New article: What is the meaning of "al masjid al haram"?

[ayman]

Peace brother Wakas,

Let me repeat: there is NO contradiction.
What seems to be the issue for you is that you are asking "So how are they related then?". Not explicitly citing the relationship, in my article, does not constitute a contradiction.

This is why I explicitly cited the relationship. On the other hand, you said "such tying together is not even necessary in the first place." Thus, implying that they are not necessarily related.

AMAH is related to the straight path because it involves doing good, it is the truth from your Lord, involves making the believers a balanced/moderate community, the effects of this change will be less debate from the people, lead to God completing His favour, aid guiding, and bringing you all together, the change of qiblah command and what to is from God thus following/serving God is to do with the straight path [see 3:51].
I did mention most of the above in my article, but I did not explicitly state that's how the straight path is related to AMAH.
Please cross-reference "straight path" in Quran also.

It is an indisputable fact that all of those realtionships that you say link the straight path to AMAH are applicable ALL the time. None is only applicable to a certain physical time (Wakas interpretation) or place (traditional interpretation). Moreover, you are missing a crucial clear relationship between the inviolable commands (that should be obeyed/acknowledged) and the straight path in 6:151-153.

With regard to your answers to some of my questions, you offered general information, but no specific evidence from Quran. For example: "Are you implying not being part of "government" precludes one from trading with believers?"
Please answer, and if possible, with evidence as per Quran.

I never said or implied anything about trading with anyone.

I think that once we agree on the basic point of the clear relationship between the inviolable commands, the inviolable institute of obedience (or acknowledgment, if you prefer) of those commands, and the straight path then the rest will become easier.

I have little clue as to what you are saying here. Can you please provide your translation of 2:196 (ideally with explanation footnotes)? Thanks.

2:196. And complete the feast and the prospering to the god. And if you are constrained, then (give) what you can from the livestock/offering and do not relieve your representatives until the livestock reaches its destination. And whoever amongst you is sick or has harm from his representative, then a compensation of fasting or charity or cleansing. When you are secure so whoever benefits from the prospering to the feast then (give) what is easy from the livestock/offering and whoever can?t find then an abstinence of three days in the feast and seven when you return - this is a complete ten ? this (3 in the feast+7 at home) is for one whose people are not present in the inviolable institution of obedience (for others the entire 10 is in the feast) and be cautious of the god and know that the god is severe in retribution.

Again, there is no contradiction, see above. I dont see how my elaborating on what I said makes it much easier for you to answer questions about YOUR own view.

The contradiction is now even worse since the relationship that you "explicitly" stated clearly contradicts your interpretation of AMAH being only something that is limited to a certain physical time and not applicable all the time.

Peace,

Ayman

[Mazhar]

and whoever can?t find then an abstinence of three days in the feast and seven when you return - this is a complete ten ? this (3 in the feast+7 at home) is for one whose people are not present in the inviolable institution of obedience

So this "institution" is located some where. Its address please!!!

[Ayisha]

So this "institution" is located some where. Its address please!!!

institution of obedience, like the institution of marriage, has no address or location 


Edit: maybe I should have read all of it first .............

[Wakas]

Peace brother Ayman,

Thanks for the swift reply.

Despite my efforts to clarify the alleged contradiction, you now claim it is even worse, and again do not reply to the other questions. Before I again clarify, let's try to take this one issue at a time, and tackle what seems to be a simple issue. Here is how this went:

In your first reply to me in this thread, as part of your reply, you said:

" This helps explain passages such as 9:19 and 9:28........"

I then said:
It (i.e. your explanation) does not explain 9:19 or 9:28. Quote from article:
" 9:19 also seems to imply there is a tangible difference between "watering of those undertaking HaJJ and development of AMAH" and "one who believed in God and the Last Day and strived in the cause of God". This might present some issues with any understandings that try to equate AMAH with God's system in full, as striving in the cause of God would surely involve trying to develop AMAH, thus making them overlap/similar, IF it meant something like that."

Please explain.

Quote from article:
"This clearly implies the polytheists participated in AMAH previously, and "if you fear poverty" shows there is a potential monetary impact to this decision. These two issues require explanation for whatever meaning of AMAH is chosen."

Please explain.

To which you said:

Before the great reading, the people of the previous books were in charge of prospering the inviolable institution of obedience. However, they violated the first command and setup Jesus and their clergy as partners. This is why 9:28 commands that they are not to be part of this institution after this calendar year of theirs. Of course, kicking the elite class of the people of the book (those who are literate in the language of religion and politics) out of the government would involve potential financial hardship.

I replied:
Elite class? People of the book? Potential financial hardship? Are you implying not being part of "government" precludes one from trading with believers? Evidence, as per Quran?

You then said:

The great reading talks about two classes of people, the commoners "umi" who can't understand the language of religion and the people of the book who can understand the language of religion. In the ancient world, the language of religion was the language of prestige only understood by the religious and political elite but not the commoners. The great reading was in the language of the commoners and it enabled the commoners to take over government from the religious and political elite.

I recently replied:
With regard to your answers to some of my questions, you offered general information, but no specific evidence from Quran. For example: "Are you implying not being part of "government" precludes one from trading with believers?"

Please answer, and if possible, with evidence as per Quran.

You replied:

I never said or implied anything about trading with anyone.

Yes, you never mentioned anything about trading, and that is what I'm trying to find out. You have still not answered what I originally wrote in my article, on 9:19 and 9:28 (highlighted in red above). Please provide a clear and direct answer.

Thanks.

[sushi1992]

Peace Javed,

I am also working on an English version. The English version shouldn't take a whole lot of time since I already have most of the info in English.

I initially wanted to include a lot more info in the book but decided to limit it to the 7 chapters. The reason is that the vast majority build everything on the so-called 5 pillars. So instead of taking the typical Quranist approach of attacking Hadiths, I instead took the path of making it clear that even the majority's understanding of such basic premise as the meaning of "islam" and the so-called 5-pillars is wrong. If this point is successful then the whole traditional structure will crumble and no need to waste time arguing about Hadiths.

Peace,

Ayman

Peace Ayman,

It would be really kind of you to let me (us as a whole) know when you complete the English version of your book as I would be extremely interested in reading it since my views on "islam" have always hovered around yours and Wakas's understanding. At a later time I might contribute to this argument having read Wakas's article a few weeks ago but I will first try to fully understand the links and correlations made in the article to a sound degree. Continue your great work that you post on Free-Minds and admirable research .

Peace

[good logic]

Peace All.

I do not believe what I am reading sometimes.

How can we claim we rely on " God Alone" when time and again, as soon as some  claim are writing books , others queue up to receive and read these books.

What is wrong with the " best book" , God s book?

What is wrong with relying on " God Alone" ?

Are we doubting that He will explain to us what we want explaining?

I am not saying we should not read other books, what I am saying is we should not rely on any one else to explain to us. We would be taking on " Another god" beside God.

Your Lord suffices as a teacher , explainer... and we should only rely on Him.

Peace.

[Wakas]

Those who listen to what is being said, then follow the best of it.
These are the ones God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.

[Al Quran, 39:18]

?

[sushi1992]

Peace All.

I do not believe what I am reading sometimes.

How can we claim we rely on " God Alone" when time and again, as soon as some  claim are writing books , others queue up to receive and read these books.

What is wrong with the " best book" , God s book?

What is wrong with relying on " God Alone" ?

Are we doubting that He will explain to us what we want explaining?

I am not saying we should not read other books, what I am saying is we should not rely on any one else to explain to us. We would be taking on " Another god" beside God.

Your Lord suffices as a teacher , explainer... and we should only rely on Him.

Peace.

Selam "good logic",

Just to make things very very clear "good logic.", I stated it would be "extremely interested in reading" the book. I don't know if your post was implied at me but if it was then please do not judge me so impulsively. I believe Allah's words to be the key to the truth and the only key. What you have implied seems to make me think that reading what other people have written is a bad thing. I rely upon the Qur'an as my true source and I feel slightly insulted to think someone thinks we all queue up to suck on other people's hard research. We go through our own struggles to understand God's word, and for your information I have acted alone with my views of Allah throughout the whole of my life up until April when I have stumbled on this site, so for someone to imply how we are not SOLELY relying on the Qur'an, do not speak on our behalf. Once again forgive me if this is not what you were implying, however I felt it was and I felt it is necessary to make my point heard because as a believer of Allah ALONE I believe in The God's REVELATIONS.

Thanks

[sushi1992]

Those who listen to what is being said, then follow the best of it.
These are the ones God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.

[Al Quran, 39:18]

?

It's times like these where I can only learn and better myself to be able to pluck these verses out of my head in my defense. Anyway, I will shortly post my own interpretation of which one of the two translations I am more leaning towards (i.e. the inviolable institution of obeying/acknowledging or the inviolable time of obeying/acknowledging). In the mean time, I hope not to hinder any of this discussion if i have done so....

[ayman]

Peace Mazhar,

So this "institution" is located some where. Its address please!!!

The "location" aspect of this institution is defined by "albayt alharam". We are clearly and precisely told its location here:

وَإِذْ بَوَّأْنَا لِإِبْرَاهِيمَ مَكَانَ الْبَيْتِ أَن لَّا تُشْرِكْ بِي شَيْئًا وَطَهِّرْ بَيْتِيَ لِلطَّائِفِينَ وَالْقَائِمِينَ وَالرُّكَّعِ السُّجُودِ

And when we assigned to Ibrahim the house's place is that do not partner with me a thing, and cleanse my house for the passers by, and the maintaining, and the humbly hearing and obeying.

The god tells us that the location is any location where partners are not setup with the god. Clear and simple. So Mecca is definitely not the location since the pagans setup filthy idols such as the black stone and the black cube as partners with the god and they adore, fondle and kiss those idols.

Peace,

Ayman