still doesn't prove anything. Just because the majority adheres to particular view does not make that view true; this is known as the appeal to majority.

Thirdly, may I ask which of the two views you are in-line with? And why you support that view?

I can’t take seriously Mr. Asad. If he is not a perennialis

So you're dismissing his solely because he isn't a "perennialist"? With all due respect, that is a ridicules reason to not take him seriously. Judge hims solely based on the arguments he makes and nothing more.