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 - Bikrun

Pages: [1] 2 ... 4

I dont really understand what you mean by "well writen", but if you mean it in a traditional hermeneutical way, I would just tell you that you are reading translations, and specially in some cases,  higly enriched meta texts. For example, the so called Gospels (which I do not personally believe is the "injeel") were writen in Helenistic Greek. Well, the Gospels are full of grammar mistakes. There is few space to refute this since Greek had clear and very useful grammar books centuries before.

Now let's come to the Quran. Of course you can have any opinion and I welcome it as I think exactly the same... then i realize that Quran is not a "book" to read, but a book to understand. That is why forums like this do exist, because we all try to understand. It rises more questions than answers and it shakes your mind every single second for good or bad, as you want. In my opinion, Gospels do not, they just tell you a story as they are human writen (remember the epistoles).

when you get to understand that you do not "read" the Quran, some verses explain you that they are not to be read in the (lets say) "traditional" way, but there is some kind of inter and intra text inherence not found in any other of the books you mentioned.

My point is that your question is pointless. Would you say that something is less beautiful just because yo cant see it?

General Issues / Questions / Re: Seeing spiritual world
« on: May 04, 2020, 11:46:53 AM »
Hi Huruf

Thank you for your reply, but I can't see how is that related to what I asked. You didn't understand my intention. I didn't say I want to get illuminated to see stuff, I said I have a problem with what people saw when these spiritual eyes opened for them (from the stories and sayings I heard about). And I'm trying to see if there's any chance that it's not correct what they interpreted...

Salam, sis

I see you seek for something practical.  Since I know that possibility "faces" to be showing their "judgement result" / reality /whatever (I don't really know how to express it, I dont understand it and I do not agree with it, I refer to my previous answer) is only possible on "the Day" if you research the Quran. Now what you understand with "face" and "the Day"  and all the relevant... is up to you. 

General Issues / Questions / Re: Seeing spiritual world
« on: May 02, 2020, 01:09:31 PM »
No, but if many pious people said to have seen the same thing.. it becomes difficult to just ignore these sayings.

It could easily be explained by a mental pathology or disorder and a previous common cultural / literacy / collective imagery reference leading to more than one person seeing the same. Just as many people have seen green aliens in flying saucers in different places, times and cultures.

Many pious people in Christian tradition had visions of Holy Mary and or other saints, and they were indeed pious. And so on in other religions, with their own signs and symbols. Does it mean something?

Then I do not know why I remembered this article. Feel free to ignore it

General Issues / Questions / Re: Seeing spiritual world
« on: May 02, 2020, 10:24:08 AM »
It has to do with religious people who got purification and were able to see the reality of stuff. For example, they saw some bad person in an ugly shape (that person looked pretty in material world)


Don't you find all this a bit prejudiced, partial, and kind of predetermination? "Good" people can be able to do bad things and "bad" people can be able to do good things given the circumstances. Some times there is a necessary evil... Sometimes you must hurt someone for his good so you look bad to that person while you are not. So good and bad are relative and arguable terms in many situations and then just someone claims (or not) he can actually see the "real" (?) stuff? Like there is an absolute and final "real" stuff?

General Issues / Questions / Re: How would you answer this question
« on: May 02, 2020, 04:57:08 AM »

You should say more...
Maybe your understand arabic, but it isn't the case for all. And in some translations there is no mentions of the book (but :if we chek in arabic there is a mention 'lkitabi).
And in others, we find " the [former] scripture, the existing book ( the Bible) and we can also find the Book.

If you can explain what you understand. Sarah asked questions maybe she needs details.


Salam, sister

Well, there is a huge problem with translations and especially with the brackets which directly express one personal interpretation of one singular person, the translator. Sister Sara can go herself through this great journey and discover her own interpretation, may Allah guide her, with an open, pure, empty from a priori ideas and brackets mind and without no one. I just proposed to her my understanding which is that Kitab and Quran are not the same. It is not stated if Kitab was sent in "arabic" and it is not said that Kitab is a "book" as we understand a "book", thus ayat in the kitab is not necessary a verse. Ayat can mean other things (30:22).

If you take it like this and forget that Kitab is a "book" with pages and that verses are not necessarily a limited group of words, the understanding can be quite different. And if you take it like this there is absolutely no dilemma of clear / not clear verses, allegorical or whatever, and so on.

About the existing/former scriptures (if they are scriptures), it is never said they are the book, they just "confirm" / "affirm" what is "yadayhi" (between his hands)... In any case, each one makes his/her own interpretation and research, may Allah guide us all 

General Issues / Questions / Re: How would you answer this question
« on: May 01, 2020, 10:12:00 AM »

I was reading this website and came across this:
'The Quran says that it is “clear”, but then says elsewhere (3:7) that only Allah understands the meaning of some verses (which begs the question of why they are there).  '

How would you argue these points?


3:7 is talking about the Kitab and not about the Quran. They are not the same (10:37)


Anybody can go to Jannah or not. There is not a sect/group premium membership requirement

No I did not insult you. YOU FEEL like I insulted you. Just like you feel like Soitto's interpretation is satisfying. You did not even try to hide your bias and I made that remark as an advice. Because if you were doing something wrong then it's you who will suffer from it, not me. My intention was good. And i'm not gonna argue why and how and what not. Worst case scenario you think I'm wrong in my assumption or that I'm an idiot and call it a day....but no.....behold you just insulted me!!!!

Then thank you. I am sorry i understood your absolute assertion as an absolute assertion and not an advice from you who knows what's in the others not bias your assertions.
Now i hope this is over.

It is called confirmation bias. This kind of dishonesty is so dangerous when it gets into that vicious circle where you start of with a desire in mind and you seek something and you find your way back to what you desired. You haven't challenged or even improved your opinion just reinforced your sentiment of it being true.....


red: how you know that?
why you do directly accept that I just replied without checking or you refuse it could be close to one of my already interpretations? Mr Wakas also.
Is there something wrong if there is a new point of view and I would like to see it further or agree or disagree with it later?
Maybe you are rushing judging things?
why is this so important for you that you spared such your words to me like this?
You just insulted me.

Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: Why PLURAL to call God......
« on: October 29, 2019, 02:53:17 AM »
That's right... the WE is used in common in quran that we understand... God + Angel Messengers involved in it.... unless God uses singular .. for example When God called Mosa... it is singular.. saying I am your Lord...not said We are your Lord.... that WE is common.. no issue.. in your example also same... but the concern is 37:75.... Why we need to call God in Plural while address only HIM...and not Messengers (Angel).... is my explanation complicated?


I have no answer but a simple and plain that Nuh called all forces to help him with his difficult task and all forces with the permission from the singular and one God responded to him.

Hope you can find a more interesting answer...

Pages: [1] 2 ... 4