Is Quran anti- secular?

[Ali Omar]

Dear peacefulmuslim,

My views concerning being a ?muslim?, in short:
You can not ?sign on? as a citizen of islam and due to this be required to abide by the laws of islam. It is the other way around. It is only through abiding by the laws of islam that you may become a ?member? of that ?community?.

Concerning democracy vs. islam, I see islam as a way by which we may obtain a near-to-perfect balanced system to govern ourselves.
It promotes a ?rule by the people? within a framework set by the words, and other signs, of God.
It does mention a leader for the community, i.e. as opposed to total anarchy, but in a way where the leader is supposed to seek advice from the members of the community.
Meaning the leader is not to be a dictator. In other words, some sort of democracy.

Regards

Ali Omar

[mquran]

Then I take it you mean that God has not given us the quran in order to divide ourselves. That we ourselves are doing it despite the words of God?

Allah gave us al-quraan as a guidance to achieve what He set out for us. We divided ourselves because humanity overwhelmingly seek other than what Allah has ordained.

Why is it then that we are calling each other “muslims” and “non-muslims”? I.e. dividing ourselves, and still claim to believe in the words of God which says NOT to do that?

If people have transgressed certain behavioural patterns, they are put in certain categories. This is why, at the very end of the spectrum, when they are completely out of servitude to Allah (wa maa antum aabiduna maa a'bud - 106/5) , we address them as 'yaa ayyuhal kafiroon' (106/1).

Well, if this is not the case then the opposite must be true, the quran is there, first and foremost, to punish us and not to guide us. I do not hold that as very likely.

Well, I hold thier neither thesis nor antithesis to be true because in my reading, Al-quraan is silent on it. This is why I asked for evidence.

If you are a person who tries to live according to the words of God then you may be a “muslim”. If you don’t, you may not be. But, again, this is not for us to decide.

Oh but we HAVE to decide because being a 'muslim' necessitates certain strategies of interactions from ourselves. Lets say person 'a' is a criminal and says 'in my heart, i submit'. You let him into your house and he kills you. Not a very smart move, was it?

Whatever pledge you give is not worth anything, unless you follow it up with actions. To claim to be a “muslim” doesn’t make you a “muslim”. To claim to be a cook doesn’t make you a cook.
Nobody can enter an “islamic domain” through a pledge, only through the way of life and our actions. Way of life and actions according to the words of God is the “islamic domain”.

Correct. And the evidence for this is 9/11 which says 'if they return, establish as-salat and render az-zakaat, SO THEY ARE YOUR BROTHERS IN AD-DEEN'. Therefore, any person who transgresses this, should be chucked out of the domain after any adequate warning.

You can not “sign on” as a citizen of islam and due to this be required to abide by the laws of islam. It is the other way around. It is only through abiding by the laws of islam that you may become a “member” of that community.

Thanks for telling me. There's the ayat above to prove it again.

If the quran is not “a guide to an optimal form of democracy (“rule” by the people)” then what is it?
When it is informing us of how to behave, live and function, is it not guiding us to the best way of life? Is it not giving us clues as to how to “rule” ourselves within the framework of the system of God?

It also postulates that:
1. most of humankind wont believe (12/103)
2. those who DO believe mostly do it with shirik (12/106)
3. most of humankind follow conjecture (10/36)
4. most of humankind mislead from the path of Allah (6/116)

I give these statements the reverence deserved of an eternal truth. Therefore, in an ideal situation, im not about to trust an electorate. I'd rather trust an inspired rasool.
 

It is not difficult to understand the text in the quran saying “an eye for an eye”. If we follow this to the letter does it mean that if somebody makes another person blind, he/she must also be blinded?

It depends on the intention of the defendant which the judge decides and then if guilty, on the generosity of the victim's family.

Does this make sense? Is this the best solution for everybody? Or is the one who has been wronged, and the humanity at large, better off by finding another solution to the situation at hand?

I say it is the best solution and I further assert that your resistance to it is due to incorrect notions of justice.

When we translate “laa yuminoon” into meaning “they do not believe”, we must try to find out what this “believe”-thing is. It does not take too much research to find out that it means a kind of belief based on a certain degree of knowledge. I.e. they actually do not have knowledge enough to “believe” with certainty.
The acquisition of knowledge is made inaccessible to them.

Or made accessible but they still refuse. Thats a possibility too.

Yes, the quran is obligatory on us, but if we take every word in the quran literally we have not understood the message from God. It says that we have to study all of it and find what is “best”.
Now, “best” for whom, for God, or for one particular individual, or for the human community?

Ahsnahu for 'the better of it' doesn't mean what is 'best' but better. When al-quraan is read out, we are to choose the ayaat which better suits our situation. This isn't talking about the literal/figurative dichotomy. If the equivalency laws were figurative, then it would not mention expiation or compensation.

Regards

[jonny_k]

Salam mquran,

HUH? Since there's a high possibility of corruption, this cannot be proof ? What's that, dude? The 'high probability' is coming from you.

Khi- I already explained to you that a law cannot be proven to exist unless someone tries to break it and gav you an exdample.

 All I know is:

Allah : if the Quran is from other than Allah, it'd have contradictions.

Fact : Al-quraan has no contradictions.

Therefore al-quraan must be from Allah.

If someone inserted anything into al-quraan, only part of al-quraan would be from Allah and therefore, it would have contradictions.

Khi- This is certainly ONE OF the tests. But not all additions to Quran would necessary have a contradiction to the other verses. Somebody  may add "xyz is a messenger of GOD sent to the present times and he believes firmly in what was sent down to him in this quran..." and it wont be a contradiction YET not part of the Quran either. I hope you get my point.

I'm saying those 2 verses in the thread above are the ULTIMATE things Allah does to prove the truth, but EVEN SO, people wont believe. The ultimate thing isnt 19, but those 2 experiences above.

As for 2/106, the word there isnt mujiza or miracle, its ayaat or SIGN. Further, these ayat werent given to prophets. Read 2/105, 'an yunazzila alaiKUM' , i.e. in plural. This is not talking about some miraculous event but rather our experiences of God's signs.

Khi- If you know Arabic well youd know that ayat can mean BOTH "sign" and "miracle". I took Arabic classes where native Egyptians taught and he clearly explained one meaning of "ayat" to be "miracle". Btw GOD always uses the word AYAT in the Quran in reference to Moses mirales like stick turning to snake and the hand turning white. I dont find the word "mujizah" in the Quran at all. GOD Bless!

[Jaxal]

SaLaM idmkhizar

Khi- I already explained to you that a law cannot be proven to exist unless someone tries to break it and gav you an exdample.

Im sorry brother but that is not true.

[jonny_k]

Salam Jaxal,

SaLaM idmkhizar

Khi- I already explained to you that a law cannot be proven to exist unless someone tries to break it and gav you an exdample.

Im sorry brother but that is not true.

Khi- That is not true???! I gave you an example. If i make a law that someone cannot leave a room and that person stays in that room forever NOBODY WILL EVER KNOW THAT SUCH A LAW, WHICH I CLAIMED TO HAVE MADE, EXISTED OR WAS TRUE. It is ONLY WHEN THAT PERSON IS FORCED BACK IN WHILE TRYING TO LEAVE that my law or rule, which i made, is proven. Dont you see this simple fact? GOD Bless!

[Ali Omar]

Dear mquran,

From what you have written, it seems that we agree that the quran is here to guide us.
The quran is not silent on this issue.
As you know, there are numerous verses in the quran mentioning balance, justice, guidance, forgiveness etc. It therefore seems that God is not so taken with punishment in our lifetime, as with guidance to maintain a balanced ?ummat?. How should we act to obtain that goal?

This is why, at the very end of the spectrum, when they are completely out of servitude to Allah (wa maa antum aabiduna maa a'bud - 106/5) , we address them as 'yaa ayyuhal kafiroon' (106/1).

Please check these references again.

If you are a person who tries to live according to the words of God then you may be a ?muslim?. If you don?t, you may not be. But, again, this is not for us to decide.

Oh but we HAVE to decide because being a 'muslim' necessitates certain strategies of interactions from ourselves. Lets say person 'a' is a criminal and says 'in my heart, i submit'. You let him into your house and he kills you. Not a very smart move, was it?

God tells us to use the signs of God, including the quran to guide ourselves in life. God tells us to use our senses and our minds and not blindly follow what others say. Whether a person saying ?in my heart I submit? is a ?criminal? or not, is only visible through his/her actions through life. ?Words are cheap?.
We can not decide whether a person is ?muslim? in ?the eyes? of God.

Correct. And the evidence for this is 9/11 which says 'if they return, establish as-salat and render az-zakaat, SO THEY ARE YOUR BROTHERS IN AD-DEEN'. Therefore, any person who transgresses this, should be chucked out of the domain after any adequate warning.

Again, it is not for us to ?chuck? anybody out of ?the domain?. A person opposing the words of God is not ?in the domain?, it is not something that we decide, it is a result of the person?s actions.

I give these statements the reverence deserved of an eternal truth. Therefore, in an ideal situation, im not about to trust an electorate. I'd rather trust an inspired rasool.

Is your ?trusted rasool? the same as somebody else?s ?trusted rasool?? Or rather, who decides who is trusted and who is not?
You should not trust an electorate because the person is elected; trust has to be earned through actions. Again it is what you do and not what you say that counts.

Do you believe that ?justice is served? if someone who kills another human being is killed as well?
Let us say that a person who is murdered has a family that he/she took care of. Will the family be better off if the perpetrator is killed? Will it make any difference to the one who was murdered?
The perpetrator may also have responsibility towards his/her own family, is his/her family to be punished for the one person?s criminal action?

In short, is balance restored, and justice served, if two families lose their breadwinner due to one person?s actions?
Maybe you could say that balance is restored as both families? means of support would be equally reduced.
Who is then going to sustain these families? lives? Is the community better off by this kind of ?justice?, or is this solution only a question of satisfying an urge for revenge?
In that case, is revenge what God is telling us to seek?
Doesn't this remind you more of a "Cosa Nostra" way of dealing with problems?

Ahsnahu for 'the better of it' doesn't mean what is 'best' but better. When al-quraan is read out, we are to choose the ayaat which better suits our situation. This isn't talking about the literal/figurative dichotomy. If the equivalency laws were figurative, then it would not mention expiation or compensation.

The ?better? of two options is also the ?best? of these options. And you are right; it has to be weighed in accordance with the present situation.

Regards

Ali Omar

[good logic]

All we can teach is "how to access language of Qoran". May be also teach languages. But as for Qoran teaching, it is done by the Author:
Al Rahman Allama Qoran".
Yes indeed GOD Alone is the teacher of Qoran.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[huruf]

God teaches, yes, by all means, I mean that God may teach us through others, through events, through suffering, through joy, throug literature...
Particularly, I think, through our unconscious needs and through our conscious effort.

I is as if all things that exist were water and all we are were thirst.

Salaam

[good logic]

I mean we can also teach "men s books" like hadiths and Science and....Ya it is fine to teach your fellow humans . Definitely recommended.
Of course I am all for teaching any knowledge.
As for salvation/redemption , each to seek their own .Nobody can teach it really.
GOD bless.
Peace.