Messages

Alright Saba i leave you alone.

salam aleikoum

Thanx Deliverance for agreeing with my request.


Salaam Anwar

Don't take this wrong but I really don't share your criticisms of Edward Lane's work. If you read his preface, he goes into great detail and tells you what his work contains and he uses many authorities including the TA and the Lisan. I don't know what your agenda against this work is but that isn't really my concern.

http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000032.pdf
http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000031.pdf

He provides references and yes, those that want to look deeper can access the authorities he references.
Saba

[if We establish them in the land]

My comment was not directed at you (Deliverance) and I have already mentioned that I do not want to talk to you about this topic. So please can you stop talking to me directly about this.

As far as your comment is concerned:

In my humble opinion is not left for People in power to decide what is to pay for zakah because in the the Quran it is said that Allah is making someone "zakah" or not.You have to do it for seeking the pleasure of God and not by force.

Read 22:41

"(They are) those who, if We establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity, enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs. "

Like I said, please don't talk to me directly about your views or opinions on my comments. I'm sure its against one of the QM's forum policy if someone has requested not to continue dialogue.... I am happy to hear from anyone else about my comments however. Thanx, Saba

[>>>this is the only instance in the Kur-An in which it is used in any other sense than that which next follows. ...And [The poor-rate;] the portion,or amount, of property, that is given therefrom, (M, IAth, Mgh, Mvb, ], Er-Rsghib, TA,) as the due of God, (Er-R&ghib, TA,) by its possessor, (M, V, TA,) to the poor, (M, Mgh, Er-Rbghib, TA,) in order that he may purify it thereby: (M, IAth, g, TA:) [in the g it is merely said that " the 'zakah'j of property is well known :" the giving it is obligatory, provided that the property is of a certain amount>>>]

The only way to ascertain the meanings of the words used in the Quran is through Classical Arabic dictionaries. To say that one cannot obtain meanings from the these dictionaries for words use in the Quran defies logic.
Salam

I really respect this statement!!!! thank you for saying this.

On page 1241 of the lanes lexicon who seems to quote other old Arabic authorities says:

>>>this is the only instance in the Kur-An in which it is used in any other sense than that which next follows. ...And [The poor-rate;] the portion,or amount, of property, that is given therefrom, (M, IAth, Mgh, Mvb, ], Er-Rsghib, TA,) as the due of God, (Er-R&ghib, TA,) by its possessor, (M, V, TA,) to the poor, (M, Mgh, Er-Rbghib, TA,) in order that he may purify it thereby: (M, IAth, g, TA:) [in the g it is merely said that " the 'zakah'j of property is well known :" the giving it is obligatory, provided that the property is of a certain amount>>>

I got this from a link here ....http://www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm

Now this is from a classical lexicon and fits in the Qur'an. The dictionaries speak of it as being an increase on wealth or property so this is also not a problem definition.

Just because a rate is not given by the Qur'an doesn't mean the definition of zakat is wrong. It may be that Allah (swt) doesn't want one rate to fit all circumstances and has left it to people who are in power or government to decide an appropriate rate. This is what the article also spoke about.

So my q is why should this definition be denied when it is in the classical lexicons and fits the Qur'an. Why deny this and pick another simply because we don't like this definition? Why?? Saba

[which you are persistantly avoiding it seems]

Again, sadaqa is a choice and it means more than just giving money.... It has been encouraged and there is a whole article on this site about it. However, zakat is fard. Your 'different' meaning about zakat doesn't make any sense and also you have no proof that it has to be given several times a day.... If you had read the article which you quoted in your opening post, which you are persistantly avoiding it seems, you would have noted the meaning of zakat explored.

I think it is very rude to carry an argument referring to an article and then to not read it properly. You can make any claims you want. However, I haven't seen any evidence from you. Not to be rude once again ... but I'm through talking with you on this topic as you are not making any sense to me at least. Sorry. I can't understand why you would quote an article and then not read it. This is a real shame. Pls don't respond further to me on this topic as I really don't want to hear from you about it. Thanx Saba

I really encourage you to read the whole of br. Joseph's article. Why are you against reading his whole article and then quick to point out contradictions? Isn't that really really unfair of you?? The article addresses 'sadaqah' as a separate charity which doesn't have to be income based....this is covered by another article that you can access from the article. The two are separated if you had just read the article properly. Zakat is more like an obligation you owe to those in governance so the finance can be distributed for many different purposes like the state.

However in the verse you mentioned ....you are asked to give some sort of charity but if you can't you are still expected to uphold your tax / zakat obligations to the state.... I am sure zakat is also means tested, so if you are poor, then you may not be as zakatable as others who have more means ....It is up to the authorities in government to decide the thresholds.

If you don't want to read the article, then pls don't comment and bring it up as a contradiction to other verses. Saba

excuse me Joseph if this post is against your concept of "zakat" i have only read your final thoughts about it.
http://quransmessage.com/articles/zakah%20FM3.htm

Salaam deliverance, I really recommend you read the whole article. Br. Joseph doesn't say its a fixed amount, but an amount that those who are in authority determine based on the circumstances of the communities. He doesn't say it is only given to poor people either but from i get from the article a bit like the tax system which can be used for education, welfare, society purposes. Pls pls read the complete article before commenting, especially if you are going to mention it. Thanx. Saba

Thank you for clarifying Anwar.

Salaam Anwar,

Now I have a question for you. I went through some of the links provided by the mods in the post above... I have to say that I am a little confused. Your site says "In Jesus name we pray, Amen." http://www.progod.org/prayer.htm

Yet you give the impression you are a Quranist....can you elaborate pls with regards your position re: theology so i can understand better where you are coming from? Thanx Saba

That was pretty snippy of you. Why would you react like that?

Nothing Snippy. All I said was that I asked the question of Wakas. Why do you need to answer a question I put to him because he is the one that offered the translation? Do you think he needs help? Don't take this personally, but I don't really care how researched you are of classical arabic grammar or how you compare with Wakas. Really don't care. I don't agree with Wakas's methods on many things, but having a quick look at free-minds after the mods post, i see you hold quite similar views to Wakas which I find wrong like 2 daily prayers. http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605933.0

Nothing personal, but if in future I ask a question of someone, I'd like them to answer.

Also next time, please don't call me 'myopic'! Thanx Saba

   

Saba,

You should chose the best meaning and the meanings that are viable and do not contradict the Quran, but seem to compliment it in the best fashion.

Salaam Anwar ...Just because something doesn't seem to contradict the Qur'an and seems correct to me doesn't make it correct from an Arabic viewpoint. I mean all of the above permutations don't seem to contradict the Qur'an but hey ...they all have very different meanings.

Anyway, I asked Wakas the question if you don't mind. Thank you for answering, but it doesn't help me much. No hard feelings though    Saba

[...And do not be loud/public/overbearing in/with your salat, and not silent/quiet/weak/abject in/with it; but seek a path in between...]

I recommend using a concordance, grammar and dictionary resource.

17:110 can be read as follows:
...And do not be loud/public/overbearing in/with your salat, and not silent/quiet/weak/abject in/with it; but seek a path in between...

Salaam Wakas ....What does your translation actually mean?

...And do not be loud/public/overbearing in/with your salat, and not silent/quiet/weak/abject in/with it; but seek a path in between...


Does it mean:

...And do not be loud with your salat, and not silent with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be public with your salat, and not silent with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be overbearing with your salat, and not silent with it; but seek a path in between...?


...And do not be loud with your salat, and not quiet with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be loud with your salat, and not weak with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be loud with your salat, and not abject in with it; but seek a path in between...?


...And do not be public with your salat, and not quiet with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be public with your salat, and not weak with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be public with your salat, and not abject in with it; but seek a path in between...?

...And do not be overbearing with your salat, and not quiet with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be overbearing with your salat, and not weak with it; but seek a path in between...?
...And do not be overbearing with your salat, and not abject with it; but seek a path in between...?


I don't mean to be rude, but you do a lot of this in your articles and posts and for me at least it causes more confusion and puts me right off. Opening up so many permutations gives the impression that one can choose whatever meaning they like.

Salaam Zafreen. You might find the following article helpful... Basically it argues with Qur'anic proof that the terms prophet and messenger are misunderstood today by many Muslims today. I think anyone who is given a Book, or supports a central messenger with a Book like Prophet Aaron (AS) who supported prophet Moses (AS) are known as prophets. But they are also given authority as the article says.... Saba 

http://quransmessage.com/articles/end%20of%20prophethood%20FM3.htm

['ANGELS']

Salaam Deliverence,

Just one thing I would like to say re: your posts recently... It is 'ANGELS' not 'ANGLES'...i hope you don't mind me correcting as the spelling mistake on a common word distracts a little from your post. Saba 

Salaam Goodlogic ..

My opinion ...picking and choosing and manipulating data does not amount to a mathematical miracle. Lets not get into this again pls. This subject is debated to death. Just check the free-minds forum which you are a part of ...

Bro Sardar, I still cannot work out why you choose to put out such controversial posts on this forum when you know people are not going to agree and the issue has been argued to death!??? Do you think that a 19 code believer is going to change their views so easily despite the evidence? So why do you do it??? I say let people believe what they want to believe and try to find interesting topics to talk about the Qur'an!!! .. Thanx Saba

Salam Sister Saba, I just wanted to highlight that unlike Dr Shabbir & Co Pervez was not against Salath of five times in Msaajid but I just wanted to know as who is central authority ?

Salaam. This is the problem br. Sardar. Why would someone on this forum want to clarify what Dr Shabbir & Co interpret as central authority? That is their interpretations so why don't you ask them on their board?