Messages

Sallamu aleikum dear sister
I agree with you in everything you say, what i mean is, that  I think the days of Pharaoh the punishment was  common, I mean for example a crucifixion. But whether it is possible or appropriate at the present time, to crucify someone? So I think the implementation of the plastic verse in the time of Pharaoh was possible at the present time would be an interpreted sentence, as I have described it, is appropriate. It's also so that if someone is cruel or enslaves  people or suppressed it, this people will-at the right time and with God's help - defend their rights  and this despot will get then the deserved punishment -all-automatically fulfilled here mostly the eye and eye, tooth for tooth.

dear brother doc
does not matter. I also had a ton on it ... something "schnippisch" I'm always a little sensitive, perhaps because I also tend to be a reader more than a writer  .. especially when it is in English. I often argue, by the way- you are quite right- with the heart, and only afterwards with the existing evidence. I often leave the argument over the other, which dominate this much better Mashallah.! I wish you peace

[for me]

salamu aleikum

from your tone it seems, that you are not happy with my opinion...

[quoteSo are you saying just because the other verses don't have a 'knife' involved, that means that the verses cannot be understood as 'cutting'?
][/quote]..
When when you read what i write, then it's clear, that for me it's a key to understand the verse like that. I'm not the one she makes claims and think to have the ultimative truth.. we are here for searching and share many opinions, no need to blame one another.in  the topic [urlhttp://quransmessage.com/forum/
you will find a good intellectuel answer. In arabic qamus we found also the meaning for the word  is not only cutting physicially. brother Joseph he wrote a very good article about cutting the hand. salamu aleikum wa rahmatullah

salam for all
I have yet to get an idea because of the following, Khilafa on earth. As I look at the Koran as Al Furqan, I always try to explore whether the Bible or other scriptures confirm to us in any form something that exists only as an indication in the Quran.
In the Bible we find the Schoepfungsmythos, which is almost entirely covered with that in the Koran. Then attention is drawn to the Flood, the Bible-by-covered the whole earth. (recent studies seem to confirm this). God then speaks of a new human race which inherited the earth. We see this also in the Koran. Attention is drawn to a new generation after Noah. Only it is not explained, so that we can understand the term in two ways.
1.General: as followers, leaders on Earth
2 by someone specifically as a successor of the preceding (or the beginning man)
If we look at the Schoepfungsmythos the Sumerians, explains the likeness of ourselves.
But the question really is not relevant in one way for the meaning of faith for our believe, it makes absolutely no difference whether we are now in the literal sense successor or not-an investigation in this regard may satisfy our curiosity,but brings us not closer to God  .... Salamu aleikum  wa Rahmatullah

[in sura jusuf the mention of 'sikina'(knive)]

brother Joseph he give us his interpretation, that the matter 'cutting the hands' for the thief is to look word for word, because he give the logic fact, that we see in sura jusuf the mention of 'sikina'(knive). that it is right for this situation and also the key for understand the other verses - in no other place Allah give us the mention from the object with we must cut be. nowhere we found anything. so it seems, that Allah want tell us that it's a allegory. my humble interpretation.
the matter with pharao, i thinked about it all the night and came to this end:

The reward of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to attract corruption in the country should be, that they be killed or crucified, or that they will cut off hands and feet alternately, or that they be expelled from the country. This will be a disgrace for them in this world, and theirs in the Hereafter a heavy punishment is given. (5.33)
The phrase in 5:33 is repeated in another place: Pharaoh, one of the greatest tyrants of the earth, treated a few believers who followed the prophet Moses, in the same way:

20:71
"He (Pharaoh) said:" Believe ye in Him before I give you permission, he should probably be your master, who taught you magic Truly, I will take you about cut off the hands and feet alternately (leave), and true?. I want you (leave) on the trunks of palm trees crucify;. then you will learn to determine who of us is strict in punishment and sustainable "

This is repeated elsewhere:

Pharaoh said: "Believe ye in Him before I give you permission Certainly, this is a trick which ye have planned in the city to drive out its people therefrom, but soon shall ye know verily, I will.. .. alternating your hands and feet cut off then I will crucify you all "you said:" We return to our Lord.

Note: The same expression

the first time as the threat of punishment of a tyrant, "fasaad" in the country spread

the second time as a threat of a tyrant, as a last resort, the exercise of his power, against people who believe in God and not of him.

God wants to point out that in every tyrant who enslaves his people deserved this punishment, because he just threatens that his subjects.
This reference clearly shows us how special every word in the Quran has been legal and that we are asked to study it.
The preceding verse confirms this interpretation:

5 .32
Therefore, we have ordained for the Children of Israel that if someone kills another person without that party had committed a murder, or without a disaster would have happened in the country, so be it, as if he slew the whole mankind and if anyone a person sustains life, so be it, as if he saved the lives of all mankind. And Our messengers came unto them with clear signs, yet, even then many of them committed outrages in the country.

Next we see that the sentence is not imperative, it is not a command but a fact.
Those who threaten the infidels, "God and His Messenger," with punishment and prosecution are those who have deserved this punishment, and not God's messenger and the believers who invite people to peace.

Another interpretation of the Qur'an arises when one considers what has been said as allegorical. As in the can "Handabhackvers" says that is not to be understood literally, the expression "cut off hands and feet of each other" very well have been used in a figurative sense:
A personal interpretation of the verse:
First a question: what is: wage against Allah and His Messenger, war and corruption in the country seek to attract?

This is exactly the description of a pharaoh or a monarchical despot who bullied a people or suppressed. Such a person "enslaved" sold his people, and considers it not to the law of God, that is, justice, peace, charity, poor delivery, right to protection and freedom of expression. Thus, many of the so-called modern presidents are considered "new-fangled Pharaohs" and  making Fassad. Let's look at the Middle East, for example, was a good example - in most eyes - Mubarak, the Egyptian president. Passed in principle with him exactly what threatened to God here in this Sura as punishment for a despot: If we consider allegorical expressions in this verse, as in other places in the Qur'an, we see that "cut off hands and feet alternately" equivalent to "curtail its resources and mobility" as is. This is exactly what happened to him, he was (his throne) overthrown, imprisoned and robbed of his money, ie His bank accounts frozen. In German there is also this phrase: something has no hands and no feet, said, something that has no basis, or limit the power, or curtail the funds (as expressions in German) are almost exactly the same words, as God uses them here.
Also be noted that, as we have seen above, this expression is not in the imperative. It refers to a logical law of cause and effect: How did it goes around the forest, it echoes back ... Someone who is suppressed to be reckoned his hand trying to end this way. It is worth noting that this - according to the divine law-usually without any action on our part is done, God can transform the situation and put down the tyrant, by the establishment of its agents and helpers (people can be) earned to their doom.

The reference to the crucifixion also can be understood symbolically. Each devotee, now or at the time of Muhammad, was familiar with the crucifixion of Jesus story. The crucifixion as an allegory on the "pilloried provide" a humiliation, exposure and punishment, which is visible to all the people - compare again with Mubarak: he was pilloried by his machinations and embezzlement of funds of Egypt publicly were made. His shame was submitted to the general public. There is no chance for him, somewhere hold off for a position of power. This is exactly what God wants to express here: such a tyrant and enemy of mankind (or group) should be made publicly known, branded, punished if possible, so that he can never bully other people in some form. This will be done at home. If this is not possible, he should be banished from the land-and this has happened and happens maybe in this particular case as well. As it became known, Mubarak has the American nationality, and it is rumored that he will flee there. And God knows.
According to the law of retaliation, it is permissible and legitimate to do the same to someone that he has done one. So it is allowed to bully a tyrant as he has done - he has murdered, it is legitimate to kill him. However, this verse is a clear indication that God will punish him even without our help ...

Why do I interpret this verse? Because this interpretation with the wisdom of the Koran and the groundmeaning: the justice of the peace, the preservation of life. It is fighting for a believer only allowed to defend themselves or as retaliation for a murder-but even there God clearly says that forgiveness is the better way. God abhors violence and oppression, as we have seen is ending a life to kill all of humanity equally. This was true for the Jewish community as well as for all communities at all times, as we find nowhere in the Koran abolished this principle.

Even the animals we have killed just to satisfy our hunger. Any kill for pleasure or for "sacrifice" in order to get anything for it is forbidden and abhorred. Meat should be slaughtered to donate it to the poor and even to live on them, not to be wasted.my personally view. salamu aleikum wa rahmatulla

[Friday]

Salamu aleikum to all
I have a question to Friday. in Sura al gumua,the word "gumua"  is jused for a special prayer. Of course, as it is associated with the Friday, even if it means only meeting.
We see that the Christianity  the day "Sunday"(day of the sun) erroneously  as the day of the meeting was accepted.however by the Jews, it is clearly the Sabbath, Sebt in Arabic. But back to my question. Quran was the first-  Gumua as general meeting-, or the name  Friday as Yaum al gumua? It is important to know because we might otherwise have free any day of the week to accept as Yaum al Gumua.
Does the Koran evidence that this community prayer will be held once weekly (this only, if  Gumua not  mean absolutely Friday ) otherwise would be open to the possibility of this community to hold prayer once a month, or yearly?
It all depends on the Friday. Was the name gumua as Fridayin  the time of the Prophet already in use as a Friday or later invented ahaadeeth were to hold the meeting on Friday prayer?
Funnily enough, there is in the magic-literature, an indication that Friday is also sacred, especially to do magic, you should wash or bath and perfume, and then a ram to slaughter under a tree, and call upon the gods. Then to prepare the meal with the victim and ask them what they wanted ....( source book of spells from the Middle Ages)
(i will not seek excuse again for my English, now must be clear that chadiga she speaks originally German and her English is a self-made English...)salam thank you for your help

Salamu aleikum
I need an analysis of verse 5.33, 20.71. Can someone help me? To my understanding, that term can be understood both literally and allegorically. I tend to be allegorical, because I understand alsothe "cutting of the hand for the thieves" in the light of Surah Yusuf . much thanks. Peace be with you

I wonder if the moon calendar is, how it is implemented today in Islam, by Allah willed . maybe a demi solar-lunar-system.  Sorry my Enlish ist very bad .This is a problem, i can't tell, what i meen...

[UPDATE BY QM FORUM MODERATOR]

Thank you very much. i think i must go again to learn more arabic...... ::)there is here anywhere a good teacher?



UPDATE BY QM FORUM MODERATOR

13th March 2013

This thread is now closed and a direct link to this post is now available at the dedicated Q&A page.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/q&as%20FM3.htm

Thanks.

["Twelve God considers to be the right number of months]

Salamu Aleikum

Is compliance with the Islamic lunar calendar year to really as prescribed in the Quran? If we consider the corresponding verses, we see that is clearly defined by the Koran, only the number of months in the year. That for the determination of the monthly beginning the evidence is decisive, is found neither in the Qur'an . It is just mentioned, that the new Moon was instrumental for the determination of the pilgrimage.
Here are the verses:

"Twelve God considers to be the right number of months. It is in the Scriptures of God already in the day that he created heaven and earth, laid down were are these, four are sacred. This is the right religion. Transgressors now in them (the four sacred months) are not you against yourself, and fight all against the heathens, as they fight for their part against you. You must know that God is with those who fear him. The shifts (the calendar order through an intercalary month) is an excess of disbelief . Those who are already on in disbelief, are therefore misled more. you explain the (month) of Muharram in the year (ie in a leap year) for the profane, in another (ie in a normal year) to be sacred to the number of what God has said in months for holy (namely four) to equal (and not about five months to declare holy), and (to the other) to declare profane for what God has declared holy (namely the Muharram) . The evil that they do show themselves in their best light. God does not guide the disbelieving people fairly. " [Quran 9, 36 - 37]

"He (God) is the one who made the sun for brightness (day) and the moon to light (at night) stations and determined for him, so that you know about the number of years and the reckoning of time modest. In succession of day and night and in what God has created in heaven and on earth lie, signs for those who are righteous. " [Quran 10.6]

"The sun and the moon are used for calculation (the time)." (Quran 55.5)
"They ask thee concerning the new moons. Say: They are (by God as a set) fixed times for mankind and for pilgrimage." [Qur'an 2, 189]

It can be interpreted as a sign, if we find mentioned in the Koran is the word Yaum * day * 365 times and the word * Shahr Month 12 times?
Would not it be possible that would be a God-given order as a form of Gregoran calendar that knows no leap months, only a leap Day  in four years? It may not be the pre-Islamic Arabs accused that they had no idea of ​​calendar calculation, on the contrary, they had to rely on a good run-the year custom-Kalender. see also http://www.nabkal.de/islamkalvor.html.
The names of the Arabic months give us also a evidence, so as Ramadan *hot* and Rabia *spring?* , Zu-al-Hijja and Muharram for pilgrimage what took place in the rainfall-period.

Thank you for your help

[months]

Salamu aleikum
Why Allah says in the Quran once banned by months (Plural) and the other time from the forbidden month (singular)?

"Twelve God considers to be the right number of months. It is in the Scriptures of God already in the day that he created heaven and earth, laid down were are these, four are sacred. This is the right religion..."(Quran 9, 36)


Holy Month:
"The holy month (serve for retribution) for the holy month!" [Qur'an 2, 194]

"They ask you concerning the sacred month, (namely) then, (if it is allowed) to fight in it. Say: Fighting in it is a serious offense (w. weighs heavy) But (his men) from the path of God holding. - and do not believe in him -. and (believers) from the holy place of worship (holding) and evict the residents thereof, (all) weighs heavier with God and to seduce the attempt (believers of apostasy), weighs heavier than . And kill them (ie the infidels) will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion - if they (it) And can those of you who can be (approximately) abandon their religion and (. without having to have turned again) die as an unbeliever, their works are in this world and hereafter lapse. You will be inmates of Hell and (eternal) to dwell therein. Those (but) who believe and those who have emigrated and to God's sake led war (w. struggled) may have hope for the mercy of God. God is Forgiving, Most Merciful. " [Qur'an 2, 217 - 218]

"O you who believe! Not Violating the sanctity of the cult symbols of God (w. ..... Does not explain the cult symbols for God allows), (holiness) of the holy month ....." [Quran 5, 2]

"God has the Kaaba, the sacred house, made for maintenance (?) (W. book) for the people, (and) the holy month ...." [Quran 5, 97]
put
If we take the secondary sources to help, we will find a quick explanation: namely, were separated from, that in pre-Islamic times Umrah and Hajj, Umra took place in the seven month  (Rajab, who was apparently considered sacred and is still considered by orthodox scholars to be one of the four sacred months ) and the pilgrimage took  place at the time of rainfall, in the Winter half year (Zu al Hijjah, Muharram, Safar). If we assume, however, that the pilgrimage was put together  (once per year within four months), then why were the statements of the holy month (singular) still inside the Quran?
Thank you for your help

[Errors may be found in the language, I'm sorry]

Reply to Joseph.Du brother say (rightly):                 Errors may be found in the language, I'm sorry


1.historical source is found for X, does not mean that X did not exist.
Just because the Quran does not directly connect the Ka'aba in Makkah with one verse does not mean they are not connected. There is an argument inherent fallacy of exhaustive investigation within hypothesis inherent in approach.
Second Just because something is not X, does not mean it is Y. Therefore Y must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. So, we must look at all related verses to ascertain as best we can, how cogent a Particular hypothesis remains.
3.There is no reason to suggest that non-Muslim sources were or are better informed than Islamic sources.
One can not conclude that just because the authenticity of many Islamic traditions may be disputed, that it can not be correct about a Particular Matter.

I'm sorry if I come again to speak at various points. First I want to again clarify that I do not claim that the traditional Mecca not exist-it's all about me, all arguments are logically and factually-to-compare.
1It is possible that they just do not belong together!. I have never claimed that Mecca does not exist, however, is the historic Mecca möglcherweise not equal to the Mekka today
2.Nochmals: I never said that the only possibility mentioned, because  when I read all the verses, i can not read out the Reinstituted rites in Mecca
3. It's not about that no muslim resources are better than others, it's about whether we are still somewhere finds evidence finden.Archäologische facts that can be misinterpreted. It can, however, the secondary sources also. its not a logical approach, on the one hand  completely reject the ahaadeeth and  never to consult it, in the absence of supporting evidence in the Qur'an, however overlooking  the same.
Then we could also consider that example, the seventh month in the Jewish calendar, which is considered particularly in the fasted and was equated with the 7.islam.month, which can also be accepted in the Hadith as sacred .This we ignore  at a Analysis of the sacred months but in the case from Mekka not.?

Answer for brother Wazir:

Thank you for your quickly Answer.zou write:

First There is no doubt that House was originally built by Abraham and Ishmael PBUH , but the issue of its location is in debate. In my analysis, contention of the article is not where House was built? I have not Analysed Whether the issue of Makkah and are Bakkah same place or not. So, at this stage, you can ignore this argument Which is one of the many arguments in the analysis.

c) Before declaration of Ka'ba as Universal Qibla, It might be a Qibla for Prophet SAW, his followers, his community and pagans. So, declaration of Ka'ba in Makkah as univesal Qibla definitely please the messenger as he used to consider it a Qibla.

d) There is no verse in Quran Which prophet SAW instructed to follow other before declaration of Qibla Qibla Ka'ba as universal for mankind.

You say on one hand that you have not analyzed whether Bekka and Mecca are the same place but in c) and) assoziierst you immediately  the Kaaba with  Mecca. The Kaaba is in the Koran clearly associated with the pilgrimage. Why do we rely entirely on this issue automatically to the secondary sources, if Allah in the Koran does not? I want by my side I just do not stiffen, as both possibilities are equally possible.


Answer for Saba Sheik:


I think that it is in the sense of the Koran, all possible sources to proof. Historical excavations can help us, where there written sources (which have been changed) is no longer able. We are looking for the truth, so yes, we also take some of the Bible to argue (this source is not even more authentic). We should put together all the particles of the puzzle of the Koran and in the light illuminate. That's my opinion.

I thank you all and hope that you forgive a Querschlägerin their tenacity ..

[UPDATE BY QM FORUM MODERATOR]

yes it does. thank you!




UPDATE BY QM FORUM MODERATOR

12th March 2013

This thread is now closed and a direct link to this post is now available at the dedicated Q&A page.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/q&as%20FM3.htm

Thanks.

Brother Joseph said that Prophet Muhammad-peace be upon him, may have been inspired by dreams. As I come to another question, which really is not about the compilation of the Quran, but employs me  a long time. visions of the future (Ahadith) of Prophet Muhammad are -from the traditional side  declared as "real" dreams. So my question:
1-Are the dreams of the prophets always true?
2-Could emerge as future-visions?
For me it is a paradox, as is clear in the Qur'an that Prophet Muhammad did not know anything about the future. However, dreams are sometimes addressed clearly in the future and also hold true ... (For example, I have my "transgresses" to Islam before dreamed of and also the reaction of my family)

A few facts that the area around Jabal al Lawz seem to be even more interesting.
The question of a city, this area could be assigned http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tayma
Please compare the Koordionaten the oasis Tayma (with a huge fountain) with those of Jabal al Lawz.

one other interesting connection with Tayma:

Nabonidus' stay in Tayma
It is not clear yet why Nabonidus stayed in Tayma for so long. His reason for going there seems clear: to what Tayma important oasis, from where lucrative Arabian trade routes could be controlled. The Assyrians before him had already attempted to do the same. [9] However, why Nabonidus stayed for so long (probably about ten years, perhaps from 553-543 BC) and why he returned when he did remain unresolved questions. It has been proposed that this was because he did not feel at home in Babylon, Which was opposed to his emphasis on Sin. Regarding his return, this may have had to do with the mounting threat of Cyrus and growing disagreements with Belshazzar, who was relieved of his command directly after Nabonidus had come back, along with a number of administrators. [10] During his stay, Nabonidus Tayma adorned with a complex of royal buildings, most of Which have come to light during recent excavations. [11] (wikipedia Nabonidus)

It remains a mystery why this king left his kingdom for such a long time and moved into that haven, it was perhaps not only because of trade? also significant that Tayma was a renowned trading center, not like the historic Mecca

I found a very interesting note to himself (unfortunately in German, have found nothing in English.).

http://terra-x.zdf.de/ZDFde/inhalt/18/0,1872,7165906,00.html