To Damon: On Language of the Quran

[abdalquran]

Salaam Damon,

Many thanks for participating in the other thread which has now been locked. I'd like to discuss with you about Quranic language if I may. You mentioned about Arabic being absolutely necessary to understand the Quran. I'd like to pose you a hypothetical situation:

Lets say you came across this set of books which explains a particular language (lets call it 'Haqeeqah') in English. Through these books, you understand Haqeeqah and you find that it's sounds are similar to the Quran. So it uses words like 'kitab', 'quran', deen' etc and proposes meanings of these words. . As you study Haqeeqah more and more, you find that if you apply the meanings to the Quran becomes more and more lucid and profound. Then you apply your new understanding and you find that peace descends in your life and environment.

Would you reject Haqeeqah because it's not Arabic?

p/s : if you're on facebook, feel free to add me (Farouk A. Peru) and we can continue this discussion in my group. It's a place where we promote a celebration of differences no matter who gets criticised.

[Shirley]

Salaam Farouk,

My apologies for your thread getting shut down. I guess I'm partly to blame along with the other two people who had something to say that should have stayed out of it. It is my hope that the moderators would DELETE my posts as well as the other two people's posts so Wakas and yourself can continue your debate.

The four points that I did list in your thread I actually did so because I had intervened to ask for an elaboration in your thread and I guess I wanted to offer something in exchange for my interruption for which I again apologize to You and Wakas. My points are listed as a "take it if you will or reject it all the same if you will" form because I simply do not debate/discuss/argue anymore. I listed those things to be thought upon and I leave it to each individual to ponder on those things or not ponder on them and if they do ponder on them to accept or reject those thoughts according to their own thinking and line of reasoning.

That's all I am able (and willing) to do. That is all ANY OF US can do because we cannot make another person see things our way. Cannot happen, will not happen. Wakas and yourself pretty much went at each other for 7 pages in that thread alone and neither one of you have changed your respective positions at the end of it all.

It is my very humble opinion (and I mean absolutely no offense to anyone here) that those who continually participate in intellectual debates do so because they find enjoyment in debating with others or they feel they need to validate and justify their views by trying to enforce them on others, hence the downward spiral from discussing to trying to WIN an argument. Or maybe it is both of the two reasons. Whatever the reason(s) it's not for me.

Personally, I think performing the correct and beneficial actions - 'Amaal-e-Saleha - which have a positive and just effect on one's own Self as well as society should take HUUUUUUGE preference over discussions and debates. I am of the opinion that we must ACT/MOVE if we wish to change the conditions of the society and the people from Hell to Paradise.

Also, I am sorry that I am not on Face Book or Twitter or any of those other networking sites that are out there. I guess I probably should be though.

[good logic]

Peace abdalquran, Shirley, Wakas.

I am posting this last post in this thread to explain the action I took in the other thread.

I believe a public forum is just that ie -public-. How can you expect a private debate/ discussion?

There should be ethos/ respect for the debaters and no " off topics" or deliberate interruption, but valid points from other members, why are they wrong?

Shirley, I ,for one, believe that the aim of debate/ discussion should be " Progress" and not victory or other motifs! However I agree with you doing  good deeds are more important.

I do not thing there is anything to apologise for, especially if some good comes out of it.

Peace all.

[abdalquran]

My apologies for your thread getting shut down. I guess I'm partly to blame along with the other two people who had something to say that should have stayed out of it. It is my hope that the moderators would DELETE my posts as well as the other two people's posts so Wakas and yourself can continue your debate.

No, your mistake was agreeing with the wrong person. But hey , no problem here. I only came back to FM because Wakas didn't want to discuss anywhere else and I had been asking for answers for about 5 times before that. No answer was forthcoming anyway. Nor will it ever come, I think.

The four points that I did list in your thread I actually did so because I had intervened to ask for an elaboration in your thread and I guess I wanted to offer something in exchange for my interruption for which I again apologize to You and Wakas. My points are listed as a "take it if you will or reject it all the same if you will" form because I simply do not debate/discuss/argue anymore. I listed those things to be thought upon and I leave it to each individual to ponder on those things or not ponder on them and if they do ponder on them to accept or reject those thoughts according to their own thinking and line of reasoning.

Well this should be it. We should facilitate people to think rather than scare them off thinking in novel ways to get the most out of the Q. The Aastana folk are at least trying to do this. I admire their zeal for application.

That's all I am able (and willing) to do. That is all ANY OF US can do because we cannot make another person see things our way. Cannot happen, will not happen. Wakas and yourself pretty much went at each other for 7 pages in that thread alone and neither one of you have changed your respective positions at the end of it all.

I didn't expect to convince him but rather to explore how he thinks. I am trying to formulate the quranic theory of language and needed to explore about how people use Arabic to derive meanings. I believe using these linguistic sources can be very limiting. However, some people are very attached to them and consider not using them to be ridiculous. Hence my supposition above.

It is my very humble opinion (and I mean absolutely no offense to anyone here) that those who continually participate in intellectual debates do so because they find enjoyment in debating with others or they feel they need to validate and justify their views by trying to enforce them on others, hence the downward spiral from discussing to trying to WIN an argument. Or maybe it is both of the two reasons. Whatever the reason(s) it's not for me.

The best we can do is to get whatever we can from these debates and apply them in our lives. I think this is a crucial point. We cannot show people how exactly we see things but it shouldn't matter. Rather if we shared notes and each worked towards the common goal, that is how we can bring about a quranic revolution.

Please do join fb. I have a group in which you never need to worry about getting up people's nose if you agree. We actually welcome a variety of views.  Look forward to seeing you there.

[abdalquran]

I believe a public forum is just that ie -public-. How can you expect a private debate/ discussion?

You can if you got the lock/delete button.

There should be ethos/ respect for the debaters and no " off topics" or deliberate interruption, but valid points from other members, why are they wrong?

Because there is now a measure of rightness in this forum. We have now our own orthodoxy. Thank God this orthodoxy only functions in cyberspace. Some of these orthodoxies actually escape the confines of the realm of ideas and become their own regimes.

Shirley, I ,for one, believe that the aim of debate/ discussion should be " Progress" and not victory or other motifs! However I agree with you doing  good deeds are more important.

I do not thing there is anything to apologise for, especially if some good comes out of it.

That really should be the case, yes. Years ago, I used to think that Quranists are liberals and Traditionalists are conservatives. Over the years, I have come to realise that elements of conservatism is in every dogma. In fact some Quranists are FAR MORE conservative than some Traditionalists (conservative here refers to a protectionist tendency instead of opening up to new ideas). To me, this is what we need to avoid - thinking we got all the answers. We don't. We are on a journey towards greater understanding all the time...hopefully anyway.

[Wakas]

Farouk,

No, your mistake was agreeing with the wrong person. But hey , no problem here. I only came back to FM because Wakas didn't want to discuss anywhere else and I had been asking for answers for about 5 times before that. No answer was forthcoming anyway. Nor will it ever come, I think.

Despite being given a formal warning for false / slanderous statements, you continue!

Bro Damon's comments (and the others who posted) had nothing to do in temporarily locking our discussion thread. Admin never even mentioned anything he said, nor did I to them.

When I offered to discuss these issues with you, I suggested a public forum, such as FM. I did not say I did not want to discuss anywhere else, as your slanderous statement implies.

Further, when I presented my critique of your blog post, you were silent. As time went on, you went on to discuss various other interpretations, you made the same types of errors, in my view, as you did in the critique I wrote, hence I brought them up again. Several times. Then when you finally responded to them, you were primarily interested in discussing methodology rather than actually replying to any of the points I wrote. Thus, if you were unwilling to answer my points, why would I answer your points?
Thus, the offer of this discussion came about, I made the offer I should point out, wherein it was hoped you and I would stick to the agreed upon format of 1 question at a time being answered by each person, in a structured flowing manner.

Whilst the discussion started out like that, you filled your replies with false, misleading, slanderous, derogatory statements. So, to get us back on track, I decided to refer your slanderous statements to admin for decision, for which action was taken. It was hoped by myself that this action, as I stated to admin, would result in you getting back to an evidence-based discussion, not a personal attack agenda driven one.

But here you go again!

So, let me repeat:


From: http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=8177.0

Please see free-minds.org forum rule 3:

"3] Respect other users of the forum. Language and/or material of vulgarity, obscenity, harassment, profanity or insulting nature, whether it is direct or suggested, will NOT be tolerated. Any messages containing such language or material will be moved to the trash section or deleted, without notice and may result in disciplinary action being taken against the offending member."

It is expected of you that if you cannot provide evidence for your slanderous / false statements, you publicly retract your statements and apologise.

If not, once again, your case will be referred to admin for group decision. Again, a decision I will not participate in.

[abdalquran]

Despite being given a formal warning for false / slanderous statements, you continue!

Incorrect. This statement (which I think is neither slander nor false) was made BEFORE I was issued a formal warning.

When I offered to discuss these issues with you, I suggested a public forum, such as FM. I did not say I did not want to discuss anywhere else, as your slanderous statement implies.

Ah, allow me to change it then - Wakas did not want to discuss it in facebook where he first presented his critique.

Further, when I presented my critique of your blog post, you were silent. As time went on, you went on to discuss various other interpretations, you made the same types of errors, in my view, as you did in the critique I wrote, hence I brought them up again. Several times. Then when you finally responded to them, you were primarily interested in discussing methodology rather than actually replying to any of the points I wrote. Thus, if you were unwilling to answer my points, why would I answer your points?

This is SLANDER AND FALSE and I will formally complain about this! (that's a joke btw).

1. You deliberately harassed me for the SAME critique of 2/196 when I ignored you. You did not mention my other blog posts because, quite rightly, you have no explored them yet. Your focus was 2/196 exclusively. Want proof? Evidence based? Here is the exchange between us about your harassment:

Salam Wakas,

I have made it clear to you before that I do no wish to engage with you in any discussion. The reason as I said is because I find your ATTITUDE less than conducive to quranist development.

You are free to criticise my work in any group you like. However, please don't expect any response and PLEASE DONT PRESS ME for answers.

Hope that clarifies matters. Thanks.


You then replied:
Peace Farouk, no, you never made that clear to me.

I find that interesting and I think others in the group would also find that interesting.

I am reminded of what you said to me in your previous message - "have you ever asked yourself, maybe it's me? maybe im not equipped to get it? please think about it." - it seems this could equally apply to you, but without discussion, I guess you prefer not to find out.


Suffice to say I'm disappointed, as admin (and not to mention "Quranist") you should lead by example in healthy discussion of one's views etc.

Please note, 'your previous message' here refers to a PREVIOUS warning about ANOTHER insulting remark. So there is a history of aggressive behaviour from you here. I was not the first person being harassed.

I then replied:
Of course it could equally apply to me. I would the first to admit it my limit. However, I would not care to find out to discuss with someone with an attitude like yours. Being proven wrong isn't a problem for me. Encouraging elitist attitudes is. It goes against everything I am working for which is to democratise the reading. So prove me wrong all you like.

Healthy discussions don't come with comments like the ones you've made. Comments like that KILL OFF free thinking.

You then replied Thanks for the reply.

So lets be very clear. I already warned you about harassment before. This is not about OTHER issues but this same one which you claimed 'stung me'. Please observe the exchange above for clarity. I asked you to keep writing your critiques but to stop HARASSMENT.

And what did you do? You CHANGED YOUR ID and tried to force me into discussion again (proof is here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/181724025200188/permalink/427396597299595/).

So please don't plead 'slander' here, Wakas. You have a history of aggression and deceptive tactics where you force people to engage with you.

2. I could not answer your points because you refused to substantiate the BASIS of your critique. Take for example your first point from your critique where you talked about whether many people can actualise my interpretation or not.

HOW ON EARTH is that relevant? It's about as relevant if one can dress as a matador while performing what I call 'hajj al-bayt'. With such 'quality' of questions, naturally I have to ask you the basis of your critique. You refused to answer this so what I am meant to think? You present a critique, then harass me when I refuse to engage (proof above) , then when i engage, you refuse to substantiate your critique. What gives you the right to ask, harass yet be above substantiation? And now you complain about slander but your own slander is overlooked? Quite amazing...

Whilst the discussion started out like that, you filled your replies with false, misleading, slanderous, derogatory statements. So, to get us back on track, I decided to refer your slanderous statements to admin for decision, for which action was taken. It was hoped by myself that this action, as I stated to admin, would result in you getting back to an evidence-based discussion, not a personal attack agenda driven one.

But here you go again!

That is a lie and a slanderous statement and deliberately omitting some elements for example YOUR insulting remarks which I have listed AND complained about was REFUSED an answer (that's the justice system in a 'GOD ALONE' forum, lovely) .

Also, it's not 'here you go AGAIN' because this remark was made BEFORE your friends gave the formal warning. Now that the warning has been given, fine. I am ready to the continue the discussion.

[Wakas]

Farouk,

Firstly, thanks for actually attempting to present evidence. Evidence-based discussion is what I prefer.

No, your (Damon's) mistake was agreeing with the wrong person.

Incorrect. This statement (which I think is neither slander nor false) was made BEFORE I was issued a formal warning.

Also, it's not 'here you go AGAIN' because this remark was made BEFORE your friends gave the formal warning. Now that the warning has been given, fine. I am ready to the continue the discussion.

I made my statement on 14th October 8:07:25am (according to my screen). I think the forum settings will show the time different for each user, depending on their location etc, however this has no effect on my following point.

Are you sure you wish to stick with your above statement? I will give you a chance to reply. Please note, if you stick with your statement and it is considered false by myself, I will refer it to admin.

Ah, allow me to change it then - Wakas did not want to discuss it in facebook where he first presented his critique.

Thanks for correcting your slanderous statement. However, you did not apologise, but no biggie. As you openly admitted, on facebook threads can get buried, thus making it difficult for people to locate and read them, apparently even for admin, such as yourself. In addition, facebook is a poor medium to discuss anything of length, and also regarding formatting, search function etc, compared to dedicated forum software. Hence my preference for forum discussion. Simple.

And with regards to your other statements, you essentially backed up what I said, so thanks for that. Except for one point:

Please note, 'your previous message' here refers to a PREVIOUS warning about ANOTHER insulting remark.

I cant recall getting an admin "warning" from you as such, but perhaps you can provide evidence for that, or correct your statement. You did mention however you found  a comment I made insulting and asked me about it. That is different to a "warning" however.

Again, I request you not to make false / slanderous statements.



And in case it is not clear, by "slander" I mean: A false and malicious spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.

[abdalquran]

No, your (Damon's) mistake was agreeing with the wrong person.

This is my opinion. Am I not allowed to opine in this forum anymore? My evidence is, you claimed the thread is for both of us yet you yourself took the time to respond to Damon! You went against your own rules there by responding to a whole other issue! So had Damon agreed with you, there would be no problem.

I made my statement on 14th October 8:07:25am (according to my screen). I think the forum settings will show the time different for each user, depending on their location etc, however this has no effect on my following point.

I don't know what statement you're talking about but if you're OUT of the process (which you CLAIMED), then why would I worry about YOUR statements? I should worry about the 'neutral' judgement by the admin which came long after I made this comment.

Thanks for correcting your slanderous statement. However, you did not apologise, but no biggie. As you openly admitted, on facebook threads can get buried, thus making it difficult for people to locate and read them, apparently even for admin, such as yourself. In addition, facebook is a poor medium to discuss anything of length, and also regarding formatting, search function etc, compared to dedicated forum software. Hence my preference for forum discussion. Simple.

Yes very simple. So we came to the place where you're admin and complaints made against you fall on deaf ears. Yes yes, far better choice. Where's our next place of discussion? Your parent's house?

And with regards to your other statements, you essentially backed up what I said, so thanks for that. Except for one point

:

I did not. This is about a single thread which you persisted in your harassment. Proof was given above.

I cant recall getting an admin "warning" from you as such, but perhaps you can provide evidence for that, or correct your statement. You did mention however you found  a comment I made insulting and asked me about it. That is different to a "warning" however

.

Sorry , your free-minds rules don't necessarily apply in my forum. I tried to be nice about it by not actually using the word 'warning' because I don't like banning people. If I did, you wouldn't be in it at all. However , after your rude comeback, I decided it's time to stop being nice because only nice people deserved to be nice to.

[Wakas]

Farouk,

Thanks for your reply and clarification.

Despite giving you a chance to correct, you did not, thus I have referred your case to admin, as I consider this false:

Posted by: abdalquran
? on: Today at 03:54:36 AM
No, your mistake was agreeing with the wrong person. But hey , no problem here. I only came back to FM because Wakas didn't want to discuss anywhere else and I had been asking for answers for about 5 times before that. No answer was forthcoming anyway. Nor will it ever come, I think.

Then later said:

Incorrect. This statement (which I think is neither slander nor false) was made BEFORE I was issued a formal warning.


Also, it's not 'here you go AGAIN' because this remark was made BEFORE your friends gave the formal warning. Now that the warning has been given, fine. I am ready to the continue the discussion.

Also note the contradiction, wherein you say you do not consider the statement false or slander, yet correct your statement later:

Ah, allow me to change it then - Wakas did not want to discuss it in facebook where he first presented his critique.

If/when admin confirms, admin action may be taken.