Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ahmad

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15
Wa Alaykum al salam.
Thank you Br Joseph for you reply.

In the example you kindly provided, the overhead costs are not because of a loan. Actually, one can argue that the "Amilina alayha" did not take any fees for their service. However,  I don't have enough evidence to either support or deny that they took fees.

Overhead or admin fees usually do not exist if the loan is taken from a friend for instance. Building upon that, why would a institution (Not a bank) give loans to people and seek to cover its administrative costs if the whole purpose is to do good.

An example for this is microfinance non-profit institutions, they get give loans with interest to cover their costs, so that they can be able to give loans to more people (greater good). I know some say that since the whole system is made for  helping the poor not for profit . Then it is fine to charge interest. (or the admin costs). Yet is this a valid reason to charge interest ? And from the borrower's perspective its still interest whether its admin costs, costs to expand operations or any other thing.

[2:278] Saheeh International
O you who have believed, fear Allah and give up what remains [due to you] of interest, if you should be believers.

And if you do not, then be informed of a war [against you] from Allah and His Messenger. But if you repent, you may have your principal - [thus] you do no wrong, nor are you wronged.

In my humble opinion,  the principal amount does not include any admin fees its just the amount before adding the interest.

Thoughts ?

If an institution lends money without interest to a person. The institution has some costs to cover such as the salaries of employees that are going to record and track the loan (an accountant). If the debtor is the one who pays for these fees. Will it be considered RIBA as the debtor will be returning the loan plus an extra amount (the admin fees).

Assuming that giving a loan to someone who needs it (without interest)  is an good deed.  Does this leave room for administrative fees ? Or does the point of admin fees defeat the whole purpose of the good deed ?

Thank you for the replies.

For instance, someone goes to a scholar to ask about an issue.
The scholar tells the person what to do.
On the day of judgement, it turns out that what he told the person was wrong.
Will the scholar be responsible for the sin of the person ? And the person will not be accountable.
What if the scholar did not know the right thing and he was advising to the best of his ability ?

Thanks in advance.

Dear Wakas,
Thank you for your reply.

I think we both have shared our points. We agreed on some and still disagree on others. I agree that there is no point in restating what has already been said. And since I have nothing more to add.

I would like to thank you for the discussion. And I hope that we another one soon.  :)

Dear Wakas,

I'm happy that we agree on several points. It seems that we only disagree on what to call the period where the overlapping happens.
My humble understanding has lead me to believe that at this period is neither day alone or night alone. Its both.

With regard to diyan/nur, my simple point was that two different words are used and that the sun is a diyan, not the moon. The word diyan is used in 28:71. Ergo, sun/diyan come together

Building upon what you said. If sun/diyan come together. Then verse 28:71 is talking about diyan from the sun. Which means light from the sun. Not the moon. Therefore when there is light from the sun its day. (direct or indirect)

I think this concept is reinforced in this verse:
[36:37] A token unto them is night. We strip it of the day, and lo! they are in darkness

Total darkness is when day ends. When the day is completely stripped out of the night.
You originally said: "Therefore when we can conclude that when there is light its day"
I gave the example of the full moon at night, allowing us to see somewhat, to show your above reasoning is flawed

Yes you are right. I was implying light from the sun. Maybe I needed to elaborate.

Thoughts ?

Hello Wakas,
Thank you for you reply.

Regarding noor and dyaa. What do you make of this article.

To my knowledge, during twilight, the light received on the surface of the earth is indirect light scattered from the atmosphere.

I once reached the same conclusion. I think what you are trying to say is that noor from the moon is like noor that comes as a result of indirect scattered light. However, if you have read the article above, this understanding of noor is not consistent throughout the Quran.
My humble opinion is that noor here can be understood as something that guides. Which I think is a more consistent meaning.

When there is a full moon during the night, the amount of indirect light reflected from it is quite significant allowing us to see somewhat. Of course, this is still night, not day, so your reasoning is flawed.

In the 3 verses the property of giving sight is associated with DAY. This implies that this sight is caused by the sun since its day. Not by the moon.

Note, those verses do not mention light

How can we see without light ?

Again, the verse does not say that, nor allow such a conclusion. If we pay careful attention to the words it is clear that the night has nahar in it. Note it is still described as night. And at this time the nahar is being stripped/skinned/withdrawn from the night, this implies the majority of the entity being skinned is night. This matches with our observation when at twilight, all of the sun disc has gone, and the majority of the sun's light has gone also.

I did not say that night does not start after the sun disk has gone. What I am saying is that since nahar is being stripped from night until its totally dark. Then when its totally dark is when nahar ends. Night starts at sunset regardless of when nahar ends.

If we take into account the other verses/article we have discussed in this thread it is clear that the twilights and pitch black night are described as layl/night in Quran. When the sun is covered it is night/layl, 91:1-4 is clear.

I agree. But at the same time some nahar is still occurring.
The theory I am trying to present involves overlapping. Its not simply nahar ends then layl starts. They mix with each other for a short period.

I think this concept can be confirmed from verses such as.

[3:27] You cause the night to enter the day, and You cause the day to enter the night; and You bring the living out of the dead, and You bring the dead out of the living. And You give provision to whom You will without account."


[36:37] A token unto them is night. We strip it of the day, and lo! they are in darkness.

Thoughts ?

General Discussions / Re: A question regarding layl and ghasak al layl.
« on: February 26, 2014, 10:47:22 PM »
Saheeh International translation unless stated otherwise *

Day begins at the first light of dawn and ends at the last light of dusk.

[28:71] Say, "Have you considered: if Allah should make for you the night continuous until the Day of Resurrection, what deity other than Allah could bring you light? Then will you not hear?"
[28:72 Say, "Have you considered: if Allah should make for you the day continuous until the Day of Resurrection, what deity other than Allah could bring you a night in which you may rest? Then will you not see?"

In verse 28:71. Light is mentioned as something that ends night. Therefore light is opposite of night. Which means that light corresponds to day since day is also opposite of night. Therefore, when there is light day is occurring.

[10:67] It is He who made for you the night to rest therein and the day, giving sight. Indeed in that are signs for a people who listen.
[27:86] Do they not see that We made the night that they may rest therein and the day giving sight? Indeed in that are signs for a people who believe.
[40:61] It is Allah who made for you the night that you may rest therein and the day giving sight. Indeed, Allah is full of bounty to the people, but most of the people are not grateful.

In verses 10:67, 27:86 and 40:61 day is described as a period, which gives sight. We can see only where there is light. Therefore when we can conclude that when there is light its day. This confirms the above concept.

Pickthall (This translation is closer to the original Arabic)
[36:37] A token unto them is night. We strip it of the day, and lo! they are in darkness.

In verse 36:37, day is described as being stripped from night. This happens until total darkness occurs. Therefore, we can conclude that day ends with total darkness. And begins when first light is visible.
Thus, day begins at the first light of dawn and ends at the last light of dusk.

General Discussions / Re: A question regarding layl and ghasak al layl.
« on: February 22, 2014, 11:57:03 PM »
I agree with your interpretation. Your conclusion is not in conflict with mine. Yes night begins when the sun is covered. But at the same time day did not end. Day ends when there is no light visible in the sky. Night ends when there is no darkness in the sky at sunrise. But this does not mean that day did not start. Day starts at dawn when first light is visible. So night and day overlap for a small period of time. After sunset and before sunrise. This is my conclusion. So far I have not seen a verse that is in conflict with this theory. But I would like to here your thoughts on this.

General Discussions / Re: A question regarding layl and ghasak al layl.
« on: February 18, 2014, 06:59:26 AM »
These are some quotation from the article.
But since 39:5 states that the day is rolled onto the night, then by definition part of the night will have some daylight in it

I agree that there is a gradual movement into night. But it seems that the article uses this information to conclude that at sunset night begins and day ends. I have a different interpretation. As long as there is light in the sky day did not end. But this does not mean that night has not began.  the  above verse can best understood in the light of other verses. Such as the one you mentioned

And a sign for them is the layl, We strip/peel/remove from it the nahar, whereupon they are those in darkness. [36:37]

Where it is clear that night and day can happen at the same time. For a short period.

It is important to note that in the article the verse is translated as
“Another sign for them is the night: we “naslakh” (gradually extract) the daylight therefrom, till they become in total darkness.” 36:37
In arabic, the word is nahar which should be translated to day. Not daylight.

The second indication to offer us the correct definition of the night can be found in the following verse:
“You shall observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) at the "tarafai” (two terminals) of the day .......” 11:114

The argument is that the two terminals must represent a defined point.

The only specific and defined points in time around the ends of the day are sunrise and sunset

My opinion is that total darkness after sunset and before sunrise can be 2 terminals. (not for 1.5 hours but at the point or period of total darkness only)

We also read in 11:114 a reference to the “Zulaf al-layl”. This phrase translates to the “near parts of the night”. What are they near to?

Here I did not understand what is he trying to say. I think the verse is clear.

Finally, and to seal this issue, we are given Quranic words in Sura 91 which provide conclusive proof as to the timing of the “Nahar” (day) and the “Layl” (night). The following words speak about the sun:

[91:1] By the sun and its brightness.
[91:2] And the moon that follows it.
[91:3] And the "nahar" (day) that reveals it.
[91:4] And the "layl" (night) that covers it.

Here it depends on how you take the meaning. Either sun by itself is what is revealed and covered or the sun and its brightness.

Maybe the the biggest difference between my understanding and the article is that I believe that night and day as I said earlier overlap. While in this article when day ends night starts and vice versa.

General Discussions / Re: A question regarding layl and ghasak al layl.
« on: February 16, 2014, 03:02:31 AM »
Hello Wakas,

Thank you for sharing the verse. I am currently trying to understand the properties of layl and I am in the process going through the relevant verses.

After taking the verse you provided into consideration my understanding is as follows:

Nahar and layl overlap between sunset and dusk & dawn and sunrise.
layl begins at sunset when darkness starts to overlap with light and ends when all darkness is gone at sunrise.
Nahar begins at dawn when first light is visible and ends at dusk when there is no light visible.
This is according to the following verse, where light is the opposite of night thus corresponds to day.
[28:71] Saheeh International
Say, "Have you considered: if Allah should make for you the night continuous until the Day of Resurrection, what deity other than Allah could bring you light? Then will you not hear?

Therefore the "two ends of the day" are still a reference to fagr and isha.

I would like to hear your thoughts/criticism on this conclusion.

General Discussions / A question regarding layl and ghasak al layl.
« on: February 15, 2014, 01:13:58 AM »
If nahar is the opposite of layl.

Then when nahar begins, layl ends and vice versa.

And if "two ends of the day" of the following verse refers to fagr and isha
[11:114] Saheeh International
And establish prayer at the two ends of the day and at the approach of the night. Indeed, good deeds do away with misdeeds. That is a reminder for those who remember.

Then nahar begins at fagr and ends at isa.

And Isa corresponds to ghasak al layl.

So is ghasak al layl the beginning of layl ?

Thank you

General Discussions / Re: What type of fear is not permissible ?
« on: February 15, 2014, 01:03:29 AM »
Thank you for the clarification.

General Discussions / What type of fear is not permissible ?
« on: February 05, 2014, 07:15:58 AM »
Wa alaykum al salam.

Thank you for the article.

But I still cant' figure out how to fulfill the following verse. I would appreciate it if you could shed some light on the matter.

[9:18] Saheeh International
The mosques of Allah are only to be maintained by those who believe in Allah and the Last Day and establish prayer and give zakah and do not fear except Allah, for it is expected that those will be of the [rightly] guided.
نَّمَا يَعْمُرُ مَسَاجِدَ اللَّـهِ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَأَقَامَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَى الزَّكَاةَ وَلَمْ يَخْشَ إِلَّا اللَّـهَ ۖ فَعَسَىٰ أُولَـٰئِكَ أَن يَكُونُوا مِنَ الْمُهْتَدِينَ ﴿١٨﴾

What does it mean if we apply the understanding of the world khashaya from the article ?
What should we not "nakhsha" ? There is natural fear that we are born with.. So we should not fear anything other than Allah with the exception of this natural fear. Or should we control it even if it is natural ?

Thanks in advance.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15