News:

About us: a forum for monotheists, and discussion of Islam based on The Quran

Main Menu
Menu

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.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Sharp001

#1
Peace everyone,

I have a question for QS. Do you call "Christians" pagans/idolaters/mushrik?
#2
Br. TS,


As for the Laylat Al-Qadar, I wanted to ask, what would you different on that night, than any other Ramadan night and for what purpose? You can pm me, if you don't want to or are allowed to post.

Peace
#3
General Issues / Questions / Re: Quran only?
August 25, 2009, 05:01:09 PM
Quote from: becarefull- knowledge on August 25, 2009, 04:48:00 PM
I read the section on Hikmah, he is not providing anything whatsover to disclaim that hikma is knowledge in addition to the Qruan. he quotes an ayat that is supposed to support this but see below for yusuf ali's version
Yusuf alis version
39. These are among the (precepts of) wisdom, which thy Lord has revealed to thee. Take not, with Allah, another object of worship, lest thou shouldst be thrown into Hell, blameworthy and rejected.
his version
"This is of what your Sustainer has revealed to you of ?Hikmah? (wisdom), and do not associate any other god with Allah lest you should be thrown into hell, blamed, cast away." (17:39)

IF Allah intended for us to know that the wisdom that Muhamad (PBUH) is bringing is the Quran itself and only the Quran, why didnt the Quran say the Quran and its wisdom as opposed the quran and the wisdom(hikmah)??

Br. BCKnowledge

I think I might be able to clarify this a bit.

I'm sure you're familiar with the names of Allah in the Quran. We see a couple of them in 1:3 (Ar-Rahman, Ar-Raheem). These names define Allah's attributes, "The All-Compassionate", "The All-Merciful". I believe you will agree to that.

Similar, The Quran has different names which are mentioned in the Book, which indicate its attributes. It's been called Furqan (The Criterion) and Quran (The Reading) among other things. Hikmah (The Wisdom) is simply another attribute of the Quran, which alludes to its importance to the believers.
#4
Br. TS,

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 03:09:18 PM
Now everyone can see why I am a Sharp fan. This Sharp theory is the best attack I have ever seen on Ayman theory  :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:   It has gotten me excited on this topic again !!
Thanks for the compliment and all, but I don't think I'm anybody new who presented this "theory". Now that I'm re-reading the thread, most of my questions and observations mirror what Sis. Marie made in the first 3 pages of this topic.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 03:09:18 PM
1. Sharp theory makes the year primarily lunar whereas according to 17:12 it is primarily solar. According to 17:12 one should be able to determine the year using only day and night and the only way to do that is from one solstice to the next and not from one shahr ramadhan to the next.
I'm still trying to understand the connection between the signs of the night and the day with the year being solar. Br. Ayman reasoned that the night and the day are both functions of the Sun. How was that conclusion reached?

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 03:09:18 PM
2. Shahr has been used in the same way as a woman's menstrual period in the relevant signs. The women are asked to use their menstrual periods as markers to determine the interim after divorce. If a menstruating woman waits for three menstrual periods that time interval will be similar to waiting for three nearly full moons i.e. both will be almost two lunar cycles plus the time before the first period or the first nearly full moon. If "shahr" means the interval between two nearly full moons, then the interim of the post menopausal woman will be one lunar cycle more than that of a menstruating woman which does not make any sense.
As I mention in an earlier post of mine,

Quote from: Sharp001 on August 24, 2009, 01:01:16 PM
(1) The meaning of the word "Shahar" has been debated about a lot in the discussion. Some say it means "Full Moon", others contend that it means "Month". Don't know if there are other meanings which have been attributed to the word, but these seem to enjoy most popularity. So, I looked up the root word used throughout the Book to see the context that it's been used in different places, namely 2:185, 2:194, 2:197, 2:217, 2:226, 2:234, 4:92, 5:2, 5:97, 9:2, 9:5, 9:36, 34:12, 46:15, 58:4, 65:4 & 97:3, and used both "Full Moon" and "Month" to translate. In all instances, it gave me the impression of a time frame, although in some verses, a significance was attached to these time frames, i.e. "Shahru Ramadana" (2:185) and "Alshahra Alharam" (2:194, 2:217, 5:2, 5:97, 9:5). "Shahar" could very well be a time frame between two markers, which would make sense, for the sake of continuing consistency and giving structure to time measurement. Whatever markers are used, the time frame between them would be the same, I believe. Correct me, if I'm mistaken.
If "Shahar" is taken in the sense a period between two markers, then in the case of 65:4 it can be understood as the period between one event of Menstruation to the next.

1st Menstruation - 2nd Menstruation = 1st Shahar (Approx. 28 days)
2nd Menstruation - 3rd Menstruation = 2nd Shahar (Approx. 28 days)
3rd Menstruation - 4th Menstruation = 3rd Shahar (Approx. 28 days)




Br. QD

Quote from: quickduck on August 25, 2009, 03:19:27 PM
Peace all,
Here is my latest understanding for 10:5
It is He Who appointed the sun to give radiance, and the moon to give light, assigning it in phases so you would know the number of years and the Calculation. Allah did not create these things except with truth. We make the Signs clear for people who know.

For me, God Appointed TWO things for TWO purposes. The sun to know the number of years AND the moon to know how to calculate. TWO things for TWO purposes.

example : in the restaurant, the waiter gives you a knife AND a fork , to be able to cut AND pick the meat.

So in my point of view, the sun is for knowing the number of years (the year is solar) and the moon for calculating (waiting periods, fasting, interim,etc...)

I hope this is clear , and in accordance with other verses that you already know as well.

salam
What if we apply the same logic to 17:12?

Quote from: Free Minds Translation of the QuranAnd We made the night and the day as two signs, so We erased the sign of night and We made the sign of day to see-in, that you may seek bounty from your Lord, and that you may know the number of the years and the count. And everything We have detailed completely.
Wouldn't that mean the sign of the night would be used to know the number of years and the sign of the day be used to know the count?

Peace and thank you all for indulging me.
#5
Br. TS,

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 01:20:54 PM
Quote from: Sharp001 on August 25, 2009, 12:13:24 PM
I think I may have misunderstood the whole thing from the outset, because my line of thinking appears to be based on the fact that the "year" starts on the day after the "Shahar Ramadan" and ends on the night of the next "Shahar Ramadan", but your thinking is that a Solar Year (which is the period between one Summer/Winter Solistice to the next Summer/Winter Solistice) would contain either 12 or 13 Full Moons. Am I correct in this assumption?
The answer to your above question is yes.
That's good to hear. Now I know what page I should be on.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 01:20:54 PM
Quotemy line of thinking appears to be based on the fact that the "year" starts on the day after the "Shahar Ramadan" and ends on the night of the next "Shahar Ramadan"

The problem with this line of thinking is that firstly it ignores the role of the sun in determining the year per the great reading (17:12 and 10:5) and secondly this line of thinking will result in a year that will not be in sync with the seasons thereby ending up violating the hunting restrictions as ordained by the god in the inviolable shuhoor.
True, but Br. Progressive asks a pertinent question about 10:5.

Quote from: progressive1993 on August 25, 2009, 01:00:57 PM
10:5 He is the One who made the sun an illuminator, and the moon a light, and He measured its phases so that you would know the number of the years and the calculation. God has not created this except for truth. He details the signs for a people who know.

Not sure if the verse says the sun has stages, but that could just mean for calculating the day. Tell me, ayman, is the thing about phases for the moon or the sun?
This creates an apparent contradiction to the understanding of 17:12. Br. Ayman has reasoned that out in his article as follows:

Quote10.5. It is He who made the sun a shining brightness and the moon a light and made it stages; so that you might know the number of years and the calculation. The God didn't create this except with the truth, He explains His signs to people who know.

From 10:5, it can be seen that the learning of the number of years and calculation are helped by either or both the sun and the moon, however there is no mention of a specific stage of the moon. Another sign that makes it absolutely clear that the year is solar is in 17:12:

17.12. We have made the night and the day as two signs: the sign of the night We have obscured, while the sign of the day we have made visible so that you may seek favors from your Lord, and so that you may know the number of years and the calculation, and We have explained all things in detail.

Given that night and day is certainly determined by the sun and not the moon, the sign in 17:12 leaves absolutely no doubt that the year is solar.
Both verses use "know the number of years and the calculation" in the same sense. The explanation that Br. Ayman gave for the firse verse that, "the learning of the number of years and calculation are helped by either or both the sun and the moon", does seem to apply to the second verse as well.

On a side note, I found this article on Miraclesofthequran.com, which I post here:

Quote from: Miraclesofthequran.comCALCULATING THE LUNAR YEAR

It is He Who appointed the sun to give radiance, and the moon to give light, assigning it phases so you would know the number of years and the reckoning of time. Allah did not create these things except with truth. We make the Signs clear for people who know. (Qur'an, 10:5)

And We have decreed set phases for the moon, until it ends up looking like an old date branch. (Qur'an, 36:39)

In the first of the above verses, Allah has clearly revealed that the Moon will be a means of measurement for people to calculate the year. Furthermore, our attention is also drawn to the fact that these calculations will be performed according to the positions of the Moon as it revolves in its orbit. Since the angles between the Earth and Moon and the Moon and Sun constantly change, we see the Moon in different forms at different times. Furthermore, our ability to see the Moon is made possible by the fact that it is illuminated by the Sun. The amount of the lighted half of the Moon we see from Earth changes. Bearing in mind these changes, a number of calculations can be made, making it possible for human beings to measure the year.

In former times a month was calculated as the time between two full moons, or the time it took the Moon to travel around the Earth. According to this, one month was equal to 29 days, 12 hours and 44 minutes. This is known as the "lunar month." Twelve lunar months represent one year, according to the Hijri calendar. However, there is a difference of eleven days between the Hijri calendar and the Gregorian calendar, in which a year is the time it takes the Earth to orbit the Sun. Indeed, attention is drawn to this difference in another verse:

They stayed in their Cave for three hundred years and added nine. (Qur'an, 18:25)

We can clarify the time referred to in the verse thus: 300 years x 11 days (the difference which forms every year) = 3,300 days. Bearing in mind that one solar year lasts 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 45.5 seconds, 3,300 days/365.24 days = 9 years. To put it another way, 300 years according to the Gregorian calendar is equal to 300+9 years according to the Hijri calendar. As we can see, the verse refers to this finely calculated difference of 9 years. (Allah knows best.) There is no doubt that the Qur'an, which contains such pieces of information, which transcended the everyday knowledge of the time, is a miraculous revelation.
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_13.html
Not entirely sure if this is of any significance or relevance, but it looked like food for thought.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 25, 2009, 01:20:54 PM
I will leave brother Ayman to carry on the discussion with you because now that the old Sharp is back, it should be an interesting discussion.  :handshake:
:)... I wouldn't get your hopes up, if I were you, because I don't think I'll bring anything new to the table that Br. Ayman has already heard or read. I'll just go through this thread, jot down my questions as and when they arise, and see if they were addressed by him or anybody else in the thread or his article. If not, then I post a question, otherwise, I don't want to bother him by asking him the same questions that he or anybody else has already answered repeatedly over and over again.
#6
Peace Br. TS,

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 07:59:13 PM
Peace Sharp,

I used to be a fan of the old Sharp after reading his sharp posts but it seems that the new Sharp is not as sharp as the old Sharp!! I am really disappointed by your response. :'( I guess I overestimated you but that's my fault not yours.  :(
I'm sorry to have disappointed you. I guess this is one of the many areas of my life, I really haven't pondered over. I hope to look into it further, soon. Till that time, I'll try to post as little as I can.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 07:59:13 PM
I have already explained all these points in my past posts on this thread IN DETAIL and I didn't want to repeat myself over and over again. That's a logical fallacy of repetition. In any case I would humbly request you to go back and read my older posts and other posts that deal with these points for details. I would also request you to do your homework, like the old Sharp used to do. Instead of inventing your fantasy calendar with every lunar cycle of 30 days, you could have consulted a real solar calendar with lunar phases superimposed and did the calculations but you didn't. Even with your fantasy calendar, had you continued counting the 30 day fantasy lunar cycles in the next solar years you would have found that for the next 2 solar years there would have been 11 complete lunar cycles in each solar year.
I apologize. My mistake that I didn't go through all the 80 pages of this thread, just went through first 22 pages before I jumped here. In my defense, all I can say is I needed an answer within the span of 5-6 hours, which definitely was unreasonable. But, in the end, I wasn't able to convince either myself or my brother of not fasting in the (how you would call it) so-called month of Ramadan, and ended up fasting yesterday, am fasting today and probably will till the end of this so-called month of Ramadan.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 07:59:13 PM
Ok let's start step by step and point by point. Let's deal with the first point only for now and when it is settled we can move on to the next one. You can either consider the following luni-solar calendar and count the lunar cycles in each year consecutively for at least 12 years:

http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/moonphases.html

OR do the following exercise:

Forget about all calendars and see what the reality is. Go out and start counting the lunar cycles for three actual solar years. Start from any solstice as your day 1 of the solar year. Then look for the first full moon after that day. The second full moon after that will complete the first "interval between two full moons" as per your definition of shahr. Count such intervals for the whole solar year until the same next solstice. For example if you started from the summer solstice this year then count the "interval between two full moons" until the summer solstice next year. Do this for at least 3 years and let me know what your findings are.

Let me make a prediction for you. From summer solstice this year (which was June 21) until the day before summer solstice of 2010 (June 20, 2010) you will count 11 complete lunar cycles. The first full moon during this period was on July 7 and the last full moon during this period will be on May 27. But don't take my word for it. Actually observe all the full moons and count the "intervals between two full moons" yourself. Repeat the same exercise for the period from June 21, 2010 to June 20, 2011. You will count 12 complete lunar cycles in that time period. Then repeat the same exercise for the period from June 21, 2011 to June 20, 2012. You will count 11 complete lunar cycles in that time period.

If you want, continue this exercise for the next 12 solar years. You will find that there are actually 11 complete lunar cycles (or intervals between two full moons) for 2 consecutive solar years and 12 complete lunar cycles in the third solar year and this will repeat. This will be empirical proof that shahr cannot mean lunar cycle because you should be able to count at least 12 "shahr" EVERY SOLAR YEAR.
I think I may have misunderstood the whole thing from the outset, because my line of thinking appears to be based on the fact that the "year" starts on the day after the "Shahar Ramadan" and ends on the night of the next "Shahar Ramadan", but your thinking is that a Solar Year (which is the period between one Summer/Winter Solistice to the next Summer/Winter Solistice) would contain either 12 or 13 Full Moons. Am I correct in this assumption?

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 07:59:13 PM
See you in 3 or 12 solar years. I will not respond to you until I see the old Sharp again, who has sincerely done his homework with ACTUAL FACTS BASED ON REALITY as per 17:36. Once again I apologize for overestimating you.
Ah, what a wonderful sign.

Quote from: Free Minds Translastion of The Quran17:36 - And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these you are responsible for.

Thanks for the reminder.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 07:59:13 PM
PS: Wherever I have used the term "full moon" the reader should understand it as referring to the actual "nearly full moon".
Yes, I perfectly understand. Thanks.




Peace Br. Ayman,

Quote from: ayman on August 24, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
Peace Sharp001,

You partially misunderstood the concept. You are assuming that the beginning of the cycle will fall exactly on the summer solstice. This will rarely happen. Most likely, whatever marker one chooses, whether it is the full-moon or the crescent, will occur sometimes after the solstice. If it is more than 10 days after the solstice then you will only get 11 complete cycles. So as Truthseeker said, most of the times you will only get 11 integer cycles in a year. If you start counting fractions of a cycle then you will end up with 12.3 cycles in a year, never 12. The only way you can count 12 in a year is if "shahr" was an event and meant "full-moon". If it meant "crescent" then you will also have a problem because there are 24-26 crescents in a year.
Like I said to TS, I may have started off on the wrong foot. My line of thinking appears to be based on the fact that the "year" starts on the day after the "Shahar Ramadan" and ends on the night of the next "Shahar Ramadan", but your thinking is that a Solar Year (which is the period between one Summer/Winter Solistice to the next Summer/Winter Solistice) would contain either 12 or 13 Full Moons. Am I correct in this assumption?

Quote from: ayman on August 24, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
No it does change your understanding. Now you are forced to say "marker" and not a continuous month. This is due to "witnessed" being in the perfect past tense while "fast" is in the present tense. There is no way around it, "shahr" has to be an event that, as you said, marks the start of the fast.
Hmm... I see where you're coming from, and it seems logical. But come to think of it, the current practice is the same in theory, even though the marker and the time of year may be wrong. Around the world, as soon as the New Moon is sighted/witnessed, the month and the fasting begins the next day. Again, I'm not justifying or validating the practice, just making an observation.

Quote from: ayman on August 24, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
In 2:184, we also hear that the fast is for a few days ("ayyam ma3doodat"). This would be redundant and useless information if it was already known that "shahr" is 29-30 days.
I totally overlooked that verse. Your claim of redunduncy has merit.

Quote from: ayman on August 24, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
Menstruations are EVENTS exactly like the full-moon is an event. No woman I know has a continuous period from one period to the next, like month is a continuous period from one month to the next. This would be miserable, especially for her husband :).
I agree that Mestruations are events. I think I may have misunderstood the verses as I took the Period to mean the Menstrual Cycle, whereas I think it indicates the Menstruation Phase of the cycle. Please correct me, if I'm mistaken.

Quote from: ayman on August 24, 2009, 08:27:18 PM
Truthseeker is saying the opposite. The great reading was clearly descended in one night. The wrong understanding of "shahr" as "month" creates a contradiction. So now on the one hand the god is saying that it descended in on night and on the other he is saying 29-30 days!
I think you and TS may have misunderstood what I meant. I'll try to illustrate it.

If I tell you today that I was born in March, and tomorrow I tell you that on the night I was born there was a Full Moon, (A) Would you take the first statement to mean that I was born through-out the month? (B) Would the statements be contradictory to each other?

So basically what I was trying to say is if] the time frame of "Ramadan" started from witnessing of the "Scorching Full Moon" and ended at the witnessing of the next "Full Moon", and the Book was sent down on the night of the 'Scorching Full Moon", which falls into that time frame, then the verse mentioning that the Book being sent down in the "month" of Ramadan doesn't automatically imply that it was sent down throughout the "month".

Quote from: ayman on August 25, 2009, 01:34:10 AM
Quote from: Rex on August 25, 2009, 12:56:46 AM
58:4 So who did not find, so fasting two months following each other from before that they touch each other, so who was not able, so feeding sixty poorest
This is talking about the period between consecutive full-moons.
Sorry about being off-topic, but I have a question about this verse. The period between two full-moons would/can be 29-30 days, but the feeding is to 60 poorest. It seems kind of odd and non-symmetrical (for lack of a better word). 30 days or 60 feedings? I expected, 30 days and 30 feeding, or 60 days and 60 feedings, for equality, I guess.

Peace All
#7
Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
Peace everyone,

Sharp welcome back to the forum. :welcome:
Thanks, TruthSeeker.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
In addition to what quickduck said, "shahr" cannot mean the interval between two nearly full moons because of the following reasons:

1. According to 9:36 the count of shahr is 12. Sharp, please take any set of solar years and try to count 12 lunar cycles every year. You will be surprised to see that the count of lunar cycles is 11 for two consecutive solar years and is 12 in the third solar year. You will not be able to count at least 12 lunar cycles every solar year. On the other hand you will always be able to count 12 nearly full moons every single solar year. Therefore "shahr" cannot mean lunar cycle or interval between two nearly full moons but can only mean nearly full moon.
Hmmm... Let me see if I get this straight, try and count 12 Lunar cycles, 1st Moon being the Full Moon after the Summer Solictice and let's assume for simplicity's sake that each lunar cycle has 30 days:

1 - 1st Moon - 2nd Moon = 30 days
2 - 2nd Moon - 3rd Moon = 30 days
3 - 3rd Moon - 4th Moon = 30 days
4 - 4th Moon - 5th Moon = 30 days
5 - 5th Moon - 6th Moon = 30 days
6 - 6th Moon - 7th Moon = 30 days
7 - 7th Moon - 8th Moon = 30 days
8 - 8th Moon - 9th Moon = 30 days
9 - 9th Moon - 10th Moon = 30 days
10 - 10th Moon - 11th Moon = 30 days
11 - 11th Moon - 12th Moon = 30 days
12 - 12th Moon - 1st Moon = 30 days

12 cycles in a Solar Year, present and accounted for. 360 days. Or did I completely misunderstand the concept?

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
2. We are asked to witness the "shahr" then fast it. It is "witnessed" in the past tense in 2:185. The entire lunar cycle can only be witnessed after it has completed. But then how can you fast a period after you have witnessed it? Unless you invent a time machine that will be impossible. Therefore we are not being asked to witness a lunar cycle which is a time frame but we are being asked to witness a marker to start the abstinence.
Fair enough. Doesn't really change my understanding of beginning the fast after witnessing the marker.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
3. We are asked to abstain for a few days and complete the count. That statement will make sense only if "shahr" is a marker. We are supposed to witness the marker to start the abstinence and then complete the count. If "shahr" meant the interval between two nearly full moons, then saying "complete the count" would be redundant because the lunar cycle already has the full information about the count of abstinence.
Not exactly. At least I don't see it that way. The "complete the count" part clarifies the situation for the exceptions, i.e. being ill or in journey. For example the number of days between 2 Nearly Full Moons is 30 days. I fasted for 15 consecutive days but couldn't fast in the next two days due to illness. At the end of the lunar cycle, out of a total of 30 counted days, which were meant for fasting, I fasted only 28. So I need to fast 2 more days in the next lunar cycle to "complete the count".

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
4. Shahr has been used in the same way as a woman's period in the relevant signs. The women use their period as a marker to start the interim. If a menstruating woman waits for three periods that time interval will be similar to waiting for three nearly full moons i.e. both will be almost two lunar cycles plus the time before the first period or the first nearly full moon. If "shahr" means the interval between two nearly full moons, then the interim of the non menstruating woman will be one lunar cycle more than that of a menstruating woman which does not make any sense.
If I understand you correctly, than the reasoning I applied to your first point would apply here, too. Observing 3 Menstruations and Observing 3 Menstrual periods would result in two different time periods. And considering the fact that in the Menstrual cycle, Menstruation is just the first stage, observing the 3rd Menstruation and acting on it, would mean that the 3rd Menstrual cycle wasn't completed as required by the verse.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
5. We are told that the great reading was descended in a single night of qadr. Then we are told that the great reading was descended in shahr ramadhan. Therefore shahr can only mean nearly full moon because if it meant lunar cycle that would contradict with the sign saying that the great reading was descended in the night of qadr.
Hmmm... the Book was revealed/sent down on "Laylat al-qadr", on the night of the starting Marker signaling the start of Ramadan. Doesn't that technically that the the Book was sent down within the time frame of Ramadan, as that night is part of that time frame? Nothing in the verse indicates that the Book was revealed each day/night during the course of the whole of Ramadan. Revelation of the Book in that one night in Ramadan confirms the message without any contradictions that I see.

Quote from: truthseeker11 on August 24, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
The reason I keep saying that "shahr" means "nearly full moon" is because technically the moon is never completely full. The moon can only be completely full when the sun, the earth, and the moon are aligned at 180 degrees or in a straight line. This occurs only once in 173 days as explained in one of my previous posts. When that happens, the moon is in the shadow of the earth in a lunar eclipse and is therefore not visible. The so-called full moon which is visible every lunar month is not usually aligned with the sun and the earth at 180 degrees but is slightly above the plane at less than 180 degrees and is therefore "nearly full moon". The classical dictionary meaning also mentions that shahr can mean the moon which is nearly full. Razor sharp precise terminology by the god which should increase your faith even further. Had the great reading used a word meaning "completely full moon", that would have contradicted the known scientific fact and the reality that moon can never be full, thereby disqualifying the great reading as the god's word!!!!  
Thanks for that bit of info.

Peace
#8
Quote from: quickduck on August 24, 2009, 03:56:58 PM
3- No, 1 "humain month" is the time between 2 full moons. like a ''humain hour" is the time frame that last 60 " humain minutes" or 3600 "humain seconds". No quranic basis for humain "month" ,"hour" "minutes" nor "seconds"  
You lost me here, QD... What is a "Humain month"?
#9
Br. Siki,

We're probably on the same track but I think there still might be a communication gap. Let me try and break this down. Your understanding is,

1 - "Shahar" = Full Moon.
2 - 9:36 mentions 12 Full Moons.
3 - 1 Shahar is the time between 2 Full Moons.

Am I correct?
#10
Quote from: farida on August 24, 2009, 02:12:43 PM
Salaam and welcome back
At least your family didn't abandoned you to some remote Island
Well.... actually.......