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.

Topics - mquran

Pages: 1 [2]
Salaamun alaikum Layth,

1.In your new article, you have translated '3allama' (55/2) as 'marked'.  Can you please provide Quranic evidence for this. My points are as follows:

a. '3lim' has never been used to mean 'marking' something. Rather, the word 'seema' (as in 48/29 , SEEMAhum feewujuhihim) has been used to distinctly mean 'mark'

b. Translating 'allama' of 55/2 to mean mark totally ignores the context because 55/4 also uses 'allama' as in 'allamhul bayaan', unless you translate 55/4 to mean 'he marked them the clarification' !!!

2. Futher, you have connected 3/7's muhkam and mutashabih to suras with muqataat letters.  The problem is, muhkam and mutashabih are AYAAT, not suras (minhu AYAATUN muhkamaatun, NOT suratun muhkamaatun). Allah already used the word sura elsewhere, so why is He using the word 'ayaat' here ?

3. In your 'what will change', you didn't tell us what exactly changes. You mentioned that how we view the scriptures will change, but into what ? All of the book still needs to be upheld, right?

4. The word 'quraan' means 'compilation' as used by the Quran itself (75/18). How can therefore 'quraan' be only part of the book ?

thanks and peace

General Issues / Questions / To Layth - About the 19 and Smoke Articles
« on: January 06, 2005, 08:52:11 PM »
Salaamun alaikum Layth,

I just read the 2 latest articles on free-minds:

'19 - Fact or Fiction' (19FOF) and 'The Smoke - Nuclear War' (TSNW)

and I must say, I find both articles most objectionable, especially coming from you. I'm not sure if your recent change of heart about 19 has anything to do with your recent association with Edip, but if it did, then you should know that many people in this forum do take your words seriously.

I do however think its good that you and Edip are getting together on common grounds.

Here are my comments about your 2 articles :

1. Do you accept RK as a messenger ? Your nuclear war article seems to accept him as a messenger. However, in 19FOF, you rightly point out he removed 2 'false verses' from Al-Qur'aan. Is this the duty of a messenger  to REMOVE verses from The Book ?

2. 74/30 says that 'alaiHA tis'aa ahsara' (over her is nineteen). Can this 'her' refer to 'al-kitaab', 'al-quraan' or 'az-zikr' , all of which are masculine nouns?

3. 74/31 'aiddatuHUM' - THIER count, the malaika over hell. How does this explanation support the 19 theory ?

4. 17/104: If 'bani israil' refers to Jews, then why are there jews still living outside Israel when the verse speaks of bringing them together ?

5. 54/1. Why do u translate the word here as 'breached' when 4/35 uses 'shiqaaq' as 'seperate, cleft asunder'.

6. Where is the proof to map the 44th president to the 44th sura ?

7. What is the proof to map the 19th year of RK's death to anything ?

Layth, we successfully escaped the hadith and sunna trap. Lets not fall into this one. They made up all sorts of definitions outside the Book of Allah.
I respect your right as free-minds owner and I am appealing to you as a brother in Al-Islaam.

shukran wa salam.

Salaamun alaikum,

To anyone who follows 'hadith and sunna of Muhammad', my question is :

were any of the hadith compilers (the big 6, bukhari, muslim ibn hajjaj, tirmidhi, nisai, abu dawud, ibn majah) PERFECT, i.e. FLAWLESS in thier collection?

that's all.


General Issues / Questions / to Layth..Makka or Bakka ?
« on: February 14, 2004, 01:33:18 PM »
Salaamun alaikum Layth,

Just went through your translation and find a bit of an inconsistency. In 3/96, you didn't translate bakka although Goinsy already gave us a myriad of meanings. However, in 48/24, you translated makka as 'opposition'. Is there any reason for this , if I may ask ?

thanks and salaam

Questions/Comments on the Quran / Announcement : New Quranic Study Tool
« on: January 12, 2004, 12:02:31 PM »
Salaamun alaikum people,

I had the good fortune of stumbling across the following book :

A Dictionary Of Grammatical Analysis Of The Qur'an  Mujam I'raab Alfaaz Al-Qur'an  

at the following site :

As far as I understand, this book contains compilations of similar grammatical patterns in Al-Quraan. This is in direct line with the fact that the Quran is 'kitaaban mutashabihan mathany'/a book with similarities repeating' (39/23) and so may shed great light on Quranic concepts. I would highly recommend it.

thanks and salam.

Salat & Zakat (The Contact & Purification) / Salaat based on 19/58-59
« on: January 08, 2004, 10:21:46 AM »
Salaamun alaikum,

I found an interesting colour to the interpretation of as-salaat this morning. It mayn't be new to most of you, but just in case, I thought I'd share it :

Those were some of the prophets on whom God did bestow His Grace,- of the posterity of Adam, and of those who We carried (in the Ark) with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel of those whom We guided and chose. Whenever the Signs of (God) Most Gracious were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tears (KHARRO SUJJAD(AN) WA- BUKEY(AN) - 19/58 :

But after them there followed a posterity who missed prayers and followed after lusts soon, then, will they face Destruction (.FA- KHALAFA MIN BAcDI -HIM KHALF AD.AAcO AS.- S.ALAAH WA- ITTABAcO ASH- SHAHAWAAT )

As we can see, the end of 19/58 talks about falling prostate in tears. 19/59 BEGINS with a 'fa'/but' followed a generation which LOST THIER SALAAT. From this, I gather that as-salaat includes a reminder of the verses/signs/ayaat of God Al-mighty and this induces a state of emotionality in the person performing.

comments and criticisms welcome.

thanks and salam.

General Issues / Questions / at-tauraat wal injeel
« on: January 07, 2004, 09:22:24 AM »
Salaamun alaikum all,

I read somewhere on this forum a question asking what at-tauraat and al-injeel are. I'd like to raise the subject here, if I may.

Lets go off on a tangent first and ask, 'what is as-salaat'. Well, I say 'as-salaat' is the ritual prayer practised by Sunnis. Most people reading this would be shocked. 'Why', do you take as-salaat to be ritual prayers when the context clearly denies this?' they would say. Good point, but why are people doing this with at-tauraat and al-injeel ? Why dissect salaat to the bone and leave at-tauraat and al-injeel alone ?

At-tauraat and al-injeel when translated as 'torah and evangel' i.e. the Old and New Testaments and thus accepted as 'previous revelations' also yields another issue. The issue of Quranic exegesis. Can the Quran be interpreted correctly using the OT and NT ?

If we to perform the same operation we performed on 'as-salaat' on at-tauraat and al-injeel, we would find the following :

1. Allah says at-tauraat contains 'hukum Allah'/Allah's ordainments, judgements, law' (Quran 5/43). If we say that the OT contains God's laws, then we would have to yield to some racist, barbaric laws.

2. In the Quran, you won't find anywhere at-tauraat revealed to Musa. The first 5 books of the OT are attributed to Musa. At-tauraat rather is taught to Isaa and Isaa does 'confirm/tasdiq'. What it means to 'tasdiq' should be checked Quranically as well.

3. 5/47 says that let the people of al-injeel judge by it. Does the NT contain ANY judgements which are Quranic ? If so, what seperates it from any other document also having Quranic elements ?

4. 5/46 says that al-injeel is a 'sermon for al-muttaqeen'. The Quran itself is guidance for al-muttaqeen. If the Quran is fully detailed, why would al-muttaqeen need anything else ?

5. 5/66 says if they establish at-tauraat and al-injeel, they would find God's provisions from above and below. Once again, contentually, you will find that this has nothing to do with the old and new testaments.

7. 48/29 contains descriptions of the people with Muhammad ar-rasulullah. 2 of these descriptions are said to be in at-tauraat and al-injeel. Neither the OT nor the NT contain this.

8. 9/111 yields a bargain made by Allah in at-tauraat and al-injeel, that Allah purchases the lives of the believers and thier wealth in return for the garden. Once again, you won't find this in the OT and NT.

My conclusion : At-tauraat and al-injeel cannot be the OT and NT. Accepting them as such is acceptance without evidence. While the Quran itself gives tests of its authenticty , the OT and NT doesn't recognise itself at all. Accepting it without evidence and without recourse to the Quranic text is dangerous for tafseer purposes.

I would expect a counter-argument going like 'well, the Quran authenticates what is correct in the OT and NT'. That's good, but does it mean you're authorised to take the information which ISN'T authenticated as well ? The Quran doesn't only authenticate, but ASSERTS that at-tauraat and al-injeel contain :

1. descriptions of Muhammad's followers (48/29)
2. promise made by Allah (9/111)

and neither OT nor NT has it.

My current view is that at-tauraat and al-injeel are both modes of operations practised by Isa. Once we understand that and practise it, we would be following the example of Isaa and achieve his victories (23/50 and 61/14).

Please comment and criticse.

thanks and salaam.

Pages: 1 [2]