Islam, Homosexuality & the People of Lot

[Someone]

Salam all,

Even if I have some difficulties to understand the issue discussed in this topic, I think this 2 verses can make it plain.

 ?And those females who commit lewdness together from among your women, then bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death takes them, or God makes for them a way out. And those males who commit it together from amongst you, then you shall annoy them. If they repent and amend, then leave them alone. God is Redeemer, Merciful.? (4:15-16)

Thanks shane (I saw this verses in one of his posts) :wink:

Al hamdou lillah rabbi el3alamine.
[/b]

[afdhere]

Wasalam, Someone,

The verses say.. "those who appraoch adultery among your women"(15) and "those who approach it among YOU(plural)("16)  :-P


Afdhere

[Someone]

Salam afdhere,

it's plural when talking about women, but it talks about 2 persons for men.
Read the arabic verse to see the difference. And it's not talking about adultery...

[afdhere]

Wasalam, Someone,

Oh LORD :roll: Both verses talk to the Muslim community in general! It neither talks to women or men. Both of the verses speak in the masculine... because most of the time, in the Qur'an, God speaks to Muslims in the muscline sense.... NOT that he is talking to "men."

And since 4:15 stars with the muscline, it speaks muscline throughout the portion.

And, Someone, Fahishah is this sense IS adultery.

BUT.... let me humor you. What do you think is fahishah in 4:15-16... and what is the punishment thereof? Surely, you don't think God says we should leave lesbians in the houses until death comes to them. And what is the punishment for the males... since it just says "punish" them.

So since you believe 4:16 just speaks to men only, what do you do with lesbians concerning 24:2.... or do you think the Qur'an contradicts itself? :shock:

[mquran]

Salaam Afdhere,

Oh, brother. OK, so in your opinion, an old guy who can't get aroused (but still gets sexually stimulated inside) is exempt here? I bet you think her father and all of these other men lack sexuality for her, physically, too, right, although they are capable physically... as is the case with the unbelievers or the sick ones amongst the believers? :roll:

Sexually stimulated inside ? How does one do this ?

It has nothing to do with physical. It has to do with psychological. A gay man cannot -- psycologically -- be roused by a woman. So, no matter how much her physical body shows... it means nothing to him, though he is very much capable physically (as the case with some gay Muslims who get married to women, for reasons other than love or sexuality.)

Are eunuchs necessarily gays ? If not, then wouldnt they be included as well ?

ALSO... the verse talks about "THEIR ATTENDANTS .... AMONGST THE MALES"(wa al tabi`iina ... min al- rijjaliThe Hadith, and other historical records, whether "limitting" or not, show who these attendants were.

Im afraid I dont have the arabic original of that hadith but it never says there that the effeminate male was an attendant. 'tabiin' is simply a follower, not necessarily an 'attendant'.

Oh Lord... :roll: Are we talking about the Book of anybody else or the one sent to Muhammad? When I refer to Books sent to other people, I use their life stories (Hadith/Sunna or whatever they call themI'm only for the Hadith of Muhammad when discussing the Qur'an or the Book sent to Muhammad. If you see me referring to his Hadith when I'm talking about the life of Moses, or Jesus, you can tell me )

The book sent to Muhammad mentions Muhammad by name only 4 times. Most of it is devoted to talking about Musa, Ibrahim, Nuh and Isaa. So by ur logic, u need to be a great bible scholar.

Well I don't look at the text as 'dead' ... but there are some of it that should just stay in the 7th century. I personally don't understand the need for camels today :-P but people all over the place... cling to such old things
On a more serious note, if your understanding of certain aspects in the Qur'an changes, it has to do with your own pre-disposed BS from cultures, etc ... not the true understanding of the Qur'an. And another thing your views may change is like I was saying before, if certain terms are not translated correctly (which people don't most of the time,) it can be a difference of day and night

No doubt it's to do with my predisposed BS. However, what inspired me to that knowledge was Allah himself. Allah's changing of the ayat in my life brought illumination to the ayat in the Book.

Have you ever studied the history of why Hadith was put in paper? By the way, for the generations living during Bukhari's time, certain names might be "different" to them but not the Hadiths. People grew up with these oral traditions... and somebody just decided to put them in paper... because it was becoming evident that people were just starting to see them as "family tales" even though it was oral history that transcended families.

The same is true for all histories in most of the world. A really good example is the Jewish Historian, Josephus, who put down all the oral history fo the Jewish people... during his lifetime.

And even my own people -- who did not write until the 1970s -- have been ever since recording our own history in paper.

By the way, most of the Hadiths are the same ... both sides (shi'ites and sunnis) ... who were enemies and fought for centuries. Why do you think that is? :shock:

Look, when it comes to your oral history etc, who can say anything against that. But Im talking about GOD'S BOOK here, Afdhere.

Do you know why there's a difference between fatawa of different jurisprudence schools ? Because certain hadith didn't reach them on time. Is this how God treats the thing which explains his revelations ? Come on, man.

This is completely untrue. While I disagree with most Muslims on most subjects, I still recognize they are Muslims. A Muslim is one who submits to God and no one else. This means there is no physical idol in their presence... and they believe in God alone as the sustainer without partners. That definition is from the Qur'an, and it is the same in the Hadiths and their crappy mullahs. I have never met a Muslim who advocates we should worship anyone beside God.

Anything after that is just a bunch of details... which I don't really care about... since God assures me that God forgives anything but idolworship.

So in the 'muslim world' there's no idolworship ? The only one in the quraan who said to be 'wa maa kaana min al-mushrikeen' is Ibrahim. He fulfilled God's kalimaah and became imam to mankind. THe 'muslim world' have imams of rituals. Not the same thing, Im afraid.

My assertion : the 'muslim world' has as much , if not more , shirik as a place on earth.

:roll: Check 24:32 where the word "`abd" or slave is used ... Sometimes I think God mentions certain words that are offensive... just to make sure some folks don't come around making trouble lol.

Ok, so when you say they are not slaves, do you think God says we can have sex with people under our house? Who, like guests? :shock: Sometimes, we are told we cannot be naked in front of anyone except our mates and those whose our right hand posses (see 23:5-6, for example.) The words "who guard their private parts" -- i.e, who do not have sex :-P

'house' here doesnt mean a roof and four walls. It could mean a lady who offers herself to you in marriage and live under your dominion.

sorry if there's an inadequacies in my replies.

thanks and salaam.

[afdhere]

Wasalam, Mquran,

Sexually stimulated inside ? How does one do this ?

You are aroused just the same... except you can it is not happening outside. Why things like Viagra... then come into play ;-)

Are eunuchs necessarily gays ? If not, then wouldnt they be included as well ?

As Jesus puts it in the Gospel, there are born Eunuchs, Eunuchs who chose to be such and forced ones.

And while Eunuch is physically limited, he is not limited psychologically. So a straight Eunuch (ones forced... for whatever reasons) certainly does NOT include those mentioned in 24:31

In certain countries -- like India -- gay men choose to become and/or pretend to be Eunuchs because they are more accepted (I guess the straight men are not afraid of them no more lol.)

Im afraid I dont have the arabic original of that hadith but it never says there that the effeminate male was an attendant. 'tabiin' is simply a follower, not necessarily an 'attendant'.

It is hard to explain things to people like you... because you split hairs to find doubts :-P

In Arabic, when God says "tabi`iin" -- the ARABS of that time, as well as those who are living today... Understand it. Actually, tabi'iin doesn't mean follower but "FOLLOWS AROUND" ...

As for the Hadith, the woman is uncovered in the house with the dude, the Prophet and her brother. And he was talking to her brother. :roll:

BY the way, the Hadith -- like many -- has variations... and one that Aishah narrates says "A man used to enter upon us... " (i.e, he didn't have to knock... )

The book sent to Muhammad mentions Muhammad by name only 4 times. Most of it is devoted to talking about Musa, Ibrahim, Nuh and Isaa. So by ur logic, u need to be a great bible scholar.

No, actually, most of the stories are told to Muhammad -- to strengthen his belief. It has nothing to do with us. And many times, the ones that concern us... really deal with allegories.

That said, every time I refer to something that predates Muhammad, I try to find the source in that genre.

For example, I study the Bible and Jewish History every sunday :-) And, of course, it is not so I can become Jewish or Christian.

No doubt it's to do with my predisposed BS. However, what inspired me to that knowledge was Allah himself. Allah's changing of the ayat in my life brought illumination to the ayat in the Book.

Yes, God guides people in their own heart. The Human being, however, has a responsibility to find their own sources... that is why their eyes, ears and heart will be questioned (17:36)

Look, when it comes to your oral history etc, who can say anything against that. But Im talking about GOD'S BOOK here, Afdhere. Do you know why there's a difference between fatawa of different jurisprudence schools ? Because certain hadith didn't reach them on time. Is this how God treats the thing which explains his revelations ? Come on, man.

Oh, LORD :roll: Are we talking about the Qur'an or just Islamic History since the Qur'an? The Qur'an is the Qur'an everywhere in the Muslim world, with very little varience...

And, no, Fatwas of different jurisprudence schools are so because they disagree on the interpretation. Homosexuality is a good example. Certain schools treat it as Zina... and the non-married Homosexuals don't get stoned.... while others treat it specail and whether muhasan(married) or not, you get stoned to death. That has nothing to do with anything else.

So in the 'muslim world' there's no idolworship ? The only one in the quraan who said to be 'wa maa kaana min al-mushrikeen' is Ibrahim. He fulfilled God's kalimaah and became imam to mankind. THe 'muslim world' have imams of rituals. Not the same thing, Im afraid. My assertion : the 'muslim world' has as much , if not more , shirik as a place on earth.

Look, I do not read people's hearts. All I know is there aren't many Muslims in the Muslim world who have physical idols. And I'm not going to assert anything beyond that. My job is to get along with folks... and not accuse them of anything unforgivable as that...

'house' here doesnt mean a roof and four walls. It could mean a lady who offers herself to you in marriage and live under your dominion.

It says to "confine" them in the houses :-P But I bet that is not what it means hehe....




your brother,

[mquran]

Salaamun alaikum Afdhere,

It is hard to explain things to people like you... because you split hairs to find doubts  
In Arabic, when God says "tabi`iin" -- the ARABS of that time, as well as those who are living today... Understand it. Actually, tabi'iin doesn't mean follower but "FOLLOWS AROUND" ...
As for the Hadith, the woman is uncovered in the house with the dude, the Prophet and her brother. And he was talking to her brother.  
BY the way, the Hadith -- like many -- has variations... and one that Aishah narrates says "A man used to enter upon us... " (i.e, he didn't have to knock... )

Split hairs? Look, people split more hairs when they go prospecting for a house or car to buy! This is my eternal fate here, so if I split hairs , I think I'm justified. I don't want to end up with Shafiee or Bukhari on J-day.

So this hadith has many variations? And you're comfortable accepting something which your compilers cannot even agree what actually happened ?

No, actually, most of the stories are told to Muhammad -- to strengthen his belief. It has nothing to do with us. And many times, the ones that concern us... really deal with allegories.
That said, every time I refer to something that predates Muhammad, I try to find the source in that genre.
For example, I study the Bible and Jewish History every sunday  And, of course, it is not so I can become Jewish or Christian.

So the stories in the Quran HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH US ? Wow, amazing. I find it funny that you liberalise yourself in order to reconcile your homosexuality with Islam yet your liberalisation stops dead when it comes to reading the Quran for itself.

12/111 says that in thier story-relationships are archetypes FOR ULIL ALBAAB. You mean to tell me there are no ulil albaab now ? The last ulil albaab was Muhammad ?

Oh, LORD  Are we talking about the Qur'an or just Islamic History since the Qur'an? The Qur'an is the Qur'an everywhere in the Muslim world, with very little varience...

Anyone can write a book and call it 'the quran' thus creating a variance. Az-zikr, the one in eminence, rememberance will always be the ones coming from the mother of cities.

And, no, Fatwas of different jurisprudence schools are so because they disagree on the interpretation. Homosexuality is a good example. Certain schools treat it as Zina... and the non-married Homosexuals don't get stoned.... while others treat it specail and whether muhasan(married) or not, you get stoned to death. That has nothing to do with anything else.

Interpretation ? Go ask a Hambali scholar about his view of qiyaas and ijmaa ? He will tell you that's bid'aa because Hambalites don't believe in this. The very SOURCES of sharia are in dispute by these 4 schools.

Look, I do not read people's hearts. All I know is there aren't many Muslims in the Muslim world who have physical idols. And I'm not going to assert anything beyond that. My job is to get along with folks... and not accuse them of anything unforgivable as that...

There's a big difference between being alladhina-yashraku/those who have shirik and 'al-mushirikeen/those ppl whose shiriks have led them to create mischief on the earth'. The latter people are mentioned in sura 9.

Everyone has a measure of shirik in them unless they become like Ibrahim who was in submission fully to Allah alone. He became imam to mankind and his order was an establishing point for mankind and a place of safety. (2/124-125)

'muslims' today are nowhere near this. Physical idols or lack thereof mean nothing if the idol is a piece of art. It's the 12 non-physical idols we need to worry about.

peace





[/quote]

[afdhere]

Wasalam, Mquran,

Split hairs? Look, people split more hairs when they go prospecting for a house or car to buy! This is my eternal fate here, so if I split hairs , I think I'm justified. I don't want to end up with Shafiee or Bukhari on J-day.

You should be so lucky as to end up with folks like Bukhari. Regradless of how their work is turned into, they were Muslims who did the best they could. They didn't split hairs... and try to see in the stars stuff that are not ... nor have they blamed the people of the past -- whom they never met -- for the beliefs/actions of those who are living the present ;-)

Your job as a human is ONE thing: worship God and no one else. If you have that correctly -- which pretty much most Muslims, Jews, Christians, Baha'is, etc do -- then forget the rest ... and be a good person; i.e, don't go around hurting people with your thoughts, words or actions.

So this hadith has many variations? And you're comfortable accepting something which your compilers cannot even agree what actually happened ?

:roll: No, silly, Ayesha -- who was another wife -- had a different experience. But, anyways, the Hadith is not like the Qur'an; they are stories that are to inspire, not "guide." So, at the end of the day, as long as they are not advocating against God, nobody cares :-P

So the stories in the Quran HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH US ? Wow, amazing. I find it funny that you liberalise yourself in order to reconcile your homosexuality with Islam yet your liberalisation stops dead when it comes to reading the Quran for itself. 12/111 says that in thier story-relationships are archetypes FOR ULIL ALBAAB. You mean to tell me there are no ulil albaab now ? The last ulil albaab was Muhammad ?

:roll: Did I say all stories or most stories? And you misunderstood... I was talking about half-mentioned stories... not a-z stories like Joseph's :-P Each story has its own allegory. Some -- like Joseph's -- just say; God never fail anyone. Pretty simple, I would say.

By the way, Mquran, I never had to reconcile my "homosexuality" -- my sexuality has always been fitrah... as my skin color or nationality or gender has been... it is just that some folks have always had problems with ALL of those identities. And I've never been one to let others define me.

Anyone can write a book and call it 'the quran' thus creating a variance. Az-zikr, the one in eminence, rememberance will always be the ones coming from the mother of cities.

ROFL :lol: Well they all came Arabia, where the dude it was sent to has lived. And some varient Qur'ans came from Mecca itself :-P

Interpretation ? Go ask a Hambali scholar about his view of qiyaas and ijmaa ? He will tell you that's bid'aa because Hambalites don't believe in this. The very SOURCES of sharia are in dispute by these 4 schools.

Yes, but that is why it is just sharia -- man made laws, more or less. You misunderstand, regardless of how disputed they may seem -- they all agree they are equal :-D

By the way, we are only talking about Sunni Schools -- you should get into Shi'ite schools. LOL

There's a big difference between being alladhina-yashraku/those who have shirik and 'al-mushirikeen/those ppl whose shiriks have led them to create mischief on the earth'. The latter people are mentioned in sura 9.  Everyone has a measure of shirik in them unless they become like Ibrahim who was in submission fully to Allah alone. He became imam to mankind and his order was an establishing point for mankind and a place of safety. (2/124-125)  'muslims' today are nowhere near this. Physical idols or lack thereof mean nothing if the idol is a piece of art. It's the 12 non-physical idols we need to worry about.

:roll: Shirk is shirk. Regardless of what the masses say, there is no "smaller" shirk. Hence, those who "have" shirk (what the?) ... are simply mushrikiin.

Ok, I have a question -- why are all "free minded" folk obsessed with Abraham? Abraham is not any more "imam" than Adam, Noah or the FAMILY of Amram (3:33) ... all of these people were "chosen"

AGAIN, you are judging people's hearts... which you have no business judging. Your job is -- do you see any physical idols? If not, then zip it Let God be the Judge since he is Ahsan el Hakamiin (Best of Judges.)




your brother,

Afdhere