Messages

[choose]

Sorry Wakas, I am totally confused. What do you mean that for 'sujud' I can choose from "honour/submission/paying respect"?

Why can't sujud simply not mean prostration when the Quran is talking about humans when referring to God? What is wrong with this traditional interpretation? I am not sure I understand why I would need to change this or pick and choose another?

The word form "masjid" (e.g. same as "maghrib", "mashriq" etc) is known for having a place/time connotation, and in case you think "time of SJD" is unheard of etc, it is a fact that this is openly mentioned even in traditional translations, e.g. Asad, Yusuf Ali, Pickthal. Of course, it is used sparingly in their works.

Sorry I don't understand this. What do you mean 'masjid' same as maghrib / mashriq etc? Please clarify. Saba

Salam Wakas,

Having looked at your link ....can I simply ask then, in your understanding what is the meaning of 'Masjid'?  Saba

Salam Wakas, Thanks

Your opening sentence struck me as a major problem which I find is the approach typical of Quranists.  You say

"It is entirely an interpretation based on external sources (i.e. traditions)"

. Why is something a problem just because it is traditional? Can traditionalists not be right about anything or any aspect of the language they have passed onto us?

Then you say

"The terms "kaabah", "mecca", "AMAH", "turn your wajh/face/consideration", "masjid" etc are NEVER discussed elsewhere in AQ involving a specific physical direction,"

Why does it need to be? Are you saying that the Quran needs to provide a dictionary of its own words? Wasn't the Quran revealed to people who already spoke the Arabic language?

What is a lexicon? Is it not a traditional source of interpretation? Saba

[more of a mess]

Not a personal comment against you br. Wakas but I am personally in general quite fed up of people highlighting in their opinion 'problems' with 'traditional understandings' yet what they offer in return is often more of a mess than the traditional understanding and does less to reconcile quranic verses with major gaping holes! But anything is passed off in the name of 'progression' these days or 'work in progress'. This is what puts me right off many quranist literature and forums which like a sister recently wrote on this forum is a 'chore'  (passerby) to read!  I like the approach br. Joseph takes with his articles which only argues against the traditional understanding when it absolutely does not make sense overall with the Quran while always trying to offer a better alternative without making a complete mess of the Arabic language and inventing new meanings of words.  My two cents! Saba

Salam br. Talib...... please also see the following article by brother Joseph which is really informative and talks about wahi, 42.51 and who can receive wahi. Saba


http://quransmessage.com/articles/wahi%20FM3.htm

Salam all. I have come across this video in which this person seems to suggest that Mary was of dual sex. I have looked at some of the verses he is quoting but looks like to me he is reading things into the verses which are not there to make a point. I think what he is claiming overall is utter nonsense really.

Would be keen to read other's views on this. Saba (link below)

http://www.iipctvstream.com/eng_mary_pbuh.html 

Pickthall's translation 2:282 (part) -
.....And call to witness, from among your men,
two witnesses. And if two men be not (at hand) then a man and two women, of
such as ye approve as witnesses, so that if the one erreth (through
forgetfulness) the other will remember. And the witnesses must not refuse
when they are summoned......

Salaam Adil,

Please see Joseph's response to a similar question in the post below.

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=330.msg1021#msg1021

Salaam Truthseeker. Thanks for sharing br. Joseph's response in his absence. 

Thanks Br. Mubashir for that 

Salam all. Sometimes I wonder who are the bigger insulters of the Prophet. Those that mock Islam or those Muslims that protect these filthy hadiths against the Prophet in the name of 'religious books'.    Br. Mubashir, please share the references if you have them. Saba

I gave refereces of Ayaat for clarity.

got it! thanks  Saba

Salam all,

Maybe its just me, but I'm a bit confused with this thread 

I understand Hope's post as a rhetorical question and to show that actually full coverage could not be possible on the basis of 33:52? I mean how could the Prophet appreciate someone's beauty if the woman was fully covered right?

So dear br. Sardar - I am not sure why you are trying to prove the absence of full veil when I think Hope already agrees with you??

Maybe I've got it all wrong, in case I'm sorry     Saba

[sincere repeated requests]

Dear brother Abdul,

Salamun Alaikum.

Despite my clear sincere repeated requests on this forum and to you in an email (which was initially posted) for you not to consistently propound Parwez's exposition as a defence for your arguments or your questions, I sadly find you repeatedly doing the same.

Also brother Abdul, please may I kindly suggest that you refrain from propounding the views of Ghulam Parwez / Tolu-e-Islam indiscriminately on this forum. There is clearly a difference of understanding that many forum readers retain to his work (which has already been discussed on this forum before) albeit there are other areas of agreement. He was undoubtedly a great thinker who deserves appreciation like other great thinkers past and present, but no ones work is beyond criticism as you will no doubt agree. It is also clear that many take a literal meaning of many passages where you clearly do not and this will only increasingly become a source of tension on this forum.

Email

Whilst I respect your decision to align your understanding of the Quran to Ghulam Parwez's interpretations in many areas, I have already shared my position that I do not agree with his allegorical interpretations of so many Quranic passages which I feel have no Quranic warrant (for reasons already exhausted).

There is obviously a difference in the way Ghulam Parwez interprets the Quran rendering many passages allegorical and his method of word analysis regardless of context which I strongly disagree with. Any such discourses held with such are core contention would inevitably prove fruitless and will amount to nothing but flogging a dead horse.

Therefore, with this in mind, I will not be responding to your last post and if in future such a post reappears, it will be removed from this forum. I feel I have been very tolerant hitherto and have already exhausted from my perspective, much of the weaknesses in Parwez's methodology and humbly afforded you a lot of time in related discussions. 

This forum should not be used as an advertising platform to peddle another scholar's views indiscriminately and exclusively especially when academic differences have been made clear. You can bring your arguments with 'translations' but interpolations such as Parwez's work or any similar expositions used as a basis for the argument will be curtailed.

Regards,
Joseph.

Aslamaolaikum Br. Joseph,

I follow alot of other forums as well including the ourbeacon forum now and again. If brother Abdul Samad is the same brother that has written on the ourbeacon forum then his feelings towards Parwez are very personal which explains why he consistently pushes one view on this forum. I would also question objectivity.

Salamun Alaikum,

On a BLESSED DAY, I accidently came across the writings of Allama Parwez and it has now completely changed my life. He is now close to my life and I love this man After Allah and His Messengers......more than I love my family.

http://ourbeaconforum.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119179704

If I am mistaken then I am sorry but if true, the quote says a lot ...... Saba

Salam,

Even you have said "to set something aright for something".  In verse 7:190 Allah used swaleha to mean a child which is perfect in every way.  In verse 24:32  Allah says: wus swaleheena min ibadikum wa ima-ikum; means slaves and slave girls who have the capacity to get married.  In chapter Yusuf, the brothers of Yusuf discussed among themselves that their father's entire attention is towards Yusuf and his brother; if Yusuf is murdered or exiled then this imbalance can be removed: Wa takoonu min ba'dehi qauman swaleheen: 12:9.  Here swaleheen makes clear that it means for imbalance or inequities to be removed. Now think what does it mean wa aslahna lahu zaujahu (21:90).  It means Allah removed the fault from his wife which was a bar to her giving birth to a child....it is nothing but "cure", "to set something aright for something". 

I am not in any argument on this point further.

Kind regards

Salam. Your argument is wrong. Plain and simply wrong,. You have not proved that she had a disease. There is no disease. Even in the examples you have quoted, the best meaning in context of 21:90 is she was put right so she could bear a child. But as you don't want to accept that, I find you are purposely twisting the meanings to get what you want to read in the verse.

Sad. But true. Sadly, end of argument for me too and you have shown me that your method of analysis is weak and your mind is made up. I mean this in a nice but honest way, but I find it pointless discussing certain matters with you. Thanks...Saba

Aslamaolaikum brother Joseph

I too note your comments with respect.... I did not intend to cause any friction ...so i apologize for that if it came across like that on my part.

Re: brother Abdul's comment again - I do not agree with your understanding of 21:90. I feel you are looking at verses and interpreting them in a way to suit your understanding.

You mentioned 21:90 "We cured his wife's (Barrenness) for him".  I have checked the word 'aslaha' and it has the meaning of to put a matter right, to set something aright for something or reform and would mean here to adjust something. It does not mean 'cure'. She had no disease. Her body was adjusted (from barrenness of old age) so that she could have a baby. She was not cured from a disease.

Please see the way the Quran uses expressions to remove an ailment or cures someone from something (21:84).

Zakaariya's wife did not have a disease. Her body was adjusted and this was intervention after the prayer was made.

Also please please stop calling me brother!!      I am a sister !!!     Saba

Dear Abdul Samad (Nice of u to share your name)

Thanks for the post, but once again ... I find you are not answering the question and I find that you are evading it!

Once again, please explain how at the point where someone wants to pull down a church, synagogue etc, How did Allah change the course of action? Your response " The fight between right and wrong is an ongoing process every point of time" is poor and a convenient way out.

If He can change the course of an outcome, He has interfered. Like I said before, He didn't change His mind on the spot, but He knew something will take place and guided a course of action so that the matter could be stopped.   

Similarly when Musa (pbh) asked for Aaron (pbh) to be sent with him, Allah answered his prayer (20:36). How do you explain that??? Please do not tell me that this is a riddle too!

Please don't keep confusing the matter and using the same accusation about literal reading of the Quran. If you want to read the Quran as riddles then it is up to you - please don't impose this on others!  It seems you do not want to accept what the Quran is saying and are changing the meanings. You keep saying to me THINK - Please can YOU also THINK!....

Also you say:

This is not a valid argument.   You are mixing revelation and guidance from Allah with intervention.   This is not the topic under discussion.   

This is a very VALID argument!!! Why is not valid - because you say so? or because you can't answer it using your method of thinking? Even if Allah uses one people against another, He is exerting His will to change the outcome at a particular point. This has nothing to do with mixing revelation and guidance.


Also you say:

Quran says Zakariya's wife's disease was cured which is a proof that this is in accordance with natural law only.

What are you talking about br. Abdul Samad? You make a claim that the Quran says that Zakarya's wife had a disease. ASTAGHFURULLAH Where does the Quran say this? Where ??

Please don't attribute words to Allah which he never said!!!! Astagfurullah.

The Quran only says she was barren! (19.5) unless you want to make it riddles again or give new meanings to the word! Thanks - Saba