From the Quran Alone was dogs being unclean
Osman
In the Name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful,
So from the Quran alone, do you regard Dogs halal to eat?
Actually from the Quran Alone... how do you know that the Quran is one
book.
Consider the following scenario,
What is now regarded as Surah Fatheha was actually a
separate book revealed to the Prophet Abdullah Bin Umar who came a few
years before the prophet Muhammad bin Abbas. The 3 ayats which
explicity refer to Muhammad refer to Muhammad bin Abbasand were
revelated to him. There was no such person Muhammad bin Abdullah
(SWAS).
Surah Fil was revealed to the Prophet Obi Bin Kanobi. 30 years before
Muhammad bin Abbas.
Surah Kafiron was revealed to the Prophet Chewbecca. There reference
to
Becca and Mekkah in the scriptures to the prophet Chewbecca.
So what is the Quran. How can you regard the book you have now as
being the
Quran. How do you know it was revealed to a prophet. How do you know
it is one.
How can you accept any historical evidence which is at least as flaky
as
hadith.
ofcource by rejecting Tawatur and hadith, you must reject the
existance of
Omar bin Khattab, Abu Bakr Siddiq, Uthman Ghani, Ali Murtaza and for
that
matter all sahabas.
>From the Quran alone, the scenario I have presented above is as likely
as
the any if you ignore tawatur and hadith.
The beauty of the Quran to me, is its summary and concentrated nature.
The
best way to transmit knowledge. This approach needs the suplement of a
prophet and his explinations which are the sunnah.
Can any quran only group claim that its not falling into the trap
mentioned
in Surah Al Imran verse 6-7? That verse is a great sanity check. If
you
are one of a few interpreting verses in a particular way and the
result is
creating dissension. WATCH OUT...
Pikhtall translation...
003.007 He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture
wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book -
and others (which are)allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt
pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause)
dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save
Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein;
the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.
how come all the Quran only groups are busy reinterpreting the Quran
in a way
which is certainly causing dissension. This by itself in proof of
their
deviancy.
osman
MrAbcX
>So from the Quran alone, do you regard Dogs halal to eat?
The Quran tells us what is halal and what is haram:
"Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and running blood
and swineflesh, and that which hath been dedicated unto any
other than Allah.." (5:3)
The Quran only forbids FOUR TYPES of food ie carrion, running
blood, pork and things (any food item) that has been
dedicated to something other than God (eg on an altar).
The verse also continues with more detail about animals that
are dead:
"(also forbidden are) and the strangled, and the dead through
beating, and the dead through falling from a height, and that
which hath been killed by horns, and the devoured of wild beasts,
saving that which ye make lawful, and that which hath
been immolated unto idols" (5:3).
Other than this, EVERYTHING ELSE is halal for Muslims. Yes,
that would include frogs, crocodiles, alligators, birds and
whatever else - AS LONG AS they are good for you.
"They ask thee (O Muhammad) what is made lawful for them.
Say: "ALL GOOD THINGS are made lawful for you. And those
hounds and birds of prey which ye have trained as hounds
are trained, ye teach them that which Allah taught
you; so eat of that which they catch for you and mention
Allah's name upon it, and observe your duty to Allah. Lo!
Allah is swift to take account".
People asked Muhammad "What is made lawful for them ?'
Muhammad is required to say "ALL GOOD THINGS ARE MADE LAWFUL
FOR YOU". And this includes what your HOUNDS (DOGS) catch
for you (see verse 5:4 above).
This also means that Muslims can keep and rear DOGS and even
use the DOGS to catch food. Such food is halal. But the
sunni world today says it is haram to keep dogs. They hate dogs.
If you follow the Quran, you can eat anything that is good for
your body except pork, running blood, dead animals and desecrated
food. VERY VERY Simple. If you follow the Quran, you can survive
anywhere on God's earth. I have seen Sunni "tourists" starving in
Papua New Guinea :) They kept eating bread for three days : )))
But the sunnis and shiahs have come up with very very long lists
of foods which are prohibited. Not surprisingly (because they are all
falsehoods) you find differences between the sunnis, shiahs, shafiee,
hanafi, maliki, hanbali sub sects etc on what exactly is halal or
haram.
For example some say crabs are haram, frogs are haram, birds with
talons are haram, animals with canine teeth are haram
and other such rubbish. They are not supposed to forbid or
make haram all these foods, but the sunni and shiah don't care.
"O ye who believe! Forbid not the good things which Allah hath
made lawful for you, and transgress not, Lo! Allah loveth not
transgressors. Eat of that which Allah hath bestowed on you as
food lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah in Whom
ye are believers. " 5:87-88
>What is now regarded as Surah Fatheha was actually a
Bring your evidence from the Book of God if you are truthful.
>So what is the Quran. How can you regard the book you have now as
>being the
The Quran is for those who believe in the unseen, that is
they believe in a God they can not directly witness:
"This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those
who guard (against evil). Those who believe in the unseen ... "2:2-3
When you do that, you just trust God and His promise:
"Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely
be its guardian." 15:9
Maybe that is too much to ask from you ?
>in Surah Al Imran verse 6-7? That verse is a great sanity check. If
You and other sunnis are only trying to scare people off from
reading the Quran by claiming that one can "misunderstand" the
Quran. This is a very incorrect understanding of the Quran
as the Book of God is:
"We have revealed to you clear revelations (ayatin baiyinatin),
and only the wicked will disbelieve therein". (2:99)
The Quran has clear revelations. Those who are wicked will
say the revelations are not clear. They disbelieve. - "We
thus reveal these clear revelation (ayatin baiyinatin), then
God guides whomever He wills". (22:16)
Note that these two verses are definitely "muhkamat" in that
they are very clear in what they are saying. Surah 2:185 and
2:209 also carry the same message. Hence the whole Quran
is a clear revelation. Otherwise it cannot be a book of
guidance.
"He revealed to you this scripture, consisting of
straightforward (muhkamat) verses, which are the essence
of the scripture, as well as multiple-meaning verses
(mutashabihat). Those who harbor doubt in their hearts
will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create
confusion, and to seek their meanings. No one knows their
meaning except God and those who are deeply rooted in
knowledge. They say, 'We believe in this; it all comes
>from our Lord.' Only those who possess intelligence will
take heed." (3:7)
It is one of the intriguing feature of the Quran that
the verse about "mutashabih" verses of the Quran is
itself mutashabih, that is, has multiple meanings. Indeed,
the verses about understanding the Quran themselves
are not understood by those who betray the Quran by
trading it with volumes of hadith books which are full of
fabricated stories falsely attributed to the Prophet
Muhammad.
The last part of the verse 3:7 can be understood in
two different ways by merely a punctuation change. If
you stop after the word God, then you will (mis)understand
like many Sunni scholars did. According to your punctuation,
even those who possess knowledge will not be able to
understand "mutashabih" verses. However, if you don't stop
there its meaning will change to the opposite: Those who possess
knowledge will be able to understand their meaning. Let's list
our reason for preferring this later understanding:
1. The intention of those who try to understand the
multiple-meaning verses is important. With the disease in
their harts, they try to confuse others by focusing on
multiple meaning verses. Since only sincere believers
possess the quality to understand the Quran (17:46; 18:57; 54:17),
hypocrites will not be able to find the
true meaning of multiple-meaning words.
2. "None can grasp it except the sincere." (56:79)
The Quran is simple to understand (54:11). Whoever opens his/her
mind and heart as a monotheist and takes the time to study it,
will understand it. This understanding will be enough for salvation.
Beyond this, to understand the multi-meaning verses or
allegorical descriptions you do not need to be a messenger
of God. If you have a good mind and have studied the Quran as
a believer, that is, if you have a deep knowledge, then you will
be able to understand the true meanings of multiple-meaning verses.
The verse 3:7, which is about the multiple-meaning
verses, points this fact in a multiple-meaning way: ". . . No
one knows their true meaning except God and those who possess
knowledge. . " Obviously, those who are confused by contradictory
teaching of clergymen (ulama) do not possess knowledge and unable
to understand this verse.
3. God, the teacher of the Quran, encourages believers to study
the Quran with patience. A portion of the Quran requires intensive
analytical study. It advises us not to rush into understanding
without sufficient knowledge (20:114). Nevertheless, the
Quran, in general, is easy to understand (54:17...).
By mistranslating 3:7, you try to discourage and scare believers,
including those who are deeply rooted in knowledge, from
understanding the "mutashabih" verses, without a clear definition
and identification of "mutashabih".
4. If we follow your translation of 3:7, then, we must have a
clear definition of "mutashabih" verses in order to avoid trying
to understand them. According to your translation, if one tries
to understand a verse and that verse happens to be a
mutashabih, then that person is in danger to become a hypocrite.
Therefore, you must be able to identify ALL the mutashabih verses.
Can you provide us with a list of mutashabih verses? Can you
justify your criteria for your selection? How can your
lack of understanding be criteria for others? Someone's lack of
understanding of one verse cannot make a verse "taboo" for all
other people. Otherwise, the lowest degree of understanding will
be the common denominator in understanding of the
Quran. The more verse you don't understand the more you
will be safe, and the more verse you understand the more you
will be a subject for accusation to be a hypocrite.
Follow the Quran, http://www.ropelist.com
Saqib Virk
news:a5kfb3$198$1...@samba.rahul.net...
> how come all the Quran only groups are busy reinterpreting the
> Quran in a way which is certainly causing dissension. This by
> itself in proof of their deviancy.
I don't support the so-called Quran only position but I suppose some Jews
argued the same point you are arguing when Jesus began "reinterpreting" the
Torah for them. Those who speak the truth on behalf of Islam are bound to
cause dissension with Muslims who are far astray from the correct path.
Don't the hadith tells us that the Muslims will follow the same path the
Jews followed?
--
Wasalaam,
Saqib Virk
Osman
In the Name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful,
Saqib,
true, but 3:6 verse was not revealed yet to the world and not
applicable
at the time of the Prophet Jesus (AS). Clearly it is a beautiful
guidance appropriate for us the Ummah of the Prophet Muhammad (SWAS).
anyways, your point is interesting. Though one thing that strikes me
is that for the vast majority of muslims practicing or not the
mukhamat are interpreted quite similarly. Would be interesting to know
what the scholars opinion is about this ayah in detail. I researched
this a while back. let me read this again.
Its just seems that the muthshabihaat become an issue with someone
trying to prove a new point. As a example, the miraclous birth of
Jesus or Moses throwing down the staff. Now for Moses case, I never
even thought of it as an issue untill a pervaizi came and started
arguing with me. I never had to take a postion on the issue. It never
was an issue for me. Not untill someone came to me and started making
an issue out of it.
Similarly with the miracles of Jesus.
People may or may not practice. They may be completely ignorant about
an issue they may argue about derived knowledge and ahadith. But when
the argument is about the Quran. Watch out... I dont wanna get into
it. And I CERTAINLY dont want to find new meaning of this of all
Ayats. I seek refuge in Allah again. I hope I have not done so already
(reinterpreted the ayah). I seek refuge in Allah again.
I thank Allah for this Ayah and I repeatedly seek refuge in My Master,
Allah, Ya Nur, Ya Hadi, Ya Rashid, Ya Mumin as only he can guide to
the right path and only his refuge is sufficient to protect.
O Ever Living O Self-Subsisting supporter of all, by Your mercy i seek
assistance, rectify for me all of my affairs and do not leave me to
myself, even for the blink of any Eye.
O Allah, what blessing i or any of Your creations have risen upon, is
from
your alone, without partner. So for You is all praise and onto You All
thanks.
osman
"Saqib Virk" <sv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<a5nfak$j43$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
Osman
In the name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful,
Mr. abcx,
You gave lots of information but you did not directly answer my
question. I assume that you mean that Dogs are halal to eat. I just
wanted this as an answer. Am i correct in this understanding?
[snipped]
>
> >What is now regarded as Surah Fatheha was actually a
>
> Bring your evidence from the Book of God if you are truthful.
So if you are truthfull and you say Quran Alone is sufficient then you
must bring the evidence from Quran Alone.
So I ask you for evidence that the Quran is one Book and that it was
revealed to Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SWAS). You have quoted no evidence.
Bring me evidence you say so youself.
You cant bring me a book printed in the last couple of hundred years
and say this is the Quran. You cant bring the Uthmanic Quran. For from
the Quran Alone we can't know when the prophet(SWAS) was in Arabia. If
we cant know that the value of the Uthmanic Quran is of no value.
WIthout the sunnah, we cant know if any of the sahabas had memorized
the Quran or if the prophet(SWAS) has recited it in Ramadan or if the
prophet used to listed to it from sahabas or if the sahabas for that
matter even existed.
So I cant bring evidence about The prophet Kenobi or Chewbecca, there
are 3 statements about Muhammad. How can you prove its about Muhammad
Bin Abdullah (SWAS), where is the evidence. How can you prove its not
Muhammad Bin Abbass? where is your evidence.
The evidence is in the Sunnah and Tawattur and histories derived
therefrom. No one can deny the Existance of my Prophet (SWAS), unless
we ourselves decide to throw away the most metecolous history of a
person in the sunnah of our Prophet and the ahadit by tawatur. Even
the Kuffar dont do that and they accept the authenticity of the Quran
to a great extent based on tawattur and history and sunnah.
>
> >So what is the Quran. How can you regard the book you have now as
> >being the
>
> The Quran is for those who believe in the unseen, that is
> they believe in a God they can not directly witness:
>
Where do you get this part "that is they believe in a God they can not
directly witness", how do you know this is not about hadith, sunnah,
after all I cant see the life of the prophet?
I believe in the Unseen, I believe in a God I have not seen but whose
effects are most clear Ya Zahir Glory be to thee, thou are most
perfect.
> "This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those
> who guard (against evil). Those who believe in the unseen ... "2:2-3
>
> When you do that, you just trust God and His promise:
>
> "Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely
> be its guardian." 15:9
>
> Maybe that is too much to ask from you ?
>
You have conviniently left out all the Ayats regarding looking at
evidence. The ayat regarding not following your forfathers blindly.
You yourself say bring the evidence from the Quran alone. Bring it and
answer my 2 questions?
> >in Surah Al Imran verse 6-7? That verse is a great sanity check. If
>
> You and other sunnis are only trying to scare people off from
[SNIPPED]
> will be safe, and the more verse you understand the more you
> will be a subject for accusation to be a hypocrite.
>
>
> Follow the Quran, http://www.ropelist.com
I wrote a detailed answer to the above issue but I deleted them
because I want you to answer few question.
Firslty can you prove from the Quran Alone that the books we have
today printed as the Quran are actually the Quran and not a sub set or
superset thereof?
Assuming that to be true.
Can you prove from the Quran Alone that Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SAWS)
was the prophet and not Muhammed Bin Abbass? From the Quran Alone can
you prove which century the Prophet Muhammed existed in?
What do you know about Muhammad Bin Abdullah from the Quran alone.
What about his family? What about his Sahabas? Did Omar, Abu Bakr,
Uthman exist? bring your evidence from the Quran Alone if you are
truthful.
Your belief is based on the convenience of taking the Quran alone.
Then explicity saying that you deny hadith but implicity keeping as
much of hadith and sunnah as you want without aluding to it as such.
You cannont know the prophet was Muhammed Bin Abdullah (SWAS) with the
Quran Alone. yet u assume so without giving credit to hadith. You
cannot know of Hazrat Khadija, Hazrat Aisha, Hazrat Hassan Hussain
Omar Abu Bakr anyone from the Quran alone. Yeah you know about hazrat
zaid alone from the Quran alone. So do you deny them All? Do you deny
the Sahabas and the serah of the prophet? You cannot have it from the
Quran alone. Please provide us a seerah of the Prophet from the Quran
alone. You cannot know who Abu Qasim was from the Quran alone. You
cannot know of the tears from his cheek when Ibrahim died from the
Quran alone. You cannot know the stories of the persecution of the
prophet and the Sahabas from the Quran Alone. When I did not believe
in islam and I kept reading the Quran a strange thing happened.. I
really started to love hazrat Ibrahim. And I relaized later, that so
much of the Quran metioned Ibrahim (AS) by name and not the prophet
(SWAS). What love I got for the prophet comes to me primarily from
reading his seerah. I cant see how one can develop love for the
prophet (SWAS) without knowing him by reading his seerah? You want to
deny that too.
You cant even know the Prophet was Muhammad Bin Abdullah from the
Quran Alone.
MrAbcX
>question. I assume that you mean that Dogs are halal to eat. I just
This was clearly answered in my previous post and
I find no reason to repeat the stuff. If you are unable to
comprehend it then that's your problem.
>So I ask you for evidence that the Quran is one Book and that it was
I have already gone this in the previous post.
".. .there is none who can alter His words.." 18:27
We trust God. When He says that no one will alter His
words and He will preserve it then we submit and accept
that without argument.
>revealed to Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SWAS). You have quoted no evidence.
God revealed the Quran to Muhammad, His messenger and last
prophet (27:6, 33:40)
What was the name of his father has nothing to do with
Islam. It is totally irrelevant. How will knowing the name
of his father make you a better muslims ?
You want to limit the Book of God in history which
the Quran condemends:
"In their history, there is a lesson for those who
possess intelligence. This is not fabricated
Hadith; this (Quran) confirms all previous scriptures,
provides the details of everything, and is a beacon
and mercy for those who believe. " 12:11
And,
"Heed not the type of despicable men - ready with
oaths. A slanderer going about with calumnies.
(Habitually) hindering (all) good transgressing beyond
bounds deep in sin. Violent (and cruel) - with all that
base-born - Because he possesses wealth and
(numerous) sons. When to him are rehearsed Our Signs
Tales of the ancients he cries!" (68:10-15)
It is evident from the above, that it is the unbelievers who
term God's Book to be something restricted to history.
This is exactly what you are doing when you are more
interested in talking about dead people God has given
no authority.
>WIthout the sunnah, we cant know if any of the sahabas had memorized
>the Quran or if the prophet(SWAS) has recited it in Ramadan or if the
I advice you to read the Quran. Maybe you should
check (73:1-4,20, 29:49, 52:1-7, 80:11-16).
Don't you belive in what Gods says:
"Shall I seek other than GOD as a source of law, when
He has revealed to you this book fully
detailed? Those who received the scripture recognize
that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully.
You shall not harbor any doubt. " 6:114
The Quran contains everything for the basis of Islam.
>The evidence is in the Sunnah and Tawattur and histories derived
>therefrom. No one can deny the Existance of my Prophet (SWAS), unless
You are mixing the science of history with hadiths. The
purpose behind hadith is to distort the picture of Islam,
introduce fake stories, Quran-contradicting laws and
turn Islam into a barbatic religion. We all saw what
happend with the Taliban and how God punished them for
this.
History on the other hand is objective and the
understanding of history changes from time to time.
>The evidence is in the Sunnah and Tawattur and histories derived
Hehe, how do you know that all this is not fake ?! How
do you know that not everything written in these gigantic
volumes is true ?
Tell me which of these three statements is the right one
and why :
1) "I am leaving for you two things that you must uphold,
the Quran and my Sunnah" (According to Muwatta 46/3).
2) "I am leaving for you the Quran and my relatives (Ahl Al- Bayt)"
(According to Muslim 44/4, Nu 2408; Ibn Hanbal 4/366; Darimi 23/1, Nu
3319).
3) "I am leaving for you the Quran; you shall uphold it" (According to
Muslim 15/19, Nu 1218; Ibn Majah 25/84, Nu 3074; Abu Dawud 11/56, Nu 1905).
>Can you prove from the Quran Alone that Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SAWS)
>was the prophet and not Muhammed Bin Abbass?
I don't need to prove. See above.
>From the Quran Alone can
>you prove which century the Prophet Muhammed existed in?
Islam has been the religion of God from day one. Mohammed
came much later and was not the founder of Islam. When
exactly he lived has nothing to do with Islam.
Certainly, the Book of God, which is free from all
discrepancies, is clear and distinct in its meaning,
is applicable in all times, can never ever be subjected
to a body of literature which is incomplete, contradictory
with itself and established facts of science, is accepted
by one sect while rejected by the other, and was compiled
and collected by human beings who were not even present
during the period of Quranic revelation, but simply compiled there
history by heresy and conjecture. Indeed the Quran is not
in need for its exegesis for such a body of literature and
reports which are at a conflict with each other, are based
entirely on paradoxical reports.
Conjecture, says the Quran is not equal to sure reality:
"Wert thou to follow those who are in a majority on earth
they will lead thee away from the way of Allah. They follow
nothing but conjecture: they do nothing but lie." (6:116)
Osman
mra...@hotmail.com (MrAbcX) wrote in message news:<a60o82$f4g$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
> osm...@bigfoot.com (Osman) wrote in message news:<a5q72k$63i$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
>
> >question. I assume that you mean that Dogs are halal to eat. I just
>
> This was clearly answered in my previous post and
> I find no reason to repeat the stuff. If you are unable to
> comprehend it then that's your problem.
It was not clearly answered in your posts. Illustrated as such...
you said..
"
Other than this, EVERYTHING ELSE is halal for Muslims. Yes,
that would include frogs, crocodiles, alligators, birds and
whatever else - AS LONG AS they are good for you.
"
Now not only did you not mention dogs... you also left a loop hole
"AS LONG AS they are good for you".
As long as you did both i.e. not mention dogs being halal to eat and
kept this stament of AS LONG as they are good for you... you answer
is not specific.
please be a bit more rigirous in your approach.
>
> >So I ask you for evidence that the Quran is one Book and that it was
>
> I have already gone this in the previous post.
>
> ".. .there is none who can alter His words.." 18:27
>
> We trust God. When He says that no one will alter His
> words and He will preserve it then we submit and accept
> that without argument.
>
> >revealed to Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SWAS). You have quoted no ev
idence.
>
> God revealed the Quran to Muhammad, His messenger and last
> prophet (27:6, 33:40)
Two, three sentences out of over 6000.... How do you know that only
those 2 or 3 are speaking about this collection of 6000 sentenses.
Further more how do you know that the reference to Muahammad in these
sentenses is the same Muhammad? and not 2 separate people.
How can you trust us horrible sunni's to not to have inserted
different
ayats in the Quran including the one about God preserving it?
The Quran as you get it printed today through these people how can you
trust it?
Without the Sunnah, how do you know that the Quran was not preserved
in
exactly the same was as the Sunnah?
> What was the name of his father has nothing to do with
> Islam. It is totally irrelevant. How will knowing the name
> of his father make you a better muslims ?
>
Knowing about his life can make a person a better muslim... Knowing
how he lived is of importance. How he delt with his friends, family,
servants everyone is of utmost importance.
> You want to limit the Book of God in history which
> the Quran condemends:
How can you possibly make such an accusation. By what possible
logic can you justify this assertion that I want to limit the
Quran to be a book of history? You have accused me of this
I will ask God Almighty on the day of Judgement to give me
of your deeds as you have brought a false accusation against
me.
Quite the contrary, I say the sunnah has the history
of the prophet, it is unnessary to have it in detail in the
Quran and it is not. Since to me the Sunnah is the book of history of
the
prophet.
The Uswae husna of the prophet is in the
hadith/history. I dont want to limit the Quran to a book of history.
Your accusation is a salander and a calumny against me.
The Quran itself explicty asks you to obey the messager many times...
Quran is complete. It itself point to the Messanger and his Hikma.
if you were right and it was to be Quran alone, then a typical
pakistan
who can reicte the Quran and not understand a word would automatically
understand it. Why need arabic dictionaries or language understanding.
If it is complete in that sense.
> >The evidence is in the Sunnah and Tawattur and histories derived
> >therefrom. No one can deny the Existance of my Prophet (SWAS), unless
>
> You are mixing the science of history with hadiths. The
> purpose behind hadith is to distort the picture of Islam,
> introduce fake stories, Quran-contradicting laws and
> turn Islam into a barbatic religion. We all saw what
> happend with the Taliban and how God punished them for
> this.
Very fair of you. How come the Quran contradicting laws of the
Barbaric Saudi for the past gazillion years not punished by God? Dont
be so quick to Judge them. What about the Quran contradicting laws of
the Pakistani government.
Perhaps The taleban were not punished any more that the prophets were
"punished"
or the Sahabas were punished. You have accused the taleban of being
punished. They may have been of those whose life Allah has purchased..
I have not yet come across a SINGLE QURAN only person who has achieved
Shaadat. So has Allah purchased any QURAN only peoples lives?
If you truely believe Quran only approach is right and it is better
than that of the taleban. I ask you to invoke Allah and ask him to
Curse you if you are wrong and bless you if you are right. Openly do
so if you are on the right path.
>
> History on the other hand is objective and the
> understanding of history changes from time to time.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
>
> >The evidence is in the Sunnah and Tawattur and histories derived
>
> Hehe, how do you know that all this is not fake ?! How
> do you know that not everything written in these gigantic
> volumes is true ?
It does not have to be perfect. That is why you have different
Madhabs.
But that is a degree of fexibiliy that Allah (SWT) has given us. He
has asked us to use the Quran and he has asked us to obey the
messanger and to take what the prophet gives us. So if he has
deliberately kept some ambiguity to check the desease in our hearts,
so be it.
If you have the Quran only schools, they have very vastly different
interpretation. Even more so than the Sunnah following schools. The
Quran
only school is a license of My very own Islam version of Islam, where
people
justify everything from Alchol to not praying to doing whatever they
want. That is a key reason why I started to realize the Quran only
were a deviant group, because in them you have people who try to
justify everything as being islamic and quranic.
The Quran only heretice have extremist from all ends of the specturm.
Each interpreting Quran as they see fit.
>
> Tell me which of these three statements is the right one
> and why :
>
> 1) "I am leaving for you two things that you must uphold,
> the Quran and my Sunnah" (According to Muwatta 46/3).
>
> 2) "I am leaving for you the Quran and my relatives (Ahl Al- Bayt)"
> (According to Muslim 44/4, Nu 2408; Ibn Hanbal 4/366; Darimi 23/1, Nu
> 3319).
>
> 3) "I am leaving for you the Quran; you shall uphold it" (According to
> Muslim 15/19, Nu 1218; Ibn Majah 25/84, Nu 3074; Abu Dawud 11/56, Nu 1905).
These are as contradictory as many statment and facts in the Quran.
Allah is Ghaffur, Ghaffar, Rahim
Allah is Qahhar and Muntaqim,
Some place there is one description of the momineen some were some
difference. All there can be correct at the same time, they are not
mutually contradictory..
Vitamins are good for you...
Fruits are good for you...
Excersie is good for you...
WOW three contradictory statements...
>
>
> >Can you prove from the Quran Alone that Muhammad Bin Abdullah (SAWS)
> >was the prophet and not Muhammed Bin Abbass?
>
> I don't need to prove. See above.
question is do you regard calling Muhammad (SWAS), Muhammad bin
Abdullah (SWAS) as against a Quran only philosophy?
>
> >From the Quran Alone can
> >you prove which century the Prophet Muhammed existed in?
>
> Islam has been the religion of God from day one. Mohammed
> came much later and was not the founder of Islam. When
> exactly he lived has nothing to do with Islam.
It does if you want evidence of the authenticity of the Quran..
>
> Certainly, the Book of God, which is free from all
> discrepancies, is clear and distinct in its meaning,
> is applicable in all times, can never ever be subjected
> to a body of literature which is incomplete, contradictory
> with itself and established facts of science, is accepted
> by one sect while rejected by the other, and was compiled
> and collected by human beings who were not even present
> during the period of Quranic revelation, but simply compiled there
> history by heresy and conjecture. Indeed the Quran is not
how do you know when the Quran was compiled and by who??? how???
Reality
answer not conjecture...
> in need for its exegesis for such a body of literature and
> reports which are at a conflict with each other, are based
> entirely on paradoxical reports.
>
> Conjecture, says the Quran is not equal to sure reality:
>
> "Wert thou to follow those who are in a majority on earth
> they will lead thee away from the way of Allah. They follow
> nothing but conjecture: they do nothing but lie." (6:116)
Conjecture is assuming the Quran is the Quran without giving me any
evidence at all.. Reality is the tawatur and evidence of it being the
same Quran as to very close to the time of the prophet (Hazrat Uthmans
time) and the further evidence to suggest that the sahabas had
memorized the Quran. Your approach seems to be based on conjecture and
blind faith with no evidence.
MrAbcX
>Now not only did you not mention dogs... you also left a loop hole
This is what the Quran is saying, if you regard it as
a "loop hole" then again that's your problem. You seem to
have big problems in following and accepting what the Quran
is telling us.
God has given us permission to eat all good things, minus
the forbidden food. In some cultures certain things
are regarded as good while others are not. It is up to
you to decide what your personal likes/dislikes are.
However, if you or your culture does not like something
then you on this basis can not make that particular
ingredient haram.
"O ye who believe! Forbid not the good things which Allah hath
made lawful for you, and transgress not, Lo! Allah loveth not
transgressors. Eat of that which Allah hath bestowed on you as
food lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah in Whom
ye are believers. " 5:87-88
>sentenses is the same Muhammad? and not 2 separate people.
Have you read the story where Jews kept asking Moses
absurd questions upon questions ? I suggest you take a
look (2:67+) and try to learn something from it.
>sentenses is the same Muhammad? and not 2 separate people.
God has sent many messengers to us, they all brought
the same message. Whether he used 1, 2 or 100 messengers
is irrelevant.
>How can you trust us horrible sunni's to not to have inserted
>different
>ayats in the Quran including the one about God preserving it?
You really find it hard to trust God and accept the verses of
the Quran.
Let me repeat:
".. .there is none who can alter His words.." 18:27
"Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will
most surely be its guardian." 15:9
"Surely those who disbelieve in the reminder when it
comes to them, and most surely it is a Mighty Book:
Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor
from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the
Praised One. " 41:41-42
As a muslim I submit and follow what I have been
told above. You obviously don't. I wonder whether
such a person really falls into the definition of
Islam.
Do you know how true believers behave ?
"Say: Believe in it or believe not; surely those
who are given the knowledge before it fall down on
their faces, making obeisance when it is recited to
them.
And they say: Glory be to our Lord! most surely the
promise of our Lord was to be fulfilled.
And they fall down on their faces weeping, and it
adds to their humility. " 17:107-109
But what are you doing ? Instead of putting your trust
in God you are questioning the very same verses. I feel
sorry for you.
>Knowing about his life can make a person a better muslim... Knowing
The Quran tells us quite a lot about Mohammed and the life of
other prophets.
"...and We have revealed the Book to you
explaining clearly everything," 16:89
When God says everything, He means everything.
>who can reicte the Quran and not understand a word would
automatically
>understand it. Why need arabic dictionaries or language
understanding.
Islam is not dependent upon Arabic. The Quran is in Arabic
but it's meaning and message can be translated. It's a universal
message and hence every single being in this universes will
be able to comprehend the meaning. Learning some basic Arabic
is also not hard.
>The Quran itself explicty asks you to obey the messager many times...
Obeying Bukhari, a narrator of stories, is not obeying the messenger.
Obeying the messenger is obeying the complete, perfect and fully
detailed Quran. Verse 25:73 describes the attitude of believers
towards
God's revelations. But the followers of Hadith and Sunna are very good
in ignoring them. They do not see 6:19, 7:3, and 50:45 which say that
the only teaching delivered by God's messenger was the Quran. They do
not think that Muhammad practiced the Quran, and the Quran alone
(5:48,
49). They do not hear Muhammad's only
complaint about his people:
"The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have deserted this
Quran." " (25:30)
They do not understand that Muhammad
disowns those who do not understand that the Quran is enough and fully
detailed (6:114). Mohammed will never ask about hadiths or sunna,
he will complain about the Quran and the Quran alone.
The first verse of Chapter 9 states that an ultimatum is issued from
God
an His messenger. We know that the verses about the ultimatum are
entirely from God. God did not consult Muhammad about the ultimatum.
Muhammad's only mission was to deliver God's message (16:35; 24:54).
Thus, the reason that God included the messenger in 9:1 is because he
participated as deliverer of the ultimatum. Similarly, because people
receive God's message through
messengers we are ordered to obey the messengers. We also know that
the
Quran is a permanent messenger (65:11), and the Quran is a reminder
and
deliverer of good news (41:4; 11:2).
Followers of hadith and sunna claim that God is represented by the
Quran, and the messenger is represented by his opinion on the Quran.
Thus, they claim that the Quran is not enough for salvation. Some
people
may not utter this claim straightforwardly. They may even claim that
the
Quran is complete and enough for our guidance. However, further
questioning will reveal that their quran is not "the Quran".
However, their minds are confused, and their quran is contaminated
with human speculations and limited by a snap-shot interpretation.
They
try to scare the believers by saying "you do not like the messenger".
The belief that God is represented by the Quran, and the messenger by
his teaching is a satanic claim. There are several points to remember:
- Quran represents God and His messenger.
- Obeying the Quran is obeying God and the messenger.
- Quran never says: "Obey God and Moses," or "Obey God and Muhammad."
But, Quran consistently states: "Obey God and the messenger." This is
because the word messenger (rasul) comes from the "message" (risala).
The message is entirely from God; messengers cannot exist without the
message.
- Messengers as humans make mistakes. Thus, when believers made a
covenant with prophet Muhammad they promised to obey him
conditionally,
i.e., his righteous orders (60:12). Moreover, God specifically orders
Muhammad to consult the believers around him (3:159). If nobody can
object to the personal decision of the messenger, then consultation is
meaningless. However, whenever the final decision is made, it should
be
followed.
- During their lifetimes, messengers are community leaders. In this
regard messengers are not different than the believers who are in
charge
(4:59); both should be obeyed. But, this obedience is not absolute. It
is open for consultation and discussion.
- The position of messengers are different during their lives; they
are interactive teachers and curious students as well. We have the
chance to ask them further questions, discuss issues, learn their
intention, and even correct their mistakes. On the other hand, they
have the opportunity to correct our misunderstandings. However, when
they pass away their
teaching becomes frozen and looses its advancing three-dimensional
character. The frozen, snap-shot fragments of knowledge is a
dangerous weapon in the hand of ignorant people to stop God's
teachings.
They defend every plain error in the name of the messenger. They
insult
every sincere students of God's revelation.
- "We gave him Isaac and Jacob: all (three) guided; and before him, We
guided NUH, and among his progeny, David,
Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron. Thus do We reward those who do
good; and Zakariya and John, and Jesus
and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous. And Isma'il and Elisha,
and Jonas, and LUT; and to all We gave favor above
the nations. (To them) and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren:
We chose them, and we guided them to a straight
way. This is the guidance of Allah: He giveth that guidance to whom He
pleases, of His worshippers. If they were to join
other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These
are
they to whom We gave the BOOK and the wisdom
and the prophecy; therefore if these disbelieve in it We have already
entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers
in it" (6:84-89)
"And certainly We sent Nuh and Ibrahim and We gave to their offspring
the
(gift of) prophecy and the Book; so there are
among them those who go aright, and most of them are
transgressors" (57:26)
The above Ayaat make it clear that ALL Prophets came with God's
Message
in some form of a Book, and that obedience to the
Messenger is obedience to God's Words that the Messengers are
delivering. Whether these words are preserved or not is another
matter. But as far as the Quran is concerned the Book has been
recorded
and preserved. And as I have shown before that the
revelation delivered by the Prophet Muhammad was nothing but the
Quran,
and therefore, to obey the Messenger we must obey the
Quraan. Besides, the speculation that obedience to Allah and obedience
to the Messenger are separate conflicts with the explicit
Quraanic statement that God does NOT share anyone in His Law or Hukm:
"Surely the Hukm (Law and Judgment) is for none but Allah" (12:40)
"He does not make anyone His associate in His Hukm (Law and Judgment)"
(18:26)
The Messenger himself is made to testify that the Law and the Judgment
is only from God as revealed through the Messenger in His Book:
"Shall I seek a Law-giver other than Allah When He it is Who has
revealed
to you the Book distinctly elucidated." (6:114)
Thus, the proponents of Hadith are only relying on conjecture when
they
say that obey the Messenger means to obey EXTRA
commandments outside of the Quraan; they have no evidence from the
Quraan to back up this claim - only conjecture:
"Most of them follow nothing but conjecture: truly conjecture can be
of
no avail against truth. Verily Allah is well aware of
all that they do." (10:36)
>Barbaric Saudi for the past gazillion years not punished by God? Dont
God will punish them. Just wait and see.
"We created them and made firm their make, and when We please
We will bring in their place the likes of them by a change. " 76:28
>than that of the taleban. I ask you to invoke Allah and ask him to
We always pray to God to show us the right path:
"Keep us on the right path.
The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors.
Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down,
nor of those who go astray. " 1:6-7
The rest is up to Him.
>That is why you have different Madhabs.
Once again you follow a different route then the one given
by the Quran:
"Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became
sects, you have no concern with them; their affair is only
with Allah, then He will inform them of what they did. " 6:159
My sincere advice to you is that you really start following
the Quran before it gets too late.
khadooj
MrAbcX <mra...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a69h2v$f1t$1...@samba.rahul.net...
>
> "...and We have revealed the Book to you
> explaining clearly everything," 16:89
>
> When God says everything, He means everything.
Lets follow your claim that you can answer everything using the Qur'an only.
Allah said in the Qur'an "A theif she or he, cut their hands, etc."
so can you elaborate where they should cut the hands? At the wrist? At the
elbow? Between the elbow and the wrists? At the elbow? Or at the shoulder?
And how much should they steal before they deserve the punisment. Please use
the Qu'ran only to find the answer to this, and what verse is the answer in?
For example if I had twenty four camels back home, and I wanna give Zakaat
on them, what will be the procedures? Remember to answer from the Qu'ran
only.
edliana...@gmail.com
U do knw that is for the children of israel right? Their sin worth 7 times =
as punishment. Anyway, Where is ur hand? Where is ur arm? We shake hands ri=
ght? Do u shake from ppl's arm? Anyway yes it is halal to eat dogs n any ot=
her animals not forbidden in quran n not died of the conditions in the qura=
n n must say in Allah's name. In some countries, dogs r eaten to heat up hu=
man body against cold weather. Oh we can keep dogs as pets btw. The quran i=
s word of Allah n hadith is hearsay. So some true some not. Quran is 100% t=
rue. Do u knw how we debate with non muslims? We have to use only the Quran=
. N Alhamdullilah with only the Quran, we got the non muslims baffled. Qura=
n speaks for itself so to say. We cannot trust hadith 100%. Do u knw hw man=
y times we hv to encounter ppl accusing us as perverts for wanting to die t=
o get 72 virgins? But lo n behold we protect the name of Islam using Quran =
time n again n its not even mentioned in the Quran. So thank us, really. I =
just hope In future there will no name for followers of islam except Muslim=
s. N we r not quranist. Allah already give us the name Muslim.