• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Perfect Quran

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Let's get back to seeing components of Salah and philosophy in the Sunnah and Quran.

The amount of times we rise and say "By God's strength do I rise...". Let's do a count:

Salah Sabah: 1
Salah Dohr: 3
Salah Asr: 3
Salah Mahrib: 2
Salah Isha: 3

That makes twelve. Now the Quran can be interpreted as saying "that is the upright/standing religion" with respect to Twelve Shuhr (can be seen as luminaries).

It's also talks about Messengers being sent so humanity RISES/upholds by justice.

This component has to do with "rising".

Ruku/Qiyam amount:

Salah Sabah: 2
Salah Dohr: 4
Salah Asr: 4
Salah Mahrib: 3
Salah Isha: 4

That is 17. That doesn't seem significant, unless, we split it again with the day/night theme. 10 - day 7 night. Now before I mentioned 20 sujood in day, 14 in night. The night with 14 Ma'asoomeen and 7 can be about how they are veiled by 7 veils. The 10 can be how God rewards goodness, by increasing the beauty of goodness 10 times, while if an evil deed, he just gives it's own ugliness without amplifying it. So the message, is to tear the 7 veils and see Ahlulbayt (a) (14) through the heart, do good deeds which are brightened (10) and related to the timing in which Musa (a) and Haroun (a) were heightened as "the highest" in people's eyes.

The 7 veils and 10 can also be saying because it's related to ruku and Qiyam, that if you want guidance, you should honor believers, and God will reward you through that into seeing Ahlulbayt (a) eventually. Dishonor believers, and you will be distanced from God and Ahlulbayt (a) as well.

There are 7 levels of paradise and 7 gates of hell as well.

Going back to "rising", we see 7 and 5. The day has 7 which is the amount Imam occurs singularly, and 5 is the amount Imams occur plural. Getting guidance from Ahlulbayt (a) collectively as light then is more when we are in darkness, while the Imam will be our light primarily, if we make to the day. The same is true of the Ghayba (we need Ahlulbayt (a) hadiths and them collectively) which is the night, and the day will be when Imam Mahdi (a) rules the world.

To be continued...
 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Zaydis as of 2014 constitute roughly 0.5% of the world's Muslim population
70 to 80 thousand Quranist members.
Ibadi = 2.72 million - 7 million

Is it fair to say that the massive majority of Islam believes that in an Islamic society, apostates should be killed?
Not really, since death for apostasy isn't a current issue. Nobody has been killed for apostasy for quite a number of years. Someone like @Link might have some insight into this, though.
 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Ali'Imran 3:82
"Do they desire a way other than Allah’s—knowing that all those in the heavens and the earth submit to His Will, willingly or unwillingly, and to Him they will all be returned?"

How is free will significant?
The "no compulsion in religion" verse.
 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Clearly you're a deflector. Taqiyya is something Muslims do. "Telling a lie concerning Allah" refers to Kufr.
No, I am pointing out that the facts about tagiyya refute your claim that:

"Telling a lie concerning God" is described as the worst crime of all."

Kufr is qualified by the context of the Quran, your statement is not.
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
The "no compulsion in religion" verse.

Sahih-Muslim 2767d
Book 50, Hadith 60

"There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah's Apostle ? I said: Yes."

So here we have the problem that you consistently ignore , the sin.
So regardgless of how heavy the sin is he will be forgiven by Allah and in his place comes the Jew and the Christian.
So let me get this clear
3 people in front of the Judge
1 Muslim - confesed that he sinned
1 Christian
1 Jew
The Judge decides to forgive the sinner and on his place he puts a Jew and a Christian.
Funny thing is that there is no reference to what kind of Jew or Christistian , but it is defined as Jew and Christian.
Abother also funny thing is that jihad is one of the ways to recive mercy from Allah.
Muslims use the word Jihad to describe three different kinds of struggle: A believer's internal struggle to live out the Muslim faith as well as possible. The struggle to build a good Muslim society. Holy war: the struggle to defend Islam, with force if necessary.

Help me understand this Judgement please..
 
Last edited:

Zyzyx

Member
To be continued...
Link, dont bother for my sake. The above is the very definition of mental gymnastics and desperation. If you like patterns, every time we have looked at one of your previous examples it falls apart when thought is given to it. I'm not going to respond to these anymore.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
No, I am pointing out that the facts about tagiyya refute your claim that:

"Telling a lie concerning God" is described as the worst crime of all."

Kufr is qualified by the context of the Quran, your statement is not.

It's not a claim, it's quoting the Qur'an.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Link, dont bother for my sake. The above is the very definition of mental gymnastics and desperation. If you like patterns, every time we have looked at one of your previous examples it falls apart when thought is given to it. I'm not going to respond to these anymore.
Okay that's fine. I will say this though, I believe in both in ethics approach and human rights approach. I believe Quran and Sunnah should be approached by ethics and human rights, and we should try to prove it's laws on those two basis. Even it's unseen ethics (Salah) can have a wisdom.

I've tried to touch a little bit with this with two titles of God in the Quran and theme therein and what we say in Ruku and Sujood. But Quran has holistic approach to a lot of issues.

For example, what does it say about Marxist theory about wealth and power? There are verses that talk about wealth as a means of making other subvariant to others, and it talks about this in detail, but does it agree with communism or does it say wealth is a necessary evil mankind needs? Dig deeply and you will see Quran touches a lot of subjects.

Take Foucault idea of soft power and discourse. See the sermon of Mina of Imam Hussain (a), the issue of discourse is huge in that sermon and he comments on Quran therein, and see if Quran agrees.

The proper way to refer Sunnah to Quran is through reflecting on ethics and human rights. When it's come to rituals, it's to see the wisdom of what the Sunnah says explicitly with themes in Quran. While rituals often take mystic insights and that type of ethics, it's also not too difficult when you understand what Quran has repeated through out in this regard, and the many aspects and dimensions it emphasizes on each component of Salah for example. Same with Hajj and other rituals.

Part of the reason Quran and Sunnah are the way they are is for us to reflect. The reflection means the type of knowledge is not easily acquired by being told. Practice and acting to wisdom and knowledge, is true knowledge as far mysticism in the real essence. Even practical knowledge, theory is usually never enough but you rather want to learn some of it has to be put it to practice.

This a dilemma God faces. Knowledge acted upon opens doors to more knowledge. He could've of made Quran clear and detailed at a certain level of knowledge, but for it to be endless, it has to be written in a way that you put to practice an initial level and then Quran grows and mutates in how you perceive it the more knowledge you gain. Infinite knowledge has to be layered. Quran is layered. It's clear and get's clearer the more it is inwardly traversed. But it is as Quran says only those purifying themselves can truly touch it and none remembers but the possessors of understanding/intellect.

That and what I said about hiding Ali (a) Welayat in plain sight, is also part of the wisdom. It's clear but not to all. And there are reasons.
 
Last edited:

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It's not a claim, it's quoting the Qur'an.
Ethically it maybe the worse evil from Islamic paradigm, but human rights wise from the Islamic paradigm, it is not an evil.

That is government should not punish you for it and you are free to do it.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Not really, since death for apostasy isn't a current issue. Nobody has been killed for apostasy for quite a number of years. Someone like @Link might have some insight into this, though.

A lot of people mix ethics, emotions, human rights, and don't divide between them.

Emotionally we might hate blasphemy against God more than anything. Okay fine.

Ethically, we can argue evil against God's right is the worse evil fine.

Human rights, however, it is not evil, since government should not interfere in this respect. The harms in interfering with freedom of expression of religion is more than the benefit in enforcing. And enforcing religion opens a Pandora's box of evil in itself. Who enforces it? Who determines what is blasphemy or not?

Human rights has to account for diversity in beliefs. If Islamic human rights don't, it's a false religion. But we see verses that encourage some type of secularism where for example Jews are encouraged to judge by their own revelation and not come to Mohammad (s) as that would be hypocritical to their faith.

So we see the model of Islam maybe subscription based secularism. Jews judge by their own books, etc. Not a universal judgment. However some judgments and applications will be universal.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
Ethically it maybe the worse evil from Islamic paradigm, but human rights wise from the Islamic paradigm, it is not an evil.

That is government should not punish you for it and you are free to do it.

The "Islamic paradigm" is to believe in and obey Allah or burn forever. It's stated hundreds of times. That's the ONE AND ONLY "Islamic paradigm". Human rights??????? Nothing could be farther from human rights than the "Islamic paradigm".
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The "Islamic paradigm" is to believe in and obey Allah or burn forever. It's stated hundreds of times. That's the ONE AND ONLY "Islamic paradigm". Human rights??????? Nothing could be farther from human rights than the "Islamic paradigm".
You should read this letter: https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-2-letters-and-sayings/letter-53-order-malik-al-ashtar

Habituate your heart to mercy for the subjects and to affection and kindness for them. Do not stand over them like greedy beasts who feel it is enough to devour them, since they are of two kinds, either your brother in religion or one like you in creation.

The translation says that but original Arabic I would say says "your equal in creation".
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
Emotionally we might hate blasphemy against God more than anything. Okay fine.

The harms in interfering with freedom of expression of religion is more than the benefit in enforcing. And enforcing religion opens a Pandora's box of evil in itself. Who enforces it?

Let's stick for what you stated , i want to argue this.

Can you say hate is effect caused on how you define blasphemy?
So do you hate it, based on how it is defined to you?
And why did you define it with "hate"?

So do you agree that there is a possibility of spontaneuos effect based on cause?

Please be precise when you answer , i want to ask you something important.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Let's stick for what you stated , i want to argue this.

Can you say hate is effect caused on how you define blasphemy?
So do you hate it, based on how it is defined to you?
And why did you define it with "hate"?

So do you agree that there is a possibility of spontaneuos effect based on cause?

Please be precise when you answer , i want to ask you something important.
Yes. Yes. Because it's evil and negative value is hated in the same positive value (such as patience, and kindness) is loved.

If we do not temper our hate by discipline and mix with it compassion, yes, it can lead to irrational immoral behavior.
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
Yes. Yes. Because it's evil and negative value is hated in the same positive value (such as patience, and kindness) is loved.

If we do not temper our hate by discipline and mix with it compassion, yes, it can lead to irrational immoral behavior.
Wait, you mentioned "in the same"..
How can the values be identical in the same way when the effect is different?
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Wait, you mentioned "in the same"..
How can the values be identical in the same way when the effect is different?
Valuing applied to - = hate (something is negatively valued)
Valuing applied to + = love (something is positively valued)

Been trying to show this to @Bird123 for a long time. I don't know why people think hate is always bad.
 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Human rights has to account for diversity in beliefs.
According to Cicero, the Caliphate would most likely be grouped among the barbarian hordes and thus be deemed subhuman. At common law people have natural rights, not human rights.
 
Top