• 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
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.
That's too technical for my taste.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
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".

That's not from the Qur'an. It's one man's opinion. Dismissed.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
That's not from the Qur'an. It's one man's opinion. Dismissed.
Imam Ali (a) is the speaking Quran. His opinion can't be dismissed per Quran.

But it's verified in Quran when it calls Prophets (a) the brother of their people including expressing the people of Lut (a) who were destroyed as "brothers/brethren of Lut".
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So, you're not denying that the phrase is from the Qur'an?
The wording is a bit off. You almost had it right. The words are "forges a lie against God". It's technically different, as it in context of accusations of Mohammad (s) forging the Quran.
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
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.
Ok , so i can agree with how you compare the evaluation , but the effect is not the same.
You have a problem when they interact;you used "in the same".

Also , the way you value it is dependable on adjective.
What happens if you switch them?

So again , how can you define it as "same value" when the effect is different?

I wanted to explain something with the example of blasphemy, but you used love.

What if you condemn blasphemy for example , does that automatically mean is neccesary to hate it ?

Do you think Condemn and hate should work together?
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Ok , so i can agree with how you compare the evaluation , but the effect is not the same.
You have a problem when they interact;you used "in the same".

Also , the way you value it is dependable on adjective.
What happens if you switch them?

So again , how can you define it as "same value" when the effect is different?

I wanted to explain something with the example of blasphemy, but you used love.

What if you condemn blasphemy for example , does that automatically mean is neccesary to hate it ?

Do you think Condemn and hate should work together?
I think love and hate are part of the same coin. It's the evaluating component. To be true to value, we have to love positive value and hate negative value. Hate and love are opposites, but that's expected way, doesn't mean one is right the other is wrong. It means they are such a delicate matter that we have to be very careful on how we value. We must base on truth as best as possible.

This is why love needs guidance. Without it, humans will love chaotically and hate chaotically. Guidance is needed so we don't love chaotically per whims and hate chaotically per whims.

Hate needs guidance too since it's the other side of coin. If we love everything equally the same, we been unjust to the honorable good by equating them to the evil. This is not fair at all.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What if you condemn blasphemy for example , does that automatically mean is neccesary to hate it ?
Yes. But, it doesn't mean ignore everything else that a person might have that is positive. God's relationship to his creation he will deal with them. Our relationship is our relationship.

Imam Jaffar (a) says in introduction to "lantern of the path":

The roots of conduct have four aspects: conduct with Allah, conduct with the self, conduct with creation (i.e. people), and conduct with this world. Each of these aspects is based upon seven principles, just as there are seven principles of conduct with Allah: giving Him His due, keeping His limits, being thankful for His gift, being content with His decree, being patient with His trials, glorifying His sanctity, and yearning for Him.

The seven principles of conduct with the self are fear, striving, enduring harm, spiritual discipline, seeking truthfulness and sincerity, withdrawing the self from what it loves, and binding it in poverty (faqr).

The seven principles of conduct with creation are forbearance, forgiveness, humility, generosity, compassion, good counsel, justice and fairness.

The seven principles of conduct with this world are being content with what is at hand, preferring what is available to what is not, abandoning the quest for the elusive, hating overabundance, choosing abstinence (zuhd), knowing the evils of this world and abandoning any desire for it, and negating its dominance.

When all these qualities are found in one person, he is then one of Allah's elite, one of His close bondsman and friends (awliya')


My (Link's) comments: a person might have conduct with three of these perfectly for example a Buddhist might have the three of these perfect, but lack seven principles with God. A person might have some of each.

Hate to be expanded upon requires a different type of hate for the type of act. While I said + - really, goodness is beauty and evil is ugliness, and so there are different type of hates towards ugliness and different type of love towards different beauty.
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
I think love and hate are part of the same coin. It's the evaluating component. To be true to value, we have to love positive value and hate negative value. Hate and love are opposites, but that's expected way, doesn't mean one is right the other is wrong. It means they are such a delicate matter that we have to be very careful on how we value. We must base on truth as best as possible.

This is why love needs guidance. Without it, humans will love chaotically and hate chaotically. Guidance is needed so we don't love chaotically per whims and hate chaotically per whims.

Hate needs guidance too since it's the other side of coin. If we love everything equally the same, we been unjust to the honorable good by equating them to the evil. This is not fair at all.
That's where we differ,I think they split ways when they are caused from the source.
They can interact with guidence , but they don't have to , love is not dependable on hate.
So remember , hate is producced(doesn't have to) as negative effect of love.
So to know what is wrong , first you have to know what is wright , am i wrong?

To be true to value , we have to love positive value and condemn negative value.

Don't you think it is better to phrase it like this?

So is it not better to be perfectly guided in love and to avoid interaction with anything negative?

I'm not arguing your "good in evil" guidence and i am not saying it's wrong , i just avoid the neccesity for that.

For example , in Christianity we condemn hate , regardless of how it's justified.Inside/Oudside doesn't matter
And it stops with condemn.

I can assume that you have read the NT , and you know this.
Jesus condems such state of mind.


If the oposite says i respect your faith , but i don't respect your religion , would that produce hate in any Muslim or do you think that is reasonable and respectfull to say from the oposite site?
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Praising something, without love, doesn't mean much. Condemning, something without hate, will inevitably lead to hypocrisy and you will act to the evil.
 

Bird123

Well-Known Member
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.
Perhaps, there is something you are missing? Will hate really return the Best results? Many have learned that the price for Hate is always too high.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!
 

Dimi95

Χριστός ἀνέστη
Praising something, without love, doesn't mean much. Condemning, something without hate, will inevitably lead to hypocrisy and you will act to the evil.
Vague

You are consistent on love to be depandent of hate in every explanation you give.
So when i condemn killing , does that mean that i am hypocrite, and that i will act on that?

Why Condemn and hate must interact with each other , when you can avoid hate?
 
Last edited:

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Vague

You are consistent on love to be depandent of hate in every explanation you give.
So when i condemn killing , does that mean that i am hypocrite, and that i will act on that?

Why Condemn and hate must interact with each other , when you can avoid hate?
If you didn't hate murder more then minor sins you do, what do you think prevents it? In case of murder, a person may fear jail or find no benefit. So maybe it's not the best example.

So for crimes when there is benefit. For example, take fornication or cheating on wife. That might be pleasurable and there are no real consequences in the law in the West. If you didn't hate it, you would probably eventually do it. If it's just because it's wrong, then you probably do minor sins that are wrong.

What separates major sins is that amount of negative we see in it, but that is spiritual, so on the emotional side, it's the amount of hate. This is why society even has grading for sins on severity.
 
Last edited:

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
No, "telling a lie concerning God" doesn't quote the Quran.

In post 124 you said:

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."


No, it does not.
- 29:68 - "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him?"
- 39:32 - "Who, then, doth more wrong than one who utters a lie concerning Allah, and rejects the Truth when it comes to him."
- It is implied in hundreds of verses such as 2:39 in which rejection of Allah's message is an automatic ticket to hell - "those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire", and 8:55 - "the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him."

And now we're at the point where you pretend these doesn't qualify. Go for it.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In post 124 you said:

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."


No, it does not.
- 29:68 - "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him?"
- 39:32 - "Who, then, doth more wrong than one who utters a lie concerning Allah, and rejects the Truth when it comes to him."
- It is implied in hundreds of verses such as 2:39 in which rejection of Allah's message is an automatic ticket to hell - "those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire", and 8:55 - "the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him."

And now we're at the point where you pretend these doesn't qualify. Go for it.
The "invent" is similar to "forge", but it didn't say tell (qala) a lie regarding God, but forges/fabricates a lie. You have to keep in mind the context that Mohammad (s) is accused as forging a lie against God.

The word "Aftara" is a bit stronger, in that, it means you go out of your way to attribute to God. An example is regarding halal and haram. If a person is mistaken, it's not treated as forging a lie attributed to God, but if you are a scholar and you attribute halal and haram without knowledge, it's treated as forging a lie.

It's subtle, but there is a difference.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
No, "telling a lie concerning God" doesn't quote the Quran.

In post 124 you said:

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."


No, it does not.

- 29:68 - "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him?"
- 39:32 - "Who, then, doth more wrong than one who utters a lie concerning Allah, and rejects the Truth when it comes to him."
- It is implied in hundreds of verses such as 2:39 in which rejection of Allah's message is an automatic ticket to hell - "those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire", and 8:55 - "the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him."

And now we're at the point where you pretend these don't qualify. Go for it.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Perhaps, there is something you are missing? Will hate really return the Best results? Many have learned that the price for Hate is always too high.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!
The best results aren't happening. That ship has set sailed. There is only salvaging now what we can.
 
Top