stevecanuck
Well-Known Member
Allah's failure to communicate wasn't complete. Afterall, the Qur'an contains 6,236 verses, so it stands to reason that some topics are adequately covered. For example, many hundreds of verses are dedicated to reiterating that unbelief is evil and those who practice it (i.e.: non-Muslims) are deservedly Hell-bound. The necessity of fighting is not in doubt. Female captives can clearly be used for sex. The fact that Allah has no equals, and is responsible for the creation of the universe is repeatedly stated. More mundane matters such as inheritance, rules for divorce, the number of wives a man may have, and just when to beat one's wife are clearly delineated.
However, the Qur'an is more notable for what it does not clarify. If dogs and music are haram, as some, but not all Muslims believe, why not just say so? Exactly how much of her body is a woman required to cover? Why was there no process given to choose Mohamed's successor? Are people created from clay or a blood clot? Mountains are up-thrusts created by plate tectonics, so why does Allah say they are "placed", which implies they are separate from their surroundings? But to me, all of that pales in comparison to one fact - that hadiths and tafsirs are apparently necessary for Muslims to really figure out what Allah wants. If, as He frequently states, His sign are "clear", and that he has "perfected for you your religion of Islam", why on earth would it be necessary for all of the additional, and frequently conflicting, 'clarification'?
An argument could be made that hadiths are relevant to the extent that they give actual examples of how Mohamed lived by what he preached. But, when they are further used to create policy, rather than exemplify it, as in the case of some declaring that dogs and music are haram, they overstep. Tafsirs are worse. They are blatant attempts to speak for Allah. The very fact that Islamic scholarship even exists for the obviously necessary purpose of clarification proves that Allah failed to get his wishes across. How is that logical given Allah's 'perfection'?
To me the answer is obvious. The Qur'an was created on an ad hoc basis by Mohamed depending on what 'Allah' happened to need on any given day. No 'perfect' deity would have created such a mess. An honest and objective reading of it could not bring a person to any other conclusion.
However, the Qur'an is more notable for what it does not clarify. If dogs and music are haram, as some, but not all Muslims believe, why not just say so? Exactly how much of her body is a woman required to cover? Why was there no process given to choose Mohamed's successor? Are people created from clay or a blood clot? Mountains are up-thrusts created by plate tectonics, so why does Allah say they are "placed", which implies they are separate from their surroundings? But to me, all of that pales in comparison to one fact - that hadiths and tafsirs are apparently necessary for Muslims to really figure out what Allah wants. If, as He frequently states, His sign are "clear", and that he has "perfected for you your religion of Islam", why on earth would it be necessary for all of the additional, and frequently conflicting, 'clarification'?
An argument could be made that hadiths are relevant to the extent that they give actual examples of how Mohamed lived by what he preached. But, when they are further used to create policy, rather than exemplify it, as in the case of some declaring that dogs and music are haram, they overstep. Tafsirs are worse. They are blatant attempts to speak for Allah. The very fact that Islamic scholarship even exists for the obviously necessary purpose of clarification proves that Allah failed to get his wishes across. How is that logical given Allah's 'perfection'?
To me the answer is obvious. The Qur'an was created on an ad hoc basis by Mohamed depending on what 'Allah' happened to need on any given day. No 'perfect' deity would have created such a mess. An honest and objective reading of it could not bring a person to any other conclusion.
