10 days

[silentsalaam]

It has been said by others on this site that the fasting of Ramadan is 10 days, and starts with the full moon after Summer solstice.

Does anyone think that the importance placed on the last 10 days of the traditional 30 day fast could have a connection to these 10 days?

I mean why is there so much importance put on the last 10 days?
Could it be they are the real fasting days , but that over time people changed the meaning of the word Shahr and changed the length of the fast ?...but still kept the importance of fasting those 10 days..the 10 days from the full moon on ?

any thoughts?

Peace

[silentsalaam]

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Even ones that disagree with my previous post.

Please give me your comments, thoughts, etc..

thanks ,

Peace

[Elke]

If you want any thought i'll give you mine...

Full moon is day fourteen after start of "ramadan" new moon (correct me if i'm wrong). So there would still be 14 days to go, not 10


Special importance is on the last ten days of ramadan (around from days 18/19 on.... because they thing leilatelqadr is taking place then - even though they don't now when -   stress again on night 27....

But the new understanding developped here is that the night of power is the first night of full moon after the summer solstice....

So if it could be importance of 10 days was somehow kept in mind they pushed night of power around...

Well just some thoughts. I do not think that one can go very far with that kind of reasoning anyway - no proof, no basic fact - some thing we just cannot reconstitute for sure.

But i understand your questionning - am on the same path atually - havent made my mind up yet

peace, lk

[mquran]

Salaamun alaikum,

Even though the quran uses words like:

1. asyara = 10
2. firq = part
3. thulutha = a third
4. thaaifat = part

it  never uses such words in 2/185. Rather it says about SHAHRU ramadhan (month of ramadhan) and  faman shahida minkum as-shahr falyasumhu (who ever witnesses from among you THE MONTH, so he fasts/abstains)

Where is the 10 day thing coming from please?

[truth]

Peace,

I believe it comes from the fact that the witnessing of the shahr (the full moon according to Ayman) determines the time to fast and not the length. This is in 2:185 which states to fast at that time.

The length is determined thus not by 2:185 but in 2:184 which states that specific days are designated for fasting. If it was the entire month then it would indicate the whole month is for fasting.

The word used to indicate the specific days is 'mawdoodat' which when used elsewhere in the reading indicates a period of 3-10 days and no more.


Also if you look at 2:196 the closest example of fasting - there is a ten day fast mentioned there for what it's worth.


Hope this helps.

[mquran]

Peace Truth,

Thanks for the explanation. 2/183-184 to me doesn't even speak of ramadhan. It just speaks of fasting in general. 2/185 mentions ramadhan and so the ayyamin ma'doodat of 184 doesn't apply to ramadhan. Oh well....

[silentsalaam]

Thank you all for your comments .

[ayman]

Peace Mquran, Silent Salam, all,

Where is the 10 day thing coming from please?

To get an answer to this question from the great reading, one needs to correct the following misconception:

it never uses such words in 2/185. Rather it says about SHAHRU ramadhan (month of ramadhan) and faman shahida minkum as-shahr falyasumhu (who ever witnesses from among you THE MONTH, so he fasts/abstains)

The word "shahr" is not used to mean "month" in the great reading and the word "ramadhan" is not meaningless. Using "shahr" to mean "month" and keeping "ramadhan" as a meaningless label creates contradictions such as the following:

Contradiction 1:

It creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 2:183-184. I don't think that you addressed this contradiction with this statement:

Thanks for the explanation. 2/183-184 to me doesn't even speak of ramadhan. It just speaks of fasting in general. 2/185 mentions ramadhan and so the ayyamin ma'doodat of 184 doesn't apply to ramadhan. Oh well....

The whole passage from 2:183-185 talks about fasting and this is clear. The word "ma3doodat" means  "can be counted on the fingers", in other words less than or equal to ten. So on the one hand 2:183-184 says that fasting is for a few ("ma3doodat") days. On the other hand, according to traditions 2:185 says that fasting is for a whole month (whatever "month" means).

Contradiction 2:

In addition to the duration being contradictory in 2:185 and 2:183-184 according to the traditional interpretation, one of the two statements is redundant since supposedly both talk about the duration of the fast. The statement of "ayyam ma3doodat" is clearly talking about the duration. On the other hand, logically the statement about witnessing the "shahr" doesn't make sense in relation to duration. People count a duration not witness it. So the statement more likely talks about witnessing an event, which tells us when to start the fast not the duration. So this way the two statements complement each other and there is no redundant contradictory information.

Contradiction 3:

According to traditions, in 2:185 we are told that the great reading was descended in a whole month of the year while in 97:1 we are told that it was descended in one night of the year. This is another clear contradiction. Once we understand the witnessing of "shahr ramadan" as witnessing an event NOT a month then that contradiction is resolved too. Moreover, it becomes clear that the great reading has been always telling us exactly when the night of measure ("laylat al-qadr") is. It is the night of the event of the scorching full-moon ("shahr ramadan").

So as you can see, those contradictions were not in the great reading but were in the traditional understanding. Once a proper understanding is reached, then those contradictions automatically disappear and everything falls into place.

I hope this helps.

Peace,

Ayman

[silentsalaam]

Ayman,

How do you think the tradition of fasting for a month came into existence, if the Readings real meaning is 10 days ( or 3-10 days) ?

Do you think it is a fast of 10 days ? or 3 days ? or some other number?

Do you think the Prophet (saw) , fasted for 3-10 days or for 30 days?

[ayman]

Peace Silent Salaam,

How do you think the tradition of fasting for a month came into existence, if the Readings real meaning is 10 days ( or 3-10 days) ?

To answer this question, we need to understand how the present so-called Islamic calendar came into existence. The God doesn't decree any calendar in the great reading. The God gives us clear cosmic phenomena for the timing of the fast and the hunting restrictions. Even traditionalists admit that the present Islamic Hijri calendar was invented during Umar's time and the prophet certainly didn't use it.

If one looks at archeological evidence then one will see that the word "Hijri" doesn't appear on manuscripts for over 100 years after the invention of this calendar. So in reality we don't even know for sure what this calendar was based on. The Abbassid era traditions about this calendar reflect the kind of questions that people were asking during the Abbassid era. I quoted a sample tradtion here in the Appendix of the article:

http://www.free-minds.org/articles/science/timing.htm

Do you think it is a fast of 10 days ? or 3 days ? or some other number?

2:185 says that we should complete the count. Completing the count of a few days is 10 days. See also 2:196 and 28:27, which talk about 10 being a complete count.

Do you think the Prophet (saw) , fasted for 3-10 days or for 30 days?

If he followed what the great reading says on the matter and understood it correctly then he fasted for 10 days.

I hope this helps.

Peace,

Ayman