Messages

46

Discussions / Re: Joseph Islam's Article "ALLEGED MURDER SANCTIONED BY THE PROPHET - OVERLAP OF...

« on: May 15, 2013, 01:11:04 PM »

I think there are many scholars--both unorthodox and traditional scholars---can refute these dangerous trends effectively but they think they can talk because of overt or covert threats to their lives and their families. The reactionary forces are too strong.  Fortunately Pakistani media is daring, and can play a role in gathering these 'enlightened' scholars at one platform and put them work.  In these representations some scholars from the Pro-Taliban camp should also be included.  Frequent moderated debates with the extremist 'scholars' may open the way for understanding the intended peaceful spirit of Islam. In any case, I believe the solution lies somewhere along the line of educating masses.  I don’t see a military resolution of this problem.   

47

Discussions / Re: Joseph Islam's Article "ALLEGED MURDER SANCTIONED BY THE PROPHET - OVERLAP OF...

« on: May 15, 2013, 07:20:46 AM »

My apologies for the typo.  Please read K'ab bin Ashraf instead of Ubai bin Kab in my earlier post. Thanks.

Irfan

48

Discussions / Re: Joseph Islam's Article "ALLEGED MURDER SANCTIONED BY THE PROPHET - OVERLAP OF...

« on: May 14, 2013, 01:17:11 PM »

Salam,
The Qur'an declares the Prophet (s) "the Mercy for all mankind/worlds".  That, in itself, says a great deal about the Prophet's character as leader and a reformist.  Ka'bs murder does not fit this profile of the Prophet. According to the narration, Ubai bin K'ab was not killed DURING the battle.  Rather he was assassinated by deceit.  The Qur'an does allow some "retreat" strategy under some warranted circumstances but these strategies are to considered during open conflicts/battles/wars. I suppose cold war surreptitious assassinations are considered illegal even under international law, but regardless, the point is that the Qur'an does not sanction such assassinations.  No prophet is shown to resort to assassination in the Qur'an, let alone the one who was to be the Mercy of the world. When I read about this story many years ago, I felt violates as a believer.

There are many other instances of this nature found in the Hadith literature.  Taliban and other extremists, in fact, use these instances to commit despicable murders of non-Muslims and Muslims alike. A prophet is not about assassinating enemies but giving them hope, good news and warning.  Yes, if the enemy comes  barging face to face, then of course the Qur'an allows self-defense.

Irfan

49

General Discussions / Re: Shariah

« on: November 14, 2011, 12:24:19 AM »

Futher to Shari'a:

As far as the Islamic rituals (salat, zakah, fasting, hajj etc) are concerned, I don't think anyone has any problem with the orthodox Shari'ah.  But as we go beyond that, enforcing the detailed Shari'ah legislation (fiqh) on a population of Muslims--even in an Islamic country, let alone in the West'”we are bound to have serious problems. Based on my study of the Qur'an and Hadith, I think the Shari'ah is not primarily based on the Qur'an.  Far from that, I think the Shari'a, as we know it from the times of the ancient 'imams', is an illogical, misogynistic, and unjust system.  I, as a student of the Qur'an and as a practicing Muslim, will oppose anyone who will impose it on me or my family. I would resist any system in a Muslim society that is NOT primarily based on the Book of Allah. It is precisely because of this Shari'ah, coupled with the routine evil conduct of many of our brothers in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, that a recent 2010 Pew poll finds 70% Americans disfavoring Islam.  When you see many unQur'anic laws in the Shari'ah that entail stoning to death for the adulterers, death sentence for apostasy, illogical inheritance laws, disallowed adoption, and ludicrous triple divorce to ruin people marriages.  And  then, on top of that, the Shari'ah-based draconian blasphemy laws which were unjustifiably incorporated into the Pakistani constitution in 1974 by ZAB regime against Ahmadi community, collected further scar tissue of PC 295a-c in 1985.  These Qur'anically unjustifiable blasphemy laws, once instituted, cannot possibly be undone any time unless a broad-based consensus is developed against them' a Herculean job indeed.  Instead of taking measure to repeal these draconian laws, they are being stubbornly defended and ferociously practiced by the Federal Shari'ah court of Pakistan, thanks to the high octane power gas being pumped through Friday afternoon mosque microphones on a regular basis in Pakistan and Indonesia.
Considering all these grim facts about this inexorable outdated and bizarre system, I don't think anyone with a clear conscience will support initiatives to enforce Shari'ah anywhere in the world.

We, as Muslims, need to take a long and hard look at our own backyard to make sure it does not contain bad weeds sown by our ancient 'imams'.  When we have our own house in order, we will find that the thing we call 'Islamophobia' will magically disappear from the dictionary.  The abhorred  'Islamophobia' term exists because the Islamic model we have shown to the world does not make sense to people;  it has many things in it that have little to do with the 'Word of God' and much to do with the word of man.

I would be more than willing to talk about the unQur'anic Shari'ah in more detail in case this forum warrants.

In sum, I, for one, would fiercely oppose any irrational piece of legislation based on the traditional Shari'a carved out for Muslim communities in the West.  Haven't we learned the consequences of having this man-made Shari'ah system in Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Talibani times of Afghanistan, Swat and Wazirastan, Sudan, Iran, and many parts of Iraq? Have we become so insensitively stubborn that we have to defend a legal system that offers little more than the ancient tribal laws that neither have any practical relevance in a typical 21st century Muslim society, nor have any Qur'anic basis?

I agree that the West does need to be educated about Islam.  But, I believe, more than the West, we the Muslims also need to educate ourselves about the real Islam---the Islam that Allah, the Most High, forever preserved for us and the one that is good for all times and circumstances.

Please take this write-up for my two cents' worth.  I hope what I have said above will not be ignored.  I believe I have to do my duty letting the world to know that what is commonly passed on as 'God's Law' in the name of the 'Shari'ah' has actually very little to do with God and much to do with man.

Ma'asslama,

Irfan

50

General Discussions / Re: Shariah

« on: November 13, 2011, 10:29:27 AM »

Salam to all,
I completely concur with brother Joseph.  A good number of the Western values are completely in consonance with the Qur'an, though not everything is perfect.  However, I must say that I have been living in the US for the last 26 years and I have seen so much of the Western value system being consistent with the Qur'an that I wondered how someone was able to put it all together and how everyone agreed to follow it. One thing that stands out tall in their values is respect for freedom of expression.  They believe in discussing and debating all issues that are relevant to their societies without prejudice, distaste, hate, or rancor for those presenting opposing points of view.  This is something that has always been woefully lacking in the so-called 'Islamic lands' where people have a strong tendency to suppress divergent views often time with violence.  That has to change if Muslims have to regain the glory they once had.  If we can't learn from the Qur'an, we can at least learn from the West.
Irfan

51

General Discussions / Re: The Compilation of the Quran

« on: November 11, 2011, 01:04:06 PM »

Salamun alaikum,
First off, my apologies to sister Truthseeker. Somehow, I confused this name with a brother on some other forums who uses the same screen name--with similar pattern of thought (as far as I recall).  A strange coincidence.
Thank you again for positing the four scenarios.  Vast majority of serious thinkers of the Quran-- do share your view of periodical/piecemeal revelation mode---as understood from 25:32 and 17:106 as well as the two Arabic expressions naazanahu tanzeelan or rattalnahu tarteelan.  Those in the orthodox camp, when faced with 97:1 and 44:3, prefer to lean on some speculative hadith, saying that the Quran was 'at once' brought down to the First Heaven, then slowly released in portions from there by Jibreel. Then there is also the story of the cave where the Prophet is commanded by Jibreel to recite/read (recite/read what?'”the hadith does not make that clear) and when he cant, he is squeezed hard" this happens three times before the five famous verses 96:1-5 are revealed to him!
I agree that the reported historical accounts do not explain anything written in the Quran but it seems who cares is the prevailing attitude.
Your idea of actually 'seeing' Jibreel twice but then later having some other way of communicating with him is intriguing.  I will try to see if theres any indication of, or support for that in the Quran.  I also find some evidence that the word 'Ayah' may actually refer to the whole scripture'”as may be understood from 2:106 and 16:101 where one ayah is being replaced with an equal or better ayah" a fact that was being objected to by the rejecters of faith.  I think in these two verses, the scripture is a better fit.  The word ayah is a bit tricky because of its various shades of meaning'”sign/portent, verse, miracle, and also, as I understand, scripture.
Irfan

52

General Discussions / Re: The Compilation of the Quran

« on: November 10, 2011, 10:52:39 AM »

Salam brothers Joseph Islam and Truthseeker,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.  It is true that every ayah is the Qur'an.  This is obvious from the verse 7:204 brother Joseph quoted.  That's why sometimes the Quranic quotes are referred to as, for example, al-Quran 30:18 etc, when what is meant is just an ayah. So when I say that I am reading the Quran, it would not mean that I am reading the entire Quran. I think this would be clear to most people. It is in this light that I understand all the verses you quoted and more 7:204 being just one example-- that show the commonly understood the presumed incompleteness of the Quran.  However, when God says that He revealed the Quran in the month of Ramadan on a particular nightof power/destiny (97:1) and  also as the blessed night (44:3), to me, that is a momentous event of humongous proportions.  It, at least to me, would not mean began to be revealed (as is often quoted in Islamic history) because if it had been so, God would have specified it. As an example, if I say I lived in Hawaii for 5 years, someone might ask you mean the state of Hawaii, or the islam of Hawaii?, but when I say Hawaii became a part of the US in 1959, I would only mean the state of Hawaii and not the island of Hawaii.
In all the three verses 97:1, 44:3, and 2:185, we see the clear meaning Quran was revealed on a blessed or powerful night with no indication whatsver of began to be revealed or some verses were revealed, etc.
Now, coming back to br. Truthseekers point of apparent contradiction between 25:32 and 17:106, and 97:1, 44:3, 2:185 and 53:10-- that he thinks needs to be avoided--I do think that--- may be not in the past---but TODAY, we can understand the congruity between the verses 97:1, 44:3, 2:185 and 53:10, and 25:32 by invoking the concept of downloaded to the heart of the Prophet in computer lingo where one can download a file but the individual components of this file can be read or retrieved as needed/required.  I also think that the perhaps the prophet was aware of this download but did not know the contents of all of its components until a time when one of them was needed.  Perhaps that why we see the phrase when they ask thee, say..  so often used in the Quran, or the argumentation of the distressed lady who was divorced by dhiaar 58:1-5 .  I note here that I do understand that these same verses can, in fact, be presented to strengthen the piecemeal mode of revelation as well but I mention them here because the piecemeal mode of revelation is exactly how the rejecters (or even the believers) may have viewed the whole revelatory affair of the Prophet.
I look at the verses that invoke rooh-al-ameen 26:193 With it came down the spirit of Faith and Truth, Rool-al-qudus---16:102, and Jibreel 2:97 perhaps all of these meaning Jibreel, they do seem to support a one-time event more than they support a repetitive protocol for revelation.
Heres why I believe the verse sequence 53:1-11 lays open the whole 'video' of one-time revelatory event: These verses (53:1-11) are giving us the account of crash revelation in a way that is difficult to ignore.  Let me put this event in perspective:
53:1 By the Star when it gs down,-
53:2 Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled.
53:3 Nor ds he say (aught) of (his own) Desire.
53:4 It is no less than inspiration sent down to him:
53:5 He was taught by one Mighty in Power,
53:6 Endued with Wisdom: for he appeared (in stately form);
53:7 While he was in the highest part of the horizon:
53:8 Then he approached and came closer,
53:9 And was at a distance of but two bow-lengths or (even) nearer;
53:10 So did ((Allah)) convey the inspiration to His Servant- (conveyed) what He (meant) to convey.
53:11 The (Prophet's) (mind and) heart in no way falsified that which he saw.
53:12 Will ye then dispute with him concerning what he saw? Notice the ayah 53:4 talks about the revelation that the Prophet (sws) received. The next two verses (53:5-6) tell us that this revelation was taught to him by someone who is mighty in power and endued with stately wisdom (meaning perhaps Jibreel) so we should not consider that an ordinary visual artifact.  The verse 53:7-9 portrays someone (perhaps Jibreel) approaching in a dramatic way from a far-off distance, making his closest approach to the Prophet (sws) at two bows length, and then "reveals what he had to reveal".  The next verse (53:11) talks about the state of the mind/heart of the prophet that witnessed and verified with certainty this unique and gorgeous event.
Along similar lines, there is this other question of repeatedly visiting of Jibreel.  May be there is, but to be candid with you, I did not see any indication of Jibreels repeated visits to the prophet---or any other prophet for that matter-- anywhere in the Quran.  In fact, the verse 53:13 (For indeed he saw him at a second descent)  seems to make it clear that the Prophet saw him (which, to me, means Jibreel) only two timesone time described in 53:7-11 and the second time indicated in 53:13.
I am not sure if I have made a convincing case for the Quran as a "ONE TIME" revelation affair, but this is how I feel I can reconcile perhaps all the verses that seem paradoxically contradictory.
Irfan

53

General Discussions / Re: The Compilation of the Quran

« on: November 09, 2011, 01:05:20 PM »

Salam brother Joseph,
Thank you for the great write-up.  Indeed the Qur'an is in which "there is no doubt-2:2". This book must be pondered and reflected upon thoroughly to solve all of our social, political, and economic problems.
I agree with you that the verb "rattala (2nd form of the verb ratala) ending in "tarteelan" should mean "arranged in the best possible way"”even though most translators have translated the verb "rattala" differently in the two verses, that is, "best arranging" in 25:32 and something like "in well measured/chanting tones" in 73:4 (I find that strange). 
Now I do have questions regarding the usually held belief that the Quran was revealed in stages over a period of a long time.
While the verse 25:32 ds seem to indicate"”at least on the surface---that the Quran was revealed in stages over a period of a long time, there are other verses, such as, the verse 2:185 that says that the Quran was revealed in the month of Ramadan, and the verse 97:1 that says that the Quran was revealed in a blessed night (laylat-ul-qadr), as also the verse 44:3 which also points to the revelation being accomplished in a single night (in lalatul mubarakah).  That being the case, how do we reconcile these verses with the implied meaning of "stage-wise revelation of the verses 25:32 and 17:106 (which used the expression "nazzalnahu tanzeelan"”translated as "revealed in stages)?
My current thought to resolve this paradox is as follows: we may need to look at the verse sequence 53:2-10 which ends up in "And He revealed unto His slave that which He revealed". Here also, it would seem that whatever was to be revealed, was revealed in ONE GO on to the prophets heart (2:97).  To reconcile 53:10/2:185/97:1/44:3 with 25:32, I like to invoke the concept of "downloading of the full Quran on to Prophets heart (2:97) by the Rooh al-amin Jibraeel all in one go"”but then the downloaded "files"”that were hastily attempted by the Prophets for memorization (75:16) were retrieved/recalled slowly in stages over a long period of time (according to specific situations).  I think this is how the Divine assurance to the traumatized/stressed out Prophet was guaranteed in 75:16-18.  This may also explain the phrase "nazzalnau tanzeelan of 17:106 or rattalnahu tarteelan in 25:32.
Thats my current line of thought anyway.  I could be totally wrong.
Wassalam,
Irfan