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 - Bender

Pages: [1] 2 ... 233
I love the drama in your posts  :)
most Essential and exclusive, most specific, exact Date, most shocking tragic Event in modern history of humankind,  clearly anticipated and also strongly emphasized  O0


The reason I brought up that thread (which involved your method of understanding Quran) was because in this thread your method of understanding Quran came up again. It's simple.

In that old thread you were shown to be using an unproven method to govern how you interpret Quran - sounds dodgy to me. I felt in this thread you were doing the same thing, hence discussing testing your method - if possible.
Does any one here has a proven method?

Agreed BUT if your method is found lacking multiple times then we may be able to conclude your method may be weak/suspect.
I see it differently, I think the method I use is the best there is, but it's me who is lacking skills.

You're against benefits? Weird.

I assume you are referring to the "benefits" of being able to choose another meaning when our understanding doesn't fit - a suspect "benefit" hence your use of " ". If so, I wasn't even on about that hence why I referred to clarification.
RED: pedophiles, murderers, slaveholders, oppressors, thieves, etc also make use of those benefits.
I prefer correctness over benefits.

Forget Quran, forget Arabic, have you even considered how in a language, any language, synonyms can actually help clarify? THINK.
Maybe there are some benefits from poetic point of view, but besides that I don't see any benefit.

I was watching a serie last week.
The bad guy Boyd Crowder held a man hostage, when he was done questioning him, he said to his sidekick Colt: "Take care of him"
So Colt shot the hostage in the head.
Boyd actually meant for Colt to untie the hostage, and then reflects that he will have to be more careful with his choice of words next time.
I believe the language of the quran should be clean, it should not allow such misunderstandings.

btw great serie, Boyd Crowder is  O0

If one were to limit the scope of variation by utilising a robust checklist to check whenever one wants to choose a different meaning of the same word then that would certainly reduce variant interpretations, e.g. the same word could mean a different thing in another occurrence BUT only if:
1) the dominant meaning in the other occurrences has been tested extensively in this occurrence under question and found problematic (by intra-Quran analysis)
2) AND there is an intra-Quran logical reason for choosing another meaning, e.g. an illogical outcome results
3) AND this other meaning has some basis in Classical Arabic dictionaries or at least theory
4) AND this other meaning fits a pattern, e.g. if its with a certain preposition, part of an idiom, all other occurrences fit like a glove
5) AND obviously this meaning does not contradict anything anywhere else in Quran

And don't worry if you don't understand what I mean by the above, here is the method I try to stick to:

Generally, I prefer to use explicit methods of understanding Quran, e.g. those said in Quran itself (see link above), rather than making up interpretational rules then using these made up rules to understand Quran. If that's what others want to do, then good luck in that minefield.

Each to their own.

I respect your method and it will bring for sure only positive results for people who use the quran quotes you quoted in your link.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: Yesterday at 07:13:05 AM »
I never thought so and I even explicitly said this in the very link I referenced.
I thought I read something else there...


I agree, your example is irrelevant and proves nothing.
Ok, then you really lost me now.
I thought when you brought up synonyms and even a link to an old thread were you gave the next example, you wanted to discuss synonyms.
- idrib bi AAasaka al hajara fa infajarat min hu  [2:60]
- idrib bi AAasaka al hajara fa inbajasat min hu [7:160]
But I guess I am wrong.
So before I make the same mistake, can you please clarify why you were talking about synonyms and homonyms and why the reference to a 4 years old thread if that was not what you wanted to discuss?

I disagree. We can easily test methods to see which ones are consistent, lead to logical/practical results, and perhaps even falsify some. Methods (for various things) are tested all the time.
I welcome every feedback or correction

Have you even considered the potential benefits of synonyms (in terms of clarifying)?
Well the potential "benefits" are exactly the reason why I am against synonyms.

It's real simple, and I already implied how, we insert "beating" into the Quran occurrences and whenever it results in an illogical/impractical/contradiction (if any) I ask you to explain it. If you cant make it make sense your method fails.

Not my method fails but my understanding of that word fails.
And this is what I am doing for years, see if undersatnding x fits everywhere, if not then I try to come up with a better defintion.
A loooooooooooot of defintions failed by this method but not the method itself.

Of course there will be an element of subjectivity to it, e.g. you may think your translation of a certain verse makes sense, whereas I do not. That's fine, but evidence needs to be put on the table first before we can test/decide anything.
yes this is testing defintions not methods.

If you are ready to put the results on the table, let's begin. Please confirm your answers for all 4, or if you want, we can do one at a time. Please confirm your actual understanding of the root DRB and verb DaRaBa.
I seriously do not get the point of this, except if you want to see if my understanding of a particular word is consistent everywhere or not.

I admit that my approach does not bring a lot of results, this means that I have for a loooooooooooooot of words/verses no clue, but I am confident that this is the way to go as I believe that this approach will lead to a better understanding.
Allowing homonyms and synonyms will for sure bring a lot of results, but it allows also a lot of different interpretations, and I am confident that this is the wrong approach.

MofF has already ran away, so it's just you.
I guess he is wiser than me.

Is every discussion here a game of thrones?

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: December 01, 2016, 07:46:22 AM »

well let me know where i insult any women...

Ok, here you go:
"and about homosexulty you already send the quote which is not answer by anyone yet apart from screaming like a loser... that what clearly show someone defeat when they start screaming or giving up on anything..."

hmm so according to your understanding...

interpretation should be like this..

why do you approach the foot(with lust) instead of women.. indeed you are ignorant people

why do you approach foot(footjob) instead of women , indeed you are intelligent people
tafseer by bender this verse indicates the invention of footjoob  :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

this boy is funny ... i love his interpreatation he will bring a change in free minds by his reasonings and interpreatation...

look i already know it will be faulty interpretation so i already guessed it... aww i think my prediction was correct ...  :yay:

anyway everybody have a right to beleive and understand what they want...  :handshake:

it looks like wakas also raise some points lets see where the wind will blow..

i think we missed your point and you missed your homework... or you are careless enough to check the previous reference... but this time i will make sure i will take you to the tour of words... lol look word tour and world tour just one letter difference make it so big and small...  :hmm

   26:165 اتاتون الذكران من العلمين

26:165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?"

incase if you have some issues with the meanings of males...

16:97 من عمل صلحا من ذكر او انثى وهو مؤمن فلنحيينه حيوة طيبة ولنجزينهم اجرهم باحسن ما كانوا يعملون

16:97 Whoever does good works, whether male or female, and is a believer, We will give him a good life and We will reward them their dues with the best of what they used to do.

incase if you you are looking for arabic of foot ...

16:94 ولا تتخذوا ايمنكم دخلا بينكم فتزل قدم بعد ثبوتها وتذوقوا السوء بما صددتم عن سبيل الله ولكم عذاب عظيم

16:94 And do not use your oaths as a means of deception between you, that a foot will slip after it has been made firm, and you will taste the evil of turning away from the path of God, and you will have a great retribution.

you always welcome again to try foot, hand, or anything with this word ( الذكر )

interestingly this word قدم we can methphorically use for move/advancement.. same like a move in chess  :!

peace.. :peace:

I guess I have no useful moves anymore, so I think it's time for me to resign this game.
Congrats  :handshake:

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: December 01, 2016, 07:16:25 AM »

Thanks for clarifying. I believe that gives us enough info to test your theory. It seems MofF also agrees with you, so perhaps he too will provide answers.

You may recall in the past you and mmkhan claimed (without evidence) there were no synonyms in Quran, and when I produced one simple example, both of you were stumped and could not explain any difference between the words. Reference thread.

You have a good memory.
I don't understand why you insist I am claiming something.
If you do not agree with my approach then you are totally free to do it your way.
I can not prove that my method is the correct method just like you can not prove yours is the correct one.
I am just following what I think is better.

Your simple example in that thread did not prove your approach nor did it disprove my approach in case you thought so.
113:1 قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ الْفَلَقِ
114:1 قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ
Are the red words synonyms?
btw this example of me is of course not a proof that there are no synonyms in the quran, it's just an example.
I am just against such ideas because I think such ideas are only bringing more and more confusions while I think the quran should be clear if it is indeed the book I think it is.

Let's move onto your claim(s) in this thread. Please answer the following questions:

1) what is the root concept of Daad-Ra-Ba AND the meaning of the first form verb DaRaBa:

2) what is the root concept of Ra-Alif/Hamzeh-Siin AND the meaning of the word 'raas':

3) what is the root concept of Siin-Jiim-Dal AND the meaning of the word 'masjid':

4) what is the root concept of Ya-Dal-Ya AND the meaning of the word 'yad':

Once you provide the answers we will test them in Quran occurrences. If others have better test examples, feel free to cite them.
How exactly are my answers to these questions going to prove or disprove anything?
Lets say I take for "daraba" "violence" as root concept and first form is "beating" then what?

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: November 30, 2016, 05:58:17 AM »
Perhaps you can clarify further. Which of the below:

1) Are you claiming that an Arabic word should have the same meaning in every Quran occurrence?
2) Are you claiming that an Arabic word should have the same theme/concept (but perhaps slightly different shade of meaning depending on context) in every Quran occurrence?
3) Are you claiming that every derived word(s) from a root should have the same meaning in every Quran occurrence?
4) Are you claiming that every derived word(s) from a root should have the same theme/concept (but perhaps slightly different shade of meaning depending on context) in every Quran occurrence?
5) (1) or (2) or (3) or (4) and every root/word has its own distinct meaning
6) something else, if so please clarify.

Depending on your answer, it may be possible to test your theory.

Well I'm not claiming anything, just sharing how I study the quran.

For me it's like this:
1 root has exactly 1 concept/theme, every derived word from that root has a strong correlation with the rootconcept/theme.
2 identical derived words have identical meanings but withing the concept/theme of the root.
2 (slightly) different derived words have 2 (slightly) different meanings but within the concept of the root.
The context has no influence on the meaning of the word.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: November 29, 2016, 01:52:36 PM »
So, Bender, rijal in 72:6 is feet of humans and feet of jinn?

No, ofcourse rijaal does not mean foot nor does it mean males/men

Cursed are those who're following deen of homosexuals and those who wanna do sin with angels.
RED: what does deen of homosexuals mean?
BLUE: I was not planning to do sin with angels, but in case one day when I am to drunk and want to do sin with angels, then how exactly am I going to achieve that?

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: November 29, 2016, 01:47:09 PM »
Bender, your translation and attempted evidence is poor.

I think you missed my point.
If he (imran) uses corpus quran to make a claim then I am also allowed to use the same source to make a claim.

Here is a good place to start:
Ra-Jiim-Lam = to go on foot, urge with foot, walk, tie by the feet, let (a female) suckle her young, be curly (hair), set free with his mother. rajjala - to comfort anyone, comb the hair, grant a respite. tarajjala - to go down without rope. rijlatun - vigour in walking. rijlun - foot, soldiers, good walker, tramp. arajil - hunters, pedestrian. rajulun - male human being, man, a person with heir. rajilun - foot, footmen (slow walkers). rijlain - two feet. arjul (pl.) - feet.

rajil n.m. (pl. rijal) 2:239, 17:64, 22:27

rajul n.m. (pl. rijal) 2:228, 2:282, 2:282, 2:282, 4:1, 4:7, 4:12, 4:32, 4:34, 4:75, 4:98, 4:176, 5:23, 6:9, 7:46, 7:48, 7:63, 7:69, 7:81, 7:155, 9:108, 10:2, 11:78, 12:109, 16:43, 16:76, 17:47, 18:32, 18:37, 21:7, 23:25, 23:38, 24:31, 24:37, 25:8, 27:55, 28:15, 28:20, 29:29, 33:4, 33:23, 33:40, 34:7, 34:43, 36:20, 38:62, 39:29, 39:29, 39:29, 40:28, 40:28, 43:31, 48:25, 72:6, 72:6

rijl n.f. (pl. arjul) 5:6, 5:33, 5:66, 6:65, 7:124, 7:195, 20:71, 24:24, 24:31, 24:45, 26:49, 29:55, 36:65, 38:42, 60:12

LL, V3, p: 209, 210, 211, 212, 213  ##

I don't see why this source is better than corpus quran.

Anyway, I know that a lot of people here use:
1 quranic word (root) ==> n interpretations/translations/understandings/concepts/etc (n >= 1)
I totally don't agree with this approach, with this approach I can make every word fit what I want it to be.
I can make rijaal="berber people" in verses where I think it will benefit me, and I can make rijaal="not berber people" where I see some disadvantage for me.
For me 1 quranic word/root ==> 1 interpretation/concept
I don't see any link between "to go on foot" and " let (a female) suckle her young" or "man" etc
But of course everyone is free to study the quran how he/she think it will benefit him/her most.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: November 29, 2016, 06:12:35 AM »
yes you understand now... male human and female human
as well as male animals with female animals produce offsprings..

atleast animals are more inline with nature compared to humans .. they know that lion dnt have to rape with tree, :rotfl:  the lioness is there for lion and a lion dnt have to sex with lion  :rotfl:

thats what the quality of this game .. losing king have 21 moves when he left alone ...  lets have some more moves ... even king is already cornered plantey of times but some kings like to get checkmate again and again..  :jedi:

Why do you      
the men      
(with) lust      
instead of      
instead of      
the women?

Indeed, you are an ignorant people. (27/55)

you always welcome to bring your faulty interpreatation for this if you have any objection with this move...

rijaal does not mean men but foot.


(on) foot

then (pray) on foot



for mankind (thus also females)

(is) love       

(of) the (things they) desire -


[the] women

Thus all women are by nature lesbians. This can be further proved by 2:187
2:187 It has been made permissible for you (males and females) the night preceding fasting to go to your wives [for sexual relations].

General Issues / Questions / Re: Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
« on: November 29, 2016, 04:14:05 AM »
hmm so here is the master piece of dignity by you...  pathetic on its height ..  :ignore:
Yes, and every time I see you insult women again (in your case a much older woman) I will loose my dignity and tell you how pathetic it is.

Pages: [1] 2 ... 233