
1) What is the Koranic DEEN, usually (but quite imperfectly) translated 'religion'?
2) What is the Koranic 'Islam'? What does it mean within the Koranic context? Is it written that often?
3) Who are the Koranic 'Muslims'? Are they called to follow hadiths or the previous scriptures?
4) What is the Koranic 'Shariah'? For it is mentioned 4 times...
The Cat wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_of_Saudi_Arabia
Article 1 states that "God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet" are the country's constitution...
It even has the perfid Shahadah on its flag
Since there's a beginning of an answer in your post, I shall deal with it soon.
Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:The Cat wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_of_Saudi_Arabia
Article 1 states that "God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet" are the country's constitution...
It even has the perfid Shahadah on its flag
Since there's a beginning of an answer in your post, I shall deal with it soon.
By quoting Article 1 of the Saudi Constitution, you have taught everyone that Muslims only live by Quran and Sunnah. One does not see Hadith mentioned in that declaration. That is a plus point and you have burst the Hadith bubble. Good job.
At first, I thought that the posters had misunderstood you or failed to understand you. But now I feel that most are trying their best not to understand you.
zamie wrote:cat, i never doubted that the koran is a book of law, and i don't think anyone has ever doubted it, so i am still failing to understand the point of this thread..... SO what the hell are you talking about, when you say that we have to examine the koran from the koran?
zamie wrote:1) What is the Koranic DEEN, usually (but quite imperfectly) translated 'religion'?
The answer to your first question is that deen means religion in arabic..
2) What is the Koranic 'Islam'? What does it mean within the Koranic context? Is it written that often?
I don't get your second question, please reiterate.
3) Who are the Koranic 'Muslims'? Are they called to follow hadiths or the previous scriptures?
The answer to your third question is that muslims are told to follow koran
4) What is the Koranic 'Shariah'? For it is mentioned 4 times...
The answer to your 4th question is that sharia is the law system of muslims, as specified in the koran and hadith.
If i am wrong, please tell me.
In the Vedic religion, Ṛta (Sanskrit ऋतं ṛtaṃ "that which is properly joined; order, rule; truth") is the principle of natural order which regulates and coordinates the operation of the universe and everything within it. In the hymns of the Vedas, Ṛta is described as that which is ultimately responsible for the proper functioning of the natural, moral and sacrificial orders....
Ṛta and Dharma
Already in the earliest Vedic texts, Ṛta as an ethical principle is linked with the notion of cosmic retribution. A central concept of the Ṛgveda is that created beings fulfil their true natures when they follow the path set for them by the ordinances of Ṛta, and failing to follow those ordinances was thought to be responsible for the appearance of various forms of calamity and suffering. Committing one's actions to the governance of Ṛta, referred to as its "Dharma", was therefore understood as imperative in ensuring one's own well-being.
In this vein, the individual who follows the ordinances of nature can be described as one who acts according to the "Dharma of Ṛta". Dharma, then, was originally conceived of as a "finite or particularized manifestation of Ṛta inasmuch as it represents that aspect of the universal Order which specifically concerns the mundane natural, religious, social and moral spheres as expressed in ritualistic regulations, public laws, moral principles and laws of nature".
How the term Dīn came to be used in Islamic Arabia is uncertain, but its use in modern Persian may derive etymologically from the Zoroastrian concept, Daena, which represents "insight" and "revelation", and from this "conscience" and "religion". Here, Daena is the Eternal Law, which was revealed to humanity through the Mathra-Spenta ("Holy Words"). Alternatively, the Hebrew term "דין", transliterated as "dīn", means either "law" or "judgement" (so written in Q.1.4).... The term is often translated in parts of the Qur'an as "religion". However, in the Qur'an itself, the act of submission to God is always referred to as Dמn, rather than as Muzdhab (Urdu Mazhab), which is the Arabic word for "religion."
In Varuna we see the earliest signs of an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God, the precursor of the Upamishadic Brahman. Varuna is the ruler of the worlds, the ordainer and enforcer of law and upholder of the world order....
Varuna is the knower of all and controller of all. He is supreme God capable of controlling and dispensing justice.... If two people talking together, beware that Varuna is there watching every thing that is going on.... Varuna is the protector, ''the Holy One, helper of all mankind, the law maker whose holy laws remain unweakened.'' Together with Mitra, he controls the world order, Rta and when people transgress the moral order and commit sin, he knows and punishes them. But if they repent and seek forgiveness, he forgives them too.
The word إسلام Islām is a verbal noun derived from s-l-m, meaning "submission" (i.e. entrusting one's wholeness to another), which may be interpreted as humility. "One who submits" is signified by the participle مسلم, Muslim (fem. مسلمة, muslimah).
The word is given a number of meanings in the Qur'an. In some verses (ayat), the quality of Islam as an internal conviction is stressed: "Whomsoever God desires to guide, He expands his breast to Islam." Other verses connect islām and dīn (usually translated as "religion"): "Today, I have perfected your religion (dīn) for you; I have completed My blessing upon you; I have approved Islam for your religion." Still others describe Islam as an action of returning to God—more than just a verbal affirmation of faith.
Arabic muslimun is the stem IV participle of the triliteral S-L-M "to be whole, intact". A literal translation would be "one who wants or seeks wholeness", where "wholeness" translates islāmun. In a religious sense, Al-Islām translates to "faith, piety", and Muslim to "one who has (religious) faith or piety". According to the Quran, Abraham was ancestor of the Muslims by his covenant with God.
One of the verses in the Qur'an makes a distinction between a mu'min, a believer, and a Muslim:
The Arabs of the desert say, "We believe." (tu/minu) Say thou: Ye believe not; but rather say, "We profess Islam;" (aslamna) for the faith (al-imanu) hath not yet found its way into your hearts. But if ye obey [Allah] and His Apostle, he will not allow you to lose any of your actions: for [Allah] is Indulgent, Merciful ('The Koran 49:14, Rodwell).
According to the academician Carl Ernst, contemporary usage of the terms "Islam" and "Muslim" for the faith and its adherents is a modern innovation. As shown in the Quranic passage cited above, early Muslims distinguished between the Muslim, who has "submitted" and does the bare minimum required to be considered a part of the community, and the mu'min, the believer, who has given himself or herself to the faith heart and soul.
Ernst writes: "The Arabic term Islam itself was of relatively minor importance in classical theologies based on the Qur'an. If one looks at the works of theologians such as the famous al-Ghazali (d. 1111), the key term of religious identity is not Islam but iman (faith), and the one who possesses it is the mu'min (believer). Faith is one of the major topics of the Qur'an; it is mentioned hundreds of times in the sacred text. In comparison, Islam is a less common term of secondary importance; it only occurs eight times in the Qur'an. Since, however, the term Islam had a derivative meaning relating to the community of those who have submitted to Allah, it has taken on a new political significance, especially in recent history."
zamie wrote:And from where do we learn the sunnah? Sira and hadith? Certainly they are the most extensive on the topic. Also, where in the koran does it permit stoning? No where in the koran is stoning permitted. So why does Saudi Arabia stone people on occasion?
http://www.ishr.org/index.php?id=857
zamie wrote:Well, let's consult the hadith.. Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 8.809/825 Narrated by Ibn Umar.....
crazymonkie_ wrote:I've got a stronger argument than he does, and his attempts to make this into a question of the Quran as a book of law alone is a non-starter. He's trying to dismiss my arguments, this time by saying I have the wrong tone.
zamie wrote:Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:By quoting Article 1 of the Saudi Constitution, you have taught everyone that Muslims only live by Quran and Sunnah. One does not see Hadith mentioned in that declaration. That is a plus point and you have burst the Hadith bubble. Good job.
At first, I thought that the posters had misunderstood you or failed to understand you. But now I feel that most are trying their best not to understand you.
And from where do we learn the sunnah? Sira and hadith? Certainly they are the most extensive on the topic.
Also, where in the koran does it permit stoning? No where in the koran is stoning permitted. So why does Saudi Arabia stone people on occasion? (http://www.ishr.org/index.php?id=857)
Well, let's consult the hadith..
Sahih Al-Bukhari HadithHadith 8.809/825 Narrated byIbn Umar
A Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah's Apostle on a charge of committing an illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet asked them. "What is the legal punishment (for this sin) in your Book (Torah)?" They replied, "Our priests have innovated the punishment of blackening the faces with charcoal and Tajbiya." 'Abdullah bin Salam said, "O Allah's Apostle, tell them to bring the Torah." The Torah was brought, and then one of the Jews put his hand over the Divine Verse of the Rajam (stoning to death) and started reading what preceded and what followed it. On that, Ibn Salam said to the Jew, "Lift up your hand." Behold! The Divine Verse of the Rajam was under his hand. So Allah's Apostle ordered that the two (sinners) be stoned to death, and so they were stoned. Ibn 'Umar added: So both of them were stoned at the Balat and I saw the Jew sheltering the Jewess.
So mr cat. You use the constition of saudi arabia to prove your argument that the hadith is not followed, yet we learn the sunnah from the hadith and the Sira, and the practice of stoning in saudi arabia is also from the hadith. So mr cat, what are you talking about? Perhaps 'god's book' also refers to the OT , which is where we learn the punishment of stoning. But if this were true, then Saudi arabia would use the Ot for all punishments not just stoning. So since this is not the case, we can say that the punishment is only adhered to because muhammad permitted it, and if it were not for the Hadith, no one would have known about it.
Anyway, i guess it comes down to the fact that Saudi does indeed follow the sunna, But if it were not for the hadith, this sunna would have been lost. So i guess you are actually right, when you say that saudi arabia only follows koran and sunna, as the hadith is only reporting on history and not making any new laws that are not based on the sunna. (However this is not always true, for example the law against women driving in saudi arabia.)
AhmedBahgat wrote:zanie, why you sound like realpest?
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Now explain the clear attempt of the Quran to be first person format, as if it is God speaking himself, letter for letter, directly to people, rather than a narrator retelling what God said and did as was the case of the Bible.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:His death made it possible to be saved, but one has to accept Jesus and his sacrifice and live accordingly in order to be saved.
Any other way would be to attack a Straw-Islam, such as the one built by the Muhammadans. My point is that the Koran dismisses nowadays man-made Islam. So why fight it blindly, according ourselves to the Straw-Islam built by the imams? The Koran is on OUR SIDE about this !
External critics of the Koran make you a kafir -dumb/deaf and blind- in the eyes of all Muslims. You whip the river but it keeps on flowing, you bark at the caravan but the caravan passes. You failed to establish a meaningful dialog, as they can dismiss you to their heart content, from the Koran itself. That's the mind-language I was referring to: if I am to talk to a kid, I will use his/her mind-language, if I am to talk to a woman or a carpenter, I will so use the appropriate mind-language. Same if I want to talk to a Koranic Muslim, to be absolutely differentiated from a Muhammadan.
Eagle wrote:Your mythological son/god/lamb was presented as a sacrifice for all humanity's sins, indiscriminately. Whether you accept his alleged death or not, Jesus died for the sins of all; past present and future sins (an absurdity per the OT sacrificial system).
The moment you say that some stand excluded from redemption, or that one needs to take action in order for the sacrifice to apply, you are saying that Jesus died for the sins of some, not of all and that his sacrifice is potentialy useless for billions (against its original intent).
Eagle wrote:Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:His death made it possible to be saved, but one has to accept Jesus and his sacrifice and live accordingly in order to be saved.
Your mythological son/god/lamb was presented as a sacrifice for all humanity's sins, indiscriminately. Whether you accept his alleged death or not, Jesus died for the sins of all; past present and future sins (an absurdity per the OT sacrificial system). The moment you say that some stand excluded from redemption, or that one needs to take action in order for the sacrifice to apply, you are saying that Jesus died for the sins of some, not of all and that his sacrifice is potentialy useless for billions (against its original intent).
Eagle wrote:Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Now explain the clear attempt of the Quran to be first person format, as if it is God speaking himself, letter for letter, directly to people, rather than a narrator retelling what God said and did as was the case of the Bible.
Because contrary to scriptures from the past, the Quran was meant to be literally the words of God put in the prophet's mouth as stated in your Bible "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their kinsmen, and will put my words into his mouth; he shall tell them all that I command him. If any man will not listen to my words which he speaks in my name, I myself will make him answer for it."
It was not the case with past scriptures.
The Cat wrote:We like to think of Islam as an ideology, well it's not quite so.
Basically Islam, as it is nowadays, is rather A CODE OF LAWS.
We like to give our proofs that it can't be from a God, that is human fabric and to point out its flaws and discuss all over them with indignation. But I think that we miss the most important point about the Koran: as the Islamic sacred book it is essentially a whole code of laws, to which we must add (as it is wrongly) the hadiths, sira and tafsirs. Those and others like Fiqh, act as jurisprudence.
So we're still and always within a legal procedure. When we deal with it as we do, we fail to understand what we're dealing with. At the end, it doesn't really matter if it's man-made or not, if some verses appear to us mere nonsense. The Koran and the Islamic jurisprudence are left untouched by all our critics because they come down to blast over let's say the American Constitution.
The Cat wrote:Imams and Mullahs are more akin to our notion of lawyers than they are to our notion of priests. So to deal with the Koran the way we usually do is totally missing the point
The Cat wrote: and so there's a huge misrepresentation between our perception and theirs: we can hurl anything we want, yet it doesn't reach Muslims for a minute, kafirs (all of us) are barking at the wrong tree, charging the wrong hill even with the most formidable will...
The Cat wrote:You may think you've proven the Koran wrong, or some verses...
The Cat wrote: it really comes down to argue against the American Constitution !
The Cat wrote:Let us say you argue that men are created unequally and come with a thousand examples to underline your point. This will not change an iota to the Declaration stating that: ''All men are created equals''. This is not David against Goliath, this is David against a troubled T-Rex !
The Cat wrote:Criticizing the Koran, in the mind of the Muslims, means you're either an outlaw or a kafir. Foreigners are such ignorant kafirs, dumb, blind and deaf so their silliness may be pardonable, that is up to the point of obtuse bad faith. They are not knowledgeable in the Science of the Law.
If we still continue this kind of approach we simply can't reach them. Their mind-language is totally different from our. The Koran is above all criticizing simply because it is The Law, the Islamic Constitution. The whole building of Islam is based on that. If you want to talk their mind-language we must argue from within the law, just like lawyers do
The Cat wrote:... for criticizing it from outside, like we do, is of no avail. Worthless. Emotionals over-reacting. Whipping the river because it merely flows. Contest the law as much as you want, it is still the law!
The Cat wrote:A good example for that is how AhmedBahgat behave if you attack his divine book. He'll argue like a lawyer interpreting The Law, from within (never from outside like we do)
The Cat wrote: giving you many related verses to a case.
The Cat wrote: Under critics and attacks, he will dismiss you without recourse.
The Cat wrote: This is like if you were stating that an article of some code of laws is completely flawed, arguing to a policeman that you didn't infringe the law by driving at high speed because there was nobody else on the highway at that time. So you really weren't a danger although you crashed the speed limit by much. The regulations couldn't then apply to you in this case... maybe you were running fast because you were late for an important meeting...
The policeman will react much like AhmetBahgat. He'll think you're a strange silly fellow, write the contravention, and give it to you with a huge smile: you've been dismissed. The Law has been infringed and his job is to punish the guilty. Period. You don't argue against a code of laws. You follow it, contest its accuracy in any given case, show your proves or else troubles are on the way...
The Cat wrote:It doesn't matter if the Koran is man-made or not, silly or not, or if you want or can reason it out. Lex Dura, Sed Lex.
The Cat wrote:The West is basically an enemy to Islam because it has different laws, ie. different values.
It wants freedom, while that can't be under The Law. To a Muslim, our notion of freedom is a dead-end... met by fate.
The Cat wrote:That's why we MUST be knowledgeable in what is The Law according to the Koran, for only then can we construct a valid case.
crazymonkie_ wrote:Eagle wrote:The moment you say that some stand excluded from redemption, or that one needs to take action in order for the sacrifice to apply, you are saying that Jesus died for the sins of some, not of all and that his sacrifice is potentialy useless for billions (against its original intent).
Taking that same point of view, the fact of Muhammad being a messenger and revealing the perfected version of Islam is useless to billions of people as well. If one does not take action, one is not a Muslim, and therefore will end up in hell. If one takes action, one is a Muslim and will end up in heaven.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:He died so that everybody CAN be saved, not so that everybody IS saved.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:First of all, it says from among your brothers
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Honestly, what sort of thickness blocks your mind??? Oh, that's right. It's Islam. You're a Muslim which automatically means that you cannot reason correctly nor even objectively. Oh well. Not my fault. Glad it's not me..Yet another Muslim lie. You people are the worst this planet has to offer. Not only do you constantly lie about your own religion, you try to hijack and lie about other people's religions as well, if that's what it takes to make your illegitimate religion created by your 20% pedo profit appear to be legitimate. What desperate disgraces you people are, and it's not even your fault, it's Islam's fault, which means it's Muhammad's fault.
Return to The Quran and Hadith
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests