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 - chadiga

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
General Discussions / Re: about sura74
« on: February 25, 2012, 10:38:32 PM »
salam to all
Thank you for your answers
I do not think that RK was a messenger, a messenger for me may possible commit human errors, but not when it comes to God's message. RKt made ​​too many mistakes to remain believable. I also see that can be manipulated very much, especially when it comes to numbers and mathematics. A brother wrote a very good criticism about the number and the chance to play with her, while he- with this number-was 'proof' , that he and his wife are the new messengers of Allah (!!! ;D), I realized that many people can be led astray easy.
However, there is no doubt a lot of coincidences, but this,  as I said, just increase  my faith in Allah. (For this, i'm agree with the interpretation of Sura 74, that is mentioned 19 in order to strengthen the faith, however, a fitnah for those who have the disease in the heart = Those who believe that the Word of God is not complete or want anything to add or take away ... Also maybe must Fitna by the intense time - the lost time - to discover new 'miracles' = Fitna as  the money or the children and womens: Who is too busy with this Fitnas can forget  Allah.)

then you think, this translation is false?

74:8 Then, when it is clicked in the clicking device

A difficult time for the disbelievers
The proximate verses (74:9-10) declare that this time (computer or information age) is a difficult time for those who deny the Quran.

General Discussions / Re: question about 2.187
« on: February 24, 2012, 10:49:59 PM »
I forgot the real role of the mosque.Thank you all. :)

General Discussions / about sura74
« on: February 23, 2012, 10:37:14 PM »
salamu aleikum all! crossroad i see an article from monotheist group about the mention from computer in sura 74. an interested a part from the article:(for the complete article see

The day as an era
The Quran tells us of various eras which are defined as "days". We are also told that a day with God is 1000 years of our time reckoning.
Sura 74 refers to the beginning of such a new era that will occur in the future and in which the people are reminded once again (... This is a reminder for the people [74:31]) . Our ancestors could not imagine what will happen in our time. They understood that the time mentioned in verses 74:8-9 is the "Day of Resurrection" and therefore they associated this verse with other verses which describe "blowing the horn" (see verses) and claimed that the situation in 74:8-9 is the same, though verse 74:8 contains completely different terms. Let us make a comparison with 50:20 concerning the terms, the shape, the pronunciation and the meaning:
ونفخ فى الصور
And blown (is) in the Horn
And here are the terms which we find in verse 74:8, so everyone sees that they have nothing to do with the previous ones:
فإذا نقر فى الناقور
Then, when (it is) clicked in the clicking device
"Click" and "clicking device"
The root نقر [NaQaRa] in verse 74:8 has the following meanings: to tap slightly, to pick, to click, to chop, to hack, to chisel (a stone). According to the dictionary of E.W. Lane the term is also used to describe the sound that occurs when snapping with the fingers. The Arabs mainly used the verb to define the light tapping with the finger on a surface or to describe the sound a bird produces with its beak. Therefore the beak of a bird is called منقار [MeNQAR], which derives from the same root. نقار الخشب [NaQAR AL-Khashab] denotes a woodpecker, تناقر [TaNAQaRa] to pick at each other. At the present time the verb is used on most Arabic websites as "to click" like in the following examples:
أنقر هنا [ONQoR hona] Click here
نقر الكلمة [NaQaRa AL KaLeMaH] He clicked on the word.
نقر أزرار اللوحة [NaQaRa AZRAR ALLaWHaH] He clicked the buttons of the keyboard
The second word ناقور [NAQOuR] has the same root like the verb that we previously mentioned. Based on an Arabic grammar rule any verb can be changed from its root form in order to describe a machine / tool / system by using an alif أ (A) after the first letter of the root and a  و waw (Ou) after the second letter:
فعل [FaÁaLa] to make فاعول [FAÓOuL] maker
حسب [HaSaBa] to compute, حاسوب [HASOuB] computer
فرق [faraqa] to divide, فاروق [Farouq] divider (among other things the sword is denoted by this word )
قنن [QaNaNa] to collect قانون [Qanoun] compilation, legislation
معن [MaÁaNa] to help, to aid ماعون [MAÓOuN] help system, aid agency
Exactly the same rule is applied for the second word in verse 74:8 that describes a device or system in or on which users can click certain things.

In fact I have never noticed that we mostly make clicks on the computer in order to gather information or process it. We click the keys, click the links that lead us to other pages or click buttons that perform specific functions. For most people the computer is nothing more than a clicking device, the clicks of which open or close worlds for us.

For these reasons we have translated verse (74:8) in this form:
74:8 Then, when it is clicked in the clicking device
A difficult time for the disbelievers
The proximate verses (74:9-10) declare that this time (computer or information age) is a difficult time for those who deny the Quran. The disbelievers will be confronted with their lies. They will not have an easy time (74:10), nor will they be able to convince anyone concerning their claims because they lack evidence. People from all over the world will unite under the slogan of truth and lead a campaign against them, so that they behave like frightened donkeys (74:50) which are upset (74:51)"

This translation is interesting. however, I have a question to the point: it is also said that the word Saqar means not hellfire but rather the mental state of punishment for those who deny the 19 miracle. However, if this is so, so we'll see at the end of Sura, that those coming into the Saqar:
not pray, do not feed the needy, to commit sins, deny the Day of Judgment. (74.42-47)
here nothing about 19 or numbers or "addad"

Another question:

74.32 What the moon has to do with the wonders of nineteen? The moon seems to me like the other signs of Allah to be here to reflect on the creation of the earth and the sky and is therefore good for swearing. Does this not tend to a universal condition here: the belief in Allah and His Book, etc. and not the miracle 19.

I am very divided because of the 19. One hand, I think that the book of God has a code, but rather take it easy for knowledge and be amazed if anyone finds out again more results. A  miracle more to see how great is Allah. But to justify the change  of the book by removing two verses ,this seems to me to abuse the wonder and to become a  Fitna ...
im confused... :-\
thank you for share your thoughts!

General Discussions / islamic funeral
« on: February 22, 2012, 11:58:20 PM »
Salamu aleikum
because my father in law has just died recently, I was faced with quite a few customs and rituals that have nothing to with the Quran in my view,. For example:
-3 Days mourning, common 'sit' of relatives, neighbors and friends in the house of the deceased,
- Engage a Sheikh to recites Quran for the deceased ('sit' in a specially rented tent, visitors also there)
-The Prohibition, for three days to turn on the TV, except the Koran
(Some say 40 days, according to other Ahadith)
-the Wash of the deceased and the white cloth
-Burying in  the direction of Mecca
-Acquaintance in the streets, so that as much as possible come to pray for the dead , so the 40 people reached (after hadith: a  person is awarded if 40 people accompanied the funeral procession)
-Women are not allowed at the funeral and makruh in the mosque
-Prayer for the Dead

All these things are not in the Koran but only removed from the secondary sources. Really is almost nothing about the death, or what is done afterwards.  is now someone who follows these traditions, guilty of  Shirk ?
the three-day-sit is about no  expression of real grief, it's just social norm / almost hypocrisy of some.

certain issues I care most:

1. is it allowed according to Islam, to cremate a person? or is the verse where Allah says, "Bani Adam comes from the earth and you go to her back" an order to  buried the body  in the earth? If you ask a Sunni it is clear that he will say, the body should be in the grave, as the two angels comes and ask you  the famous questions .. it permissible to pray for not believers (if you are not sure whether they believed or not) for forgiveness? I mean, Allah says that one should not pray for disbelievers, even if you pray for forgiveness 70 times, Allah would not accept  it. If I  pray, however, this is not a mistake or disobedience?
3. Can we or should we go in cemeteries, visiting the graves of the deceased, as a reminder, also specifically Christian? (Forbidden in Sunni Islam)
4. And I also think the legacy of a "non muslims" is allowed, right? Here, too, can be found in Sunni Islam strictly prohibits accepting such a legacy, it may not even be used as Sadaqa. I find this totally stupid  (sorry) i.e. so: rather let the hungry die , instead  to accept  some money  from Christians or nonbelievers !

Sorre for the long post, but it makes one think ... :(

General Discussions / Re: Is 5:3 The last verse of the Qur'an?
« on: February 22, 2012, 11:18:59 PM »
Salamu aleikum brother

From  the secondary sources we are told, that  this verse was set as a seal upon the message of the Koran. (revealed Arafat Friday, 9 Dhu al-Hijjah, 10 AH, 82 days before death the Prophet)
For me it plays no role because the entire Koran is regarded as a complete collection of wisdom. So we don't disconnect any Ayas from the remainder of the Quran (not pretend as Sunnis) We are encouraged to study the Qur'an as a in its entirety , so it is unimportant whether this verse was revealed as the final or not, this is not  altering the message of the Quran .
Salam  :)

General Discussions / Re: question about 2.187
« on: February 22, 2012, 11:04:12 PM »
Dear mubashir
But if this is meant in general, which is why Allah used the same phrase twice then?
Or is "approach" is not meant a sexual contact? But what should it mean then? Something else does not make sense ...

أحل لكم ليلة الصيام الرفث إلى نسائكم هن لباس لكم وأنتم لباس لهن علم الله أنكم كنتم تختانون أنفسكم فتاب عليكم وعفا عنكم فالءن بشروهن وابتغوا ما كتب الله لكم وكلوا واشربوا حتى يتبين لكم الخيط الأبيض من الخيط الأسود من الفجر ثم أتموا الصيام إلى اليل ولا تبشروهن وأنتم عكفون فى المسجد تلك حدود الله فلا تقربوها كذلك يبين الله ءايته للناس لعلهم يتقون
2:187 Lawful for you in the night of the abstinence/fast is sexual approach to your women, they are a garment for you and you are a garment for them. God knows that you used to betray/deceive yourselves so He turned towards you and He forgave you; so now approach them and seek what God has decreed/written for you. And you may eat and drink until becomes distinct the white thread, from the black thread, of dawn. Then you shall complete the abstinence/fast until the night, and do not approach them while you are devoting/staying in the maSaJiD /. These are God's boundaries, so do not transgress them. It is thus that God makes His revelations clear to the people that they may be righteous.

General Discussions / Re: not menses but war`?
« on: February 22, 2012, 10:01:05 PM »
dear mubashir
thank you very much for your very good thoughts! :)

salamu aleikum
a question in my mind for some time:


 005:001 (part)
"... game being unlawful when you are on the pilgrimage (state of ihram) ..."
005:095 (part)
"O ye who believe! Kill no wild game while ye are on the pilgrimage (state of ihram) ..."
005 096
"To hunt and to eat the fish of the sea is made lawful for you, a commission for you and for those who travel, but to hunt on land is forbidden you so long as ye are on the pilgrimage (state of ihram) And. be conscious of your duty to God, to Whom you will be gathered "

 Is the "state of ihram" mentioned herea meant (as in traditional translation)  the state of the Hajj pilgrims, i.e. in connection with the region of the Hagg. Or is "ihram" meant as a general term that refers to the four "haram months," and must be adhered to worldwide (already time for the game)
The answer depends on whether we assume that the introduction of the Islamic lunar calendar is a new feature that has been established after the death of the Prophet or not.
The question is superfluous, if we take the tradtitionel view as fact.

I've read a little about the calendars, etc. and found that a study has concluded that the lunar calendar was introduced only after the death of the Prophet.
(However, this study was to verify the hadith to their assertions, i.e. They studied the data of  traditions and counted them back. They found that most of the traditions, if they were back-calculated by the lunar calendar, making seasonal completely false information, if they were, however, calculated back to the pre-Islamic calendar, the seasonal data in most cases precise matched. Now  the only question is, I accept the results of this study now as a Qur'anic approach or not?)
 if yes, this means that the times have Hagges of the year did not originally moved and then the four sacred months are every year about the same time, the question would remain whether they require a general ban on hunting for the conservation of wildlife? For me, both scenarios sound logical.
salam  :)

General Discussions / not menses but war`?
« on: February 19, 2012, 11:55:14 PM »
salamu aleikum
 i read a question in an other forum about Vers 2.221 about the menses . One from the answers was:

Quote:  The verse 2- 221 has a word محیض, it is اسم الظرف and the paradigm is مفعل . The meaning of the word can not be menses , The word for menses is حیض then why instead of حیض the word محیض is used.

the word محیض means the place or the time or the target of حیض one of the meaning of حیض is menses while meanings are blood like material coming out of the stem acacia tree (حا ض شجرالشمر), Water flows (حیض ٰالماء). So the meaning of محیض is place or time when blood or water flows . Now keeping in view the context of war the simple meanings are the time or place of war .

Other objection to the usual translation is the answer to the query about محیض the answer is painful. This answer is not correct about menses. Its only painful or disturbing to some ladies. This statement can not be taken categorical for all ladies. Hence It is again to be interpreted as condition of war.

Hence فاعتزلوا النسا ء never means keep yourself away from ladies but here it again means keep yourself away from the oppressed or weak people till they have cleared of the wrong thoughts and ideas. Once they are pure according to Quranic teachings then you may come to them according to the orders of Quran. Because God loves those who return to the right path and purifies.

the first time i see a such interpretation. My understanding of this verse is that the time or the place of the outflowing blood is meant. This is a violation because the uterus is not closed. So if a couple had sexual contact during that time, this could have direct consequences for the woman, as bacteria or viruses etc. penetrate freely into the uterus and could cause infections there. Thus, the commandment is not to approach the women in this time, a logical and rational arrangement of God and has nothing to do with war.
What do you think?

General Discussions / question about 2.187
« on: February 12, 2012, 02:50:29 AM »
salamu aleikum

To this day I was convinced that the Masjid means mosque. Well, I stumbled upon this verse.If Masajid is translated here as a mosque, the verse is absolutely no sense ... can anyone help me?

2:187 Lawful for you in the night of the abstinence/fast is sexual approach to your women, they are a garment for you and you are a garment for them. God knows that you used to betray/deceive yourselves so He turned towards you and He forgave you; so now approach them and seek what God has decreed/written for you. And you may eat and drink until becomes distinct the white thread, from the black thread, of dawn. Then you shall complete the abstinence/fast until the night, and do not approach them while you are devoting/staying in the maSaJiD /. These are God's boundaries, so do not transgress them. It is thus that God makes His revelations clear to the people that they may be righteous.

This implies wives could theoretically be approached by husbands in the masajid!if one takes masajid=mosques , why even mention mosques, when there is much greater chance of sexual temptation in the homes? The traditional commentators have an explanation for this: Jalalayn says this is referring to 'itikaf'

or  points the word "(approach) THEM" to " eat and drink" and we should not approach them (we should not eat and drink) when we are in the mosque?
thanks and salam

General Discussions / Re: 4:34 and translators
« on: February 10, 2012, 08:53:21 PM »
salamu aleikum

i found a interesting article about linguistic and the changing of the meanings from arabic words:(part)

The pre-Islamic Arabs possessed a culture with much greater affinity for poetry than prose, and that was the medium in which their entire linguistic treasure was passed on from generation to generation. In contrast, what today is called 'Arabic literature'was primarily composed during the Abbasid period, the same period during which were compiled the various books of hadith, Quranic tafsir, history and biography. Many volumes of Arabic literature, grammar and linguistic science were produced and extensive Arabic lexicons were compiled. It is quite interesting and ironic that all these works (with few exceptions) that comprise the earliest written or prose literature of the Arabic language were actually produced by non-Arabs.

The student of history would be well aware that during the Abbasid period of Islamic history, numerous foreign concepts began to permeate all facets of life. These foreign concepts influenced and shaped society in ways that ripened the climate for the seizure of political power by the Abbasids. Their politics were infused with these new foreign concepts and ideals, further helping to perpetuate them. It is only natural that once this happened, tremendous political pressure would then be applied to inculcate these ideals into every other facet of society. It is precisely because of this fact that the literary products of that time, despite their outward appearance of Arabic form, were actually foreign/non-Arabic in their inner true nature. This is how the Arabic language, in the earliest stages of its systematization and study, was turned into a vehicle of non-Arabic ideals. A more formal description and study of this phenomenon has been excellently provided in the work of the late Ahmed Amin Misri, 'Fajr al-Islam.' In it, he claims 'Undoubtedly, you will agree with me that Persian literature had cast Arabic literature in a new light.'

It follows that once the meanings of Arabic words were affected in this manner, as expected, the understanding and interpretation of the Arabic words of the Quran were impacted as well. Since the books of Quranic interpretation (tafsir) were compiled during this period, they too became prey to these external influences. This is how the Arabic words of the Quran came to take on altogether different meanings than the ones existing at the time of its revelation. In addition to this general external (Aajami) influence upon Arabic, there was also another very important reason leading to this mutation of meanings.

When the first books of Quranic exegesis were compiled in the 3rd and 4th century A. H., one major technique used to interpret any important verse of the Quran was to examine its so-called 'sabab nuzool,'the reason for the revelation of the verse as recorded in narratives. These narratives would claim that some matter would come to pass, and in answer, a verse of the Quran would then be revealed. In this way, the stories ascribed to a Quranic verse became a more important focus of commentary than the actual words of the Quran. As a result, the meanings of the Arabic words in those Quranic verses were shaped and molded to fit the narrations ascribed to it. As time went on, newer books of tafsir would not dare depart too far from the original and oldest books, and in this way, this style of Quranic commentary was perpetuated through history, gaining a semblance of credence and authority. By claiming the narrations, and hence, the exegesis sprang from none other than the mouths of the beloved Prophet (s) and his companions (ra), these tafseer were made all the more irrefutable. All of this is in spite of the fact that the majority of the involved narrations are weak or unreliable (according to the hadith sciences), leading the occasional frustrated scholar, such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, to lament that 'narrations of war and slaughter and tafseer are totally unreliable.'Despite these facts, these narrations continue to dominate books on Quranic commentary and its resulting philosophy; therefore, it is not difficult to conceive that if these untrustworthy narrations are the basis for determining the meaning of a Quranic verse and of the Arabic words used in that verse, this would lead to a distortion of the true meanings of the words, thus obscuring the true meaning of the verse from the eyes of the reader.

This point is best explained through a specific example in the Quran. 

4:34. Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other¦ (Pickthall)

Here, the word 'qawwaamoon'is taken to mean 'in charge of,'even though according to the language, the meaning is 'those who provide the daily bread.'This latter meaning implies that there is a division of labor between men and women, and men are duty-bound to earn a means of living for the family. So how did the meaning shift from provider to dominator or ruler? 

An glance at one of the most highly authoritative books of tafseer, written by Ibn-Kathir, will shed light on exactly how this transformation of meaning took place. In his tafseer of the above verse, Ibn Kathir relates various accounts connected to the revelation of this verse. 

Ibn Abbas claimed that 'qawwamoon'refers to the fact that women should obey men  Hasal al-Basri relates a story in which a woman came complaining to the Prophet that her husband had struck her. Just as the Prophet was about to pronounce that her husband should be punished, the above Quranic verse was revealed, and then the Prophet said that there would be no punishment for her husband In another narration, a man and his wife came before the Prophet. The woman complained to the Prophet that her husband had struck her and there was still a mark on her face. Just as the Prophet began to say that the husband should not have done so, the above verse was revealed. Upon this, the Prophet claimed 'I willed something but Allah willed something else.'

There is a hadith in which the Prophet is reported to have said 'Dont beat Allahs slave women (referring to women in general).'Thereafter Umar (ra) came to him and said 'Oh Prophet! Having heard your command, the women have become bold towards their husbands.'Upon hearing this, the Prophet allowed the beating of women. When the men began beating their wives, many complaints arose from the women to the Prophet. The Prophet then said 'Many women have appealed to me complaining of their husbands abuse. Those men are not the best of you.' Ishat ibn Qays relates 'I was once a guest of Umar (ra). It happened that an argument broke out between him and his wife, and he hit her. He then said to me Ishat, remember three things I will tell you that I learned from the Prophet. Do not ask a man why he beats his wife, do not go to sleep until you have prayed the Witr prayer, and I have forgotten the third (i.e. the narrator could not recall the third)  In one narration, the Prophet is reported to have said 'If I could have ordered that any person bow to another person, I would have ordered the women to bow to their husbands because of the tremendous weight of right the husband has upon her.'

So as one can see, traditional Quranic commentary made on the basis of narration and tradition changed the meaning of the word 'qawwamoon'to mean ruler or dominator, perhaps even something beyond that. This interpretation is not unique to Ibn Kathir but is repeated in other works as well, such as Zamakhsharis al-Kashshaaf, in which he equates 'qawwamoon'with 'musaytireen'(dominators or overlords). In tafsir Jalaalayn, the synonym 'mutasalliteen'is used, in other words those who control, command and rule women. With such a predominance of this interpretation, not surprisingly, this meaning of 'qawwamoon'eventually worked its way into books of language, eventually pervading the literature of the Islamic world and the education of Islamic scholars and the masses. In this way, Arabic speakers and Arabs alike lost touch with the true message of the Quran.

the complete article you can found

thanks and salam

salamu aleikum truth Seeker

sorry, when i was absent a wile, i had a crazy time and was sick. you say:

Salaam Chadiga,

I feel that God has stressed the importance of the Qibla change and also the Masjid al Haram to the Muslims. Because of the emphasis on praying and is importance, could God have allowed it to be that Muslims place their centre of worship and Hajj in the incorrect location and direction.
In my opinion, something as important as this would surely not be overlooked by God.

As far as my knowledge on this, I do not think that in the early years of Islam, Muslims were praying in a different direction or that their Kaaba was elsewhere.

Is it not possible that like the preservation of the Holy Quran, the Muslims preserved the direction of prayer and location of the Kaaba.


Allah protects his word, not the false interpretation of it. Allah lets go astray, who wants to go astray and guides who will be rightly guided. For me, it is therefore quite possible that God allows it, because people do not use their AQL  enough  to seek the truth. They rely on their religious leaders and push so the responsibility of madness going on from those.
The location of the Kaaba is simply accepted so the word Kaab also, the black Stone as an integrated Point of focus, etc.
It is always difficult to imagine that a large mass  going wrong and this for a long time. The same problem also have the Christians, I can well remember the discussions with my parents when they were still talking with me, and her horror and disbelief that all Christians may be led astray, and God allows it.
For me, the site is open. I can not claim anything-with my current knowledge-i am simply keep my eyes open and continue to learn and seek knowledge. Only Allah expand our knowledge. A very interesting new aspect of the whole early history of Islam was presented in the FM forum by Pazuzu. Here the links[/url]][url=][/url]

Peace be with you all in the forum and I love you all your sister chadiga

Prophets and Messengers / Re: Dhul Qarnain
« on: February 09, 2012, 01:32:52 AM »
dear visionary
I have just read the Tafsir of our brother 'muhammad asad an enlightening fact, namely

what you think about it? salam your sister

Islamic Duties / Re: Slaughter of animals
« on: January 18, 2012, 01:24:42 AM »
thank you :) :) :)

Islamic Duties / Re: Slaughter of animals
« on: January 17, 2012, 06:23:50 AM »
dear brother Joseph

yes, sure, you are-like always-completly correct. I seek refuge by God to interpret his Book without knowledge. I'm far from anything like that. Maybe it's also the language, what is make that i can't exactly tell you what i mean.
i'm agree completly when you say:
"And remember Moses said to his people: "God commands that you sacrifice (Arabic: Tadhbahu) a heifer." They said: "Do you make a laughing-stock of us?" He said: "God save me from being an ignorant (fool)!"

"(Moses) answered: Indeed! He says: Verily she is a cow unyoked; she ploughs not the soil nor waters the tilth; whole and without mark. They said: Now you bring the truth. So they sacrificed her (Arabic: Thabahu), though almost they did not"

In my humble view, there is no need to consult the Torah for this matter when the Quran is clear. The Jews clearly used a process of 'thibah / dhibah' to kill an animal. At no place in the Quran is this manner of ending a life of the animal challenged. Therefore, those who listened to the Quran clearly knew the correct and lawful method of killing an animal (thakaytum).

the crucial difference between the two words are the point: thabahu=sacrifice and thakaytum=kill for purpose (eating)
i don't know if you see my other post about the sacrifice? there i was try to share -my only view- about this two words and the difference. for me is the question:was  the sacrifice the "shlaughter" from before ( sacred, holy based) and the thakaytum could maybe include also other methods to kill an animal (for eating)?
again, i'm not specialist for killing. and it's not the point that i don't  like to follow the Law from Allah or to change them .. it's allowed to eat meat so we must kill the animal. i don't challenge this! But why Allah didn't used the same word if he means really the same? I believe that Allah used every word in the quran in the best manner in it perfect meaning.
Sorry i don't want to razz you...Allah may forgive me.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10