Blog Home Member's Area  AastanaBlog: AASTANA.COM 

Join AASTANABLOG
Share your Quranic thoughts, research and knowledge with other's.
It's free, easy and only takes a minute.
Sign up Now

TRANSLATION OF QURAN
BY DR. QAMAR ZAMAN
Translation Status
آیات
سورۃ
نمبر
1-7 الفَاتِحَة -1
1-286 البَقَرَة -2
1-200 آل عِمرَان -3
1-176 النِّسَاء -4
1-120 المَائدة -5
1-165 الاٴنعَام -6
1-206 الاٴعرَاف -7
1-75 الاٴنفَال -8
1-129 التّوبَة -9
1-109 یُونس -10
1-123 هُود -11
1-111 یُوسُف -12
1-43 الرّعد -13
1-52 إبراهیم -14
1-99 الحِجر -15
1-128 النّحل -16
1-111 بنیٓ اسرآئیل / الإسرَاء -17
1-110 الکهف -18
1-98 مَریَم -19
1-135 طٰه -20
1-112 الاٴنبیَاء -21
1-78 الحَجّ -22
1-118 المؤمنون -23
1-64 النُّور -24
1-77 الفُرقان -25
1-227 الشُّعَرَاء -26
1-93 النَّمل -27
1-88 القَصَص -28
1-69 العَنکبوت -29
1-60 الرُّوم -30
1-34 لقمَان -31
1-30 السَّجدَة -32
1-73 الاٴحزَاب -33
1-54 سَبَإ -34
1-45 فَاطِر -35
1-83 یسٓ -36
1-182 الصَّافات -37
1-88 صٓ -38
1-75 الزُّمَر -39
1-85 المؤمن / غَافر -40
1-54 حٰمٓ السجدة / فُصّلَت -41
1-54 القَمَر -54
Read Now


»«
ISLAM
BELIEFS
Add Your QuestionView More QuestionsEmail this DiscussionPrinter Friendly View
Dhulqarnain, Can we follow the injeel and Torah of today?
Add Your Comments  Question by: NARGIS-BADSHAH-SALAMAT On 06 June 2011
Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum to Nargis and All,  
 
***Dhulqarnain, Can we follow the injeel and Torah of today?***  
 
If you mean follow as in take them along with Al-Quran for guidance, then the answer is no, to wit:  
 
5:48 And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a GUARDIAN over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed…  
 
17:9 Surely this Quran guides to that which is most upright…  
 
The above two ayats show the superiority of Al-Quran as a guide to anything before it. However, Allah has commanded those who trust to refer back to prior scriptures in order to establish His Truth. For example 7:157:  
 
7:157 Those who follow the Messenger-Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel. He enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and prohibits for them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were on them. So those who believe in him and honour him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him — these are the successful.  
 
 
In 7:157, Allah is telling the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) that certainly they have proof of the coming of the Last Prophet, because it is stated in their scriptures, to wit:  
 
From the Torah:  
 
Deuteronomy 18:17-19 And the LORD said unto me [Moses], They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.  
 
 
From the Injeel:  
 
John 16:13 -15 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.  
 
The above Bible verses from both the Old and New Testaments tell forth the coming of the Last Prophet. He is described as:  
 
1. words would be put in his mouth (not words that he would utter of his own).  
 
2. he would speak the words just as he was commanded.  
 
3. that God would be the one to put the words in his mouth and command him.  
 
4. he would guide, not as a duty, as a result of speaking the words which would be put in his mouth by God  
 
5. he would speak only The Truth, because the words be from God.  
 
So while there is no following of the Torah and Injeel, we are allowed to reference those past scriptures to prove a Quranic statement.  
 
In the following ayat the Last Prophet is commanded to refer to the Torah and Injeel:  
 
43:45 And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before thee: Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped besides the Beneficent?  
 
Unless the Last Prophet was allowed to refer back to the Torah and Injeel, he would not been able to answer the above question in 43:45.  
 
I hope this addressed your question.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum to Nargis and All,  
 
***Dhulqarnain, Can we follow the injeel and Torah of today?***  
 
If you mean follow as in take them along with Al-Quran for guidance, then the answer is no, to wit:  
 
5:48 And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a GUARDIAN over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed…  
 
17:9 Surely this Quran guides to that which is most upright…  
 
The above two ayats show the superiority of Al-Quran as a guide to anything before it. However, Allah has commanded those who trust to refer back to prior scriptures in order to establish His Truth. For example 7:157:  
 
7:157 Those who follow the Messenger-Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel. He enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and prohibits for them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were on them. So those who believe in him and honour him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him — these are the successful.  
 
 
In 7:157, Allah is telling the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) that certainly they have proof of the coming of the Last Prophet, because it is stated in their scriptures, to wit:  
 
From the Torah:  
 
Deuteronomy 18:17-19 And the LORD said unto me [Moses], They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.  
 
 
From the Injeel:  
 
John 16:13 -15 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.  
 
The above Bible verses from both the Old and New Testaments tell forth the coming of the Last Prophet. He is described as:  
 
1. words would be put in his mouth (not words that he would utter of his own).  
 
2. he would speak the words just as he was commanded.  
 
3. that God would be the one to put the words in his mouth and command him.  
 
4. he would guide, not as a duty, as a result of speaking the words which would be put in his mouth by God  
 
5. he would speak only The Truth, because the words be from God.  
 
So while there is no following of the Torah and Injeel, we are allowed to reference those past scriptures to prove a Quranic statement.  
 
In the following ayat the Last Prophet is commanded to refer to the Torah and Injeel:  
 
43:45 And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before thee: Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped besides the Beneficent?  
 
Unless the Last Prophet was allowed to refer back to the Torah and Injeel, he would not been able to answer the above question in 43:45.  
 
I hope this addressed your question.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  

Comments by: moazzam On 07 June 2011
Dear Dhulqarnain ! Salam.The pre requisite to seek guidance from this Alkitab is “to put the man written history” aside.  
Please read the following Quranic terminologies before going to involve in further discussion. Implement these following given sense of the terminologies in the verses under question.  
Remember Allah never recognizes the man made sects/religions, rather address the characters(individually / collectively) in each era.So find out the characters with their symptoms/attributes written in Quran.  
YAHOOD: - The root is HOOD (HA, WA, DAL), HADU, MAHWIDU.  
Meaning is Singer, stage artist the aim of their life is just to enjoy and create enjoyment activities in this world.  
NASARAA: - The people who prefers to live easy way of life and do not produce any resistance to adopt new style/ fashion (they mold them self according to the current situations)  
SAABI: - The people having their aim & goal of life just to avail their posh living (like elites).  
 
MAJOOS: - The root is “JAAS” (jeem,alif,seen) the word “JASOOS, TAJASSAS, are also derived from this root.  
Meaning is the research oriented people their aim is just to explore new things and theories in their societies.  
MASIEH: - This is the attribute of a man who speaks politely, logically and fluently (while presenting arguments to convince the people), therefore Prophet EISA also called MASIEH due to this attribute see verses 4/171,4/157/3/45. A man who travel place to place therefore called Masieh as well.  
UZAIR: - A leader-like man having the quality to manage the majority of people around him  
ABNAA ULLAH: - The people who deserve domination in society (to rule the people)  
AHL-E-KITAB = the people holding divine message in their hands.  
BANI ISRAIL = the people having written divine scripture in their hands.(driven from the word “ISRAA” the character of a nation who followed up(asri be ibadi) with Rasool, having divine scripture in hand),the detailed attributes/mentality of the character “bani israeel” could be seen in Quran.  
QURAN:- A book which is read abundantly.  
Furqan:- A book which differentiate Right from Wrong.  
INJEEL :- The book which gives glad tidings (for prosperity).  
TAURAH :- The book of laws (where DO AND DON’TS are described.  
ALKITAB :- The book beyond time and space having TAURAH,INJEEL,QURAN,ZABOOR,SUHAF,ALWAH,ROOH.  
For more details plz go to the link provided http://www.aastana.com/blog/BlogMember.asp?RP=6&UID=43#Rep

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 June 2011Report Abuse
***Dear Dhulqarnain ! Salam.The pre requisite to seek guidance from this Alkitab is “to put the man written history” aside. Please read the following Quranic terminologies before going to involve in further discussion. Implement these following given sense of the terminologies in the verses under question. Remember Allah never recognizes the man made sects/religions, rather address the characters(individually / collectively) in each era.So find out the characters with their symptoms/attributes written in Quran.***  
 
Four things:  
 
1. Why would you assume that I'm not already familiar with those terms?  
 
2. I'm not referencing "the man written history" I'm referencing Al-Quran.  
 
3. And here's the main point...why don't you simply address the question at hand as I have done? Your reply may have addressed a different question, but not the one presented at the moment.  
 
4. What would you do had a Christian queried you about 7:157, how would you have, via Al-Kitab, answered that query? Well, at least, now you how to. :D  
 
Listen, no more condescension...just address please the questions, thanks.  
 
Dhulqaranain-

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 07 June 2011Report Abuse
heyyy sorry to interfere in this affair but as i said, i cant suffer alone by thinking, have to argggh others too :D  
 
 
***1. Why would you assume that I'm not already familiar with those terms? ***  
 
I think he assumed that because you refered to John and Deutronomy to confirm 7:157- maybe he thought you are using the terminologies of AL Injeel and AL Toraiti to mean Deut and John. Which is not written in the Quran, but it is ASSUMED that Al Injeel and Al torait is the old and new testament (the one you refered to). Moazzam please dont correct me if im wrong, otherwise ill correct you when your right haha  
 
***2. I'm not referencing "the man written history" I'm referencing Al-Quran.***  
 
***In 7:157, Allah is telling the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) that certainly they have proof of the coming of the Last Prophet, because it is stated in their scriptures, to wit: ****
 
 
:P:P:P I know youll kill me, but ill play dead long before haha, but ....there is always a but,,,,, Can you please refer to the Quran where it is written that people of the book are strictly Jews and Christians? If people of the book are jews and christians, what does nasara, AL nasara , Yahood and AL yahood means?  
 
To me, Quran alone would mean that ANYTHING claimed about the book, is explained through the book. The book have to confirm every "assumption" if there is any.  
 
I have tried to explalin my thoughts through words, and i feel like poet:D Very soon you all will ask for my autograph, even though its hard to understand my "poetry" hihihihi :D

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 June 2011Report Abuse
***heyyy sorry to interfere in this affair but as i said, i cant suffer alone by thinking, have to argggh others too :D***  
 
No interference at all. Your input is very much valued and appreciated.  
 
***I think he assumed that because you refered to John and Deutronomy to confirm 7:157- maybe he thought you are using the terminologies of AL Injeel and AL Toraiti to mean Deut and John.***  
 
Ayat 7:157 is confirming that the prophecy concerning the coming of the Last Prophet can be found in both The Torah (Old Test.) and The Gospel/Injeel (New Test.). Remember now, Al-Quran is the…Reminder!  
 
***Which is not written in the Quran, but it is ASSUMED that Al Injeel and Al torait is the old and new testament (the one you refered to). Moazzam please dont correct me if im wrong, otherwise ill correct you when your right haha***  
 
DHULQARNAIN: “ I'm not referencing "the man written history" I'm referencing Al-Quran. In 7:157, Allah is telling the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) that certainly they have proof of the coming of the Last Prophet, because it is stated in their scriptures, to wit:”  
 
***To me, Quran alone would mean that ANYTHING claimed about the book, is explained through the book. The book has to confirm every "assumption" if there is any.***  
 
Remember now that--The Torah and the Injeel are part of Al-Kitab and both are qara’a-s/reading, however, Al-Quran is ahmad/more worthy of praise than the preceding qara’a-s and is guardian over them as well. Al-Quran is also ahwam/the most upright. Al-Quran, at times, does go outside of itself as evidenced by 7:157 and 43:44 (which can only be answered by referring back to the other qara’a-s which are from Allah not hadiths/histories of men).  
 
***I have tried to explalin my thoughts through words, and i feel like poet:D Very soon. :P:P:P I know youll kill me, but ill play dead long before haha, but ....there is always a but,,,,, Can you please refer to the Quran where it is written that people of the book are strictly Jews and Christians? If people of the book are jews and christians, what does nasara, AL nasara , Yahood and AL yahood means?***  
 
Nasara means helpers(followers of Jesus, who were also Jews), and yahood means guided ones ( the Jews felt they were guided as they had inherited the Torah/Law.  
 
Ayat 5:44 shows the Torah refers to Jews/yahood:  
 
5:44 Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves judged for those who were Jews, and the masters of Divine knowledge and the doctors, because they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and do not take a small price for My communications; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.  
 
Ayat 9:30 shows the nasara to be Christians, as they say--Allah has a son:  
 
9:30 And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!  
 
Ayat 2:113 shows that both the Jews/yahood and Christians/nasara use the same book—Bible.  
 
2:113 And the Jews say: The Christians do not follow anything (good) and the Christians say: The Jews do not follow anything (good) while they recite the (same) Book. Even thus say those who have no knowledge, like to what they say; so Allah shall judge between them on the day of resurrection in what they differ.  
 
Here’s the point which neither you nor Moazzam addressed,…if a Jew or Christian questioned you about 7:157, that is, where in their respective qara’a-s does it mention, according to Al-Quran, the Last Prophet being spoken of. What would you say? How would you defend your revelation from Allah and effectively give dawah to them?  
 
I do have one criticism about some of the members here and it this, some need to know the difference between critical thinking and over-thinking. Just a thought.  
 
Looking forward to your replies.  
 

Comments by: moazzam On 08 June 2011
 
Brother Dhulqarnain! In fact the sense of the Quranic terminologies used in the verses under question 5:44, 9/30, 2/113, 7/157 has not been taken into account, which I posted you in my previous post (which is most suitable sense as per tasreef al ayat and befitted according to the subject contexts,lexicon).  
Remember, there will definitely be different view point to understand the Quran which based on myth, dogmas, man written history (ultimately drags to a Religion, the futile rituals)  
I personally request you, brother Dhulqarnain; please go through all the relevant terminologies in this regard, ie YAHHOD,NASARA,ABNA ALLAH, UZAIR, to get my view point cleared.  
Mind! Injeel,Taurah, yahood,nasara,bani Israeel, Ahl e Kitab etc been used in history (as a jews, christians, Bible) are not the same which has been used in Quran, rather the attributes/characters being the generic templates.  

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 08 June 2011Report Abuse
Hello there,  
 
Dhulqarnain:- Ayat 7:157 is confirming that the prophecy concerning the coming of the Last Prophet can be found in both The Torah (Old Test.) and The Gospel/Injeel (New Test.). Remember now, Al-Quran is the…Reminder!  
 
ME:- thats the problem, Quran mentioned ALtorah and ALinjeel, NOT old testament and new testament.  
 
Quran did not say Old and new testament is Al Injeel and Al torah, it is ASSUMED al injeel and al toraiti is old and new testament because history say so.  
 
So is the Old and New Testament Injeel and Torah because it is said they mentioned S Mohammed in their scripture? If this is the logic, then lets have a look here  
 
"The prophecy containing Prophet Muhammad by name is found in Prati Sarg Parv III: 3, 3, Verse 5."  
 
The translation of Verses 5-27 (Sanskrit text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv III: 3, 3) is presented below from the work of Dr. Vidyarthi.  
 
“A malechha (belonging to a foreign country and speaking foreign language) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions. His name will be Mahamad. Raja (Bhoj) after giving this Mahadev Arab (of angelic disposition) a bath in the 'Panchgavya' and the Ganges water, (i.e. purging him of all sins) offered him the presents of his sincere devotion and showing him all reverence said, 'I make obeisance to thee.' 'O Ye! the pride of mankind, the dweller in Arabia, Ye have collected a great force to kill the Devil and you yourself have been protected from the malechha opponents (idol worshipers, pagans).' ‘O Ye! the image of the Most Pious God the biggest Lord, I am a slave to thee, take me as one lying on thy feet.'  
 
http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/prophhs.html
 
 
Now if a book that mention the prophet becomes Injeel or Torait , the Al Injeel and Al Torait Quran is talking about, then wecan find it here too.
 
 

Comments by: Nargis On 08 June 2011Report Abuse
Nasara means helpers(followers of Jesus, who were also Jews), and yahood means guided ones (  
just thoughts to reflect upon,  
 
 
 
If Nasara means HELPERS and Yahood means GUIDED ONES  
 
how is this word synonymous with  
 
Jew (n.) Look up Jew at Dictionary.com  
late 12c. (in plural, giwis), from Anglo-Fr. iuw, from O.Fr. giu, from L. Judaeum (nom. Judaeus), from Gk. Ioudaios, from Aramaic jehudhai (Heb. y'hudi) "Jew," from Y'hudah "Judah," lit. "celebrated," name of Jacob's fourth son and of the tribe descended from him. Replaced O.E. Iudeas "the Jews." Originally, "Hebrew of the kingdom of Judah." Jews' harp "simple mouth harp" is from 1580s, earlier Jews' trump (1540s); the connection with Jewishness is obscure. Jew-baiting first recorded 1853, in reference to Ger. Judenhetze. In uneducated times, inexplicable ancient artifacts were credited to Jews, based on the biblical chronology of history: e.g. Jews' money (1570s) "Roman coins found in England." In Greece, after Christianity had erased the memory of classical glory, ruins of pagan temples were called "Jews' castles."  
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=jew  
 
Christian  
 
Christian Look up Christian at Dictionary.com  
O.E. cristen, from Church L. christianus, from Eccles. Gk. christianos, from Christos (see Christ). First used in Antioch, according to Acts xi.25-26. Christian Science is from 1863.  
 
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Christian  
 
I havnt replied to your question because have to study 7:157 more. The orthodox translations are not to be used because the replaced Namaaz with Salaat, soum with fasting, Malaika with angels and so on. They are using history and hadith to translate and give other meanings to the words in the Quran. thats how the replaced the attributed, character the Quran mention, to names and titles. Quran used a word with a MEANING, its a description of something, whic is a description on whatever that falls into that description. Thats what we try to do, to find the true meaning so we can separate salt from water ::)  
 
pheew, im busy all day,,,, :(:(:(

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 08 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Moazzam,  
 
***YAHOOD: - The root is HOOD (HA, WA, DAL), HADU, MAHWIDU.  
Meaning is Singer, stage artist the aim of their life is just to enjoy and create enjoyment activities in this world. NASARAA: - The people who prefers to live easy way of life and do not produce any resistance to adopt new style/ fashion (they mold them self according to the current situations) ***  
 
have absolutely no idea where you got these definitions from, but they are certainly not the ones Allah is using in his Quran.  
 
I use the following dictionary. It’s a very good resource.  
 
The Dictionary of the Quran by Abdul Mannan Omar. Here’s the link:  
http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Holy-Quran-English-Arabic/dp/0963206796/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1307558511&sr=1-1  
 
Anyway, Jew/yahud is defined as guided ones; return to one’s duty. Christian/nasara is defined as helpers. These definitions absolutely reflect these two parties in Al-Kitab (including Al-Quran). I’ve never heard of the definitions for these two parties that you’re proffering nor are they consistent with Al-Kitab (including Al-Quran).  
 
***Remember, there will definitely be different view point to understand the Quran which based on myth, dogmas, man written history (ultimately drags to a Religion, the futile rituals) I personally request you, brother Dhulqarnain; ***  
 
This concept is new to you, not me. I haven’t offered one shred of “man written history” regarding the question of this thread. I’ve only referenced Al-Kitab PER Allah’s command. I suggest you do the same . Listen, I’m not interested in your point of view, per se, nor should you be interested in my point of view. I’m interested in Allah/Quran point of view. Your entire above statement is nothing but your opinion, conjecture, and pontificating, AND, you have yet to answer the question?!  
 
Here’s the question, rephrased, in an attempt to make it easier for you to comprehend:  
If a person comes to you and identifies himself as a Christian or a Jew and asks you where in his/her respective book can he/she find the prophet mentioned in 7:157, what would be your reply? You would have to answer this question, otherwise, that individual could make mockery of Al-Quran as a book of false claims. Do you understand this?  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 08 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun,  
 
Dhulqarnain:- Ayat 7:157 is confirming that the prophecy concerning the coming of the Last Prophet can be found in both The Torah (Old Test.) and The Gospel/Injeel (New Test.). Remember now, Al-Quran is the…Reminder!  
 
***ME:- thats the problem, Quran mentioned ALtorah and ALinjeel, NOT old testament and new testament. Quran did not say Old and new testament is Al Injeel and Al torah, it is ASSUMED al injeel and al toraiti is old and new testament because history say so.***  
 
Torah is not the Old Testament, it is part of what is referred to by Jews and Christians as The Old Testament, likewise, The Injeel is not the New Testament it is part of what is referred to by Jews and Christians as The New Testament.  
 
***So is the Old and New Testament Injeel and Torah because it is said they mentioned S Mohammed in their scripture? If this is the logic, then lets have a look here***  
 
I’m not certain what you mean here but let me say this, 7:157 is speaking of people who identify themselves as Jews and Christians, because both of these groups refer to what is commonly known as the bible. The same God that revealed Al-Quran, likewise, revealed the Torah and Injeel contained within the bible.  
 
***"The prophecy containing Prophet Muhammad by name is found in Prati Sarg Parv III: 3, 3, Verse 5." The translation of Verses 5-27 (Sanskrit text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv III: 3, 3) is presented below from the work of Dr. Vidyarthi. “A malechha (belonging to a foreign country and speaking foreign language) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions. His name will be Mahamad. Raja (Bhoj) after giving this Mahadev Arab (of angelic disposition) a bath in the 'Panchgavya' and the Ganges water, (i.e. purging him of all sins) offered him the presents of his sincere devotion and showing him all reverence said, 'I make obeisance to thee.' 'O Ye! the pride of mankind, the dweller in Arabia, Ye have collected a great force to kill the Devil and you yourself have been protected from the malechha opponents (idol worshipers, pagans).' ‘O Ye! the image of the Most Pious God the biggest Lord, I am a slave to thee, take me as one lying on thy feet.' ***  
 
This may be true, however, Allah did not REFER us to a Sanskrit text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv or those people. Can you show me in Al-Quran, where Allah mentions by name--Sanskrit text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv? Has Allah, in Al-Quran, confirmed that the text of the Puranas, Prati Sarg Parv, is SCRIPTURE from him? How do you know that it isn’t hadith of some kind? you don’t know. Now, to be true to you, Allah has made it plain that He has told of us some messengers and not others.  
 
10:47 And for every nation there is a messenger…  
 
40:78 And certainly We sent messengers before thee — of them are those We have mentioned to thee and of them are those We have not mentioned to thee…  
 
What you posted here may be what 4:78 is discussing, but you cannot determine that for sure, hence, it is conjecture on your part.  
 
53:28 And they have no knowledge of it; they do not follow anything but conjecture, and surely conjecture does not avail against the truth at all.  
 
Listen, I love reading the Dhammapada and Gospel of Buddha, and, he too, may have been a messenger of Allah, but I cannot make that claim that he was or that he wasn’t I don’t know and neither does anyone else for certain, nor can I claim that the Dhammapada and Gospel of Buddha, are scripture.  
 
What you are bringing up, as I said above, maybe true, however, it does not and cannot disallow what is WRITTEN FOR CERTAIN in Al-Quran. Allah has named Moses who is associated with the Torah and He has named Jesus who is associated with the Injeel. Why do you wish to support what you can’t prove via Al-Quran and support what you can’t prove via Al-Quran. You have things backwards. Where is the logic in that?  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
 
 

Comments by: moazzam On 08 June 2011
 
Dear Dhulqarnain ! Salam.  
Moazzam ! YAHOOD: - The root is HOOD (HA, WA, DAL), HADU, MAHWIDU.  
Meaning is Singer, stage artist the aim of their life is just to enjoy and create enjoyment activities in this world. NASARAA: - The people who prefers to live easy way of life and do not produce any resistance to adopt new style/ fashion (they mold them self according to the current situations).  
Although lexicon and Dictionaries also supporting my stance while providing the sense of quranic term YAHOOD, NASARA even then I like to confirm it by tasreef al ayat from Quran. Please read the verses 5/51—59, and concentrate at verses 5/51 in consolidation with 5/57 the matter will be very cleared to you.  
5/51  
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ الْيَهُودَ وَالنَّصَارَى أَوْلِيَاءَ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءُ بَعْضٍ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمْ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْهُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي  
الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ  
 
5/55  
إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ  
 
5/57  
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُواْ دِينَكُمْ هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ وَالْكُفَّارَ أَوْلِيَاءَ وَاتَّقُ  
واْ اللّهَ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ  
 
5/58  
وَإِذَا نَادَيْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلاَةِ اتَّخَذُوهَا هُزُوًا وَلَعِبًا ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لاَّ يَعْقِلُونَ  
 
5/59  
قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ هَلْ تَنقِمُونَ مِنَّا إِلاَّ أَنْ آمَنَّا  
بِاللّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلُ وَأَنَّ أَكْثَرَكُمْ فَاسِقُونَ  
Dhulqarnain !  
Anyway, Jew/yahud is defined as guided ones; return to one’s duty. Christian/nasara is defined as helpers. These definitions absolutely reflect these two parties in Al-Kitab (including Al-Quran). I’ve never heard of the definitions for these two parties that you’re proffering nor are they consistent with Al-Kitab (including Al-Quran).  
I haven’t offered one shred of “man written history” regarding the question of this thread. I’ve only referenced Al-Kitab PER Allah’s command.  
 
Moazzam! Yes,the lan also defines the “YAHOOD” as guided ones; return to one’s duty. But quran never support this sense at all. My dear; I meant, you are taking the quranic terminologies in the light of man written history.  
 
Dhulqarnain! If a person comes to you and identifies himself as a Christian or a Jew and asks you where in his/her respective book can he/she find the prophet mentioned in 7:157, what would be your reply? You would have to answer this question, otherwise, that individual could make mockery of Al-Quran as a book of false claims. Do you understand this?  
Moazzam! This question in fact reflecting your wrong perception (based on historic ground) of Quranic terminologies “TAURAH,INJEEL, RASOOL UMMEE, AND YAHOOD, NASARA”  
Actually the verse 7:157 is applicable in general to all man kind, please, consolidate the very next verse 5/158 with the said one.  
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 09 June 2011Report Abuse
***Moazzam! Yes,the lan also defines the “YAHOOD” as guided ones; return to one’s duty. But quran never support this sense at all. My dear; I meant, you are taking the quranic terminologies in the light of man written history.***  
 
Good!, we are beginning to find common ground in regard to the definition of yahud.  
Indeed Quran supports me. The yahud viewed themselves as guided ones, precisely because they had the GUIDANCE, The Torah! Reflect on this ayat:  
 
28:49 Say: Then bring some other Book from Allah which is a BETTER GUIDE THAN THESE TWO, I will follow it — if you are truthful.  
 
Given that the Last Prophet had the Quran, what other guidance is being referred to in this ayat? Well, it can ONLY be the Torah! The yahud considered themselves to be guided, as I said a moment ago, because they had a book of guidance from Allah—the Torah. The yahud were not meant to stay with the Torah in perpetuity, hence, the prophecy at Deuteronomy 18:18, hence, THE REMINDER of the prophecy in 7:157. I mean this should be obvious now, my friend.  
 
Dhulqarnain:If a person comes to you and identifies himself as a Christian or a Jew and asks you where in his/her respective book can he/she find the prophet mentioned in 7:157, what would be your reply? You would have to answer this question, otherwise, that individual could make mockery of Al-Quran as a book of false claims. Do you understand this?  
 
***Moazzam! This question in fact reflecting your wrong perception (based on historic ground) of Quranic terminologies “TAURAH,INJEEL, RASOOL UMMEE, AND YAHOOD, NASARA” ***  
 
Listen, just saying that I have “wrong perception/terminology” is not proof of anything, Moazzam. You’ve yet o explain why ayat 7:157 CLEARLY is telling The People of the Book that the Last Prophet is mentioned in their books. You cannot continue to skirt this vital point/issue. How would you defend this ayat if Jews and Christians challenged you on it.  
 
***Actually the verse 7:157 is applicable in general to all man kind, please, consolidate the very next verse 5/158 with the said one.***  
 
If the ayat was applicable to all mankind, then Allah would have used the term—INSAN, but he didn’t. He was specific and used yahud and nasara. All yudud and nasara are INSAN, but not all of INSAN is yahud or nasara.  
 
Come on, you have to see this this simple concept by now. And no, I’m not using wrong terminology nor is my perception impaired regarding 7:157. At some point you’re going to have to confront this ayat properly, and the starting point was your admitting that yahud is defined as—guided ones. They could only make that claim, as People of the Book, if they were in possession of guidance--the Torah--which they were.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: moazzam On 10 June 2011
Dear Dhulqarnain ! Please re -read my previous posts time and again,)hope matter will be cleared to you, (it seems that you have over looked my post related to the "definition of ALKITAB" )  
Yes,the lan also defines the “YAHOOD” as guided ones; return to one’s duty. But quran never support this sense at all. You are taking these quranic terminologies in the light of man written history, ( the yahhod o nasara as a sect/religion and Taurah/Injeel as a separate book other than Alkitab)whereas Quran describing the YAHOOD O NASARA as the character's attributes, beyond time and space and Taurah/Injeel as a part of this Alkitab.Also there in no any reference in Quran which indicate the LAST RASOOL(the end), RATHER THE PROCESS OF COMING OF RASOOL WILL BE CONTINUED TILL THE LAST DAY.  
You might see these characters presently,in any sect of the Muslim Ummah.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 10 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN, MOAZZAM,  
 
 
***the yahhod o nasara as a sect/religion and Taurah/Injeel as a separate book other than Alkitab)whereas Quran describing the YAHOOD O NASARA as the character's attributes, beyond time and space and Taurah/Injeel as a part of this Alkitab.***  
 
Ihave no idea what you’re going on about here.  
 
Let me refocus you for a moment and ask you the following series of question.  
 
A) Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past, who identified themselves by the following designations:  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
 
Yes or no.  
 
B) Are there living breathing human being walking around today, who identified themselves by the following designations:  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
 
Yes or no.  
 
If he answer is yes, then what term does Allah use, in Al-Quran, for these people?  
 
C) Do you believe that Moses and Jesus were actual living breathing human beings?  
 
Yes or no?  
 
If the answer is yes, did each them receive a book from Allah? Yes or no?  
 
If the answer is yes, what were the names of the books they were given?  
 
Listen, Torah and Injeel are separate qara’a-s, however, as revealed qara’a-s they, along with Al-Quran given to the Last Prophet, form Al-Kitab. There’s no mystery here.  
 
***Also there in no any reference in Quran which indicate the LAST RASOOL(the end), RATHER THE PROCESS OF COMING OF RASOOL WILL BE CONTINUED TILL THE LAST DAY. You might see these characters presently,in any sect of the Muslim Ummah.***  
 
If you were paying attention, which you are not it seems, you would have noticed that I’ve never written anything about the Last Messenger; I’ve written, time and again---the Last Prophet not the Last Messenger.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dulqarnain-  

Comments by: moazzam On 11 June 2011
Brother Dhulqarnain, Salam.  
Moazzam! The religious intrigues generated the yahhod o nasara as a sect/religion, and Taurah/Injeel as a separate book other than Alkitab) in the history,whereas Quran describing the YAHOOD O NASARA as the character's attributes, beyond time and space and Taurah/Injeel as a part of this Alkitab.***  
 
Dhulqarnain ! Let me refocus you for a moment and ask you the following series of question.  
 
A) Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past(Before “ALKITAB” which is beyond time and space), who identified themselves by the following designations?  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
Moazzam! Answer to both is NO  
Remember Quran described the characters of the people those bears the specific attributes(as I explained in previous postes) will be called YAHOOD O NASARA in any era.  
B) Are there living breathing human being walking around today who identified themselves by the following designations:  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
Moazzam ! Answer to both is YES.  
Remember! The religious intrigues used these terms to distinguish themselves ( to get some benefits) from the general public.  
If the answer is yes, then what term does Allah use, in Al-Quran, for these people?  
Moazzam ! Zaalien (detraked), Kafiroon  
 
C) Do you believe that Moses and Jesus (discussed in Quran) were actual living breathing human beings?  
Moazzam ! No  
REMEMBER! The rasool who posses the attributes of Quranic character Moses, Eisa (jesus) or any other one (described in Quran) all were/will be given the same book that is “ALKITAB” therefore the followers called AHL AL KITAB..  
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 11 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM, MOAZZAM,  
 
 
***A) Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past(Before “ALKITAB” which is beyond time and space), who identified themselves by the following designations?***  
 
In altering my question and then answering your own question is rude and arrogant. By altering the question you simply admitted outright that your position is wrong and indefensible. It is insulting to me what you did and very disingenuous of you. I thought you were better than that, apparently, I was wrong. Please answer the question I presented to you, thanks.  
 
A) Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past, who identified themselves by the following designations:  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
 
Yes or no.  
 
To help you with this question let me assure of the fact that the answer is yes, to wit:  
 
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/whojew1.html  
 
ORIGIN OF THE WORDS "JEW" AND "JUDAISM": Originally, the term Yehudi referred specifically to members of the tribe of Judah, as distinguished from the other tribes of Israel. However, after the death of King Solomon, the nation of Israel was split into two kingdoms: the kingdom of Judah and the kingdom of Israel (I Kings 12; II Chronicles 10). After that time, the word Yehudi could properly be used to describe ANYONE from the kingdom of Judah, which included the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, as well as scattered settlements from other tribes. The most obvious biblical example of this usage is in Esther 2:5, where Mordecai is referred to as both a Yehudi and a member of the tribe of Benjamin.  
In the 6th century B.C.E., the kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyria and the ten tribes were exiled from the land (II Kings 17), leaving only the tribes in the kingdom of Judah remaining to carry on Abraham's heritage. These people of the kingdom of Judah were GENERALLY KNOWN TO THEMSELVES AND TO OTHER NATIONS AS YEHUDIM(JEWS) and that NAME CONTINUES to be USED TODAY.  
 
You can call this man written history all you wish, but this IS the HISTORY and the PRESENT!, like it or not. You want to discount what allah says and what man writes in toto. You're making yourself into a god. Listen, you’re really making yourself look silly, seriously.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: B) Are there living breathing human being walking around today who identified themselves by the following designations:  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
 
***Moazzam ! Answer to both is YES. ***  
 
Thank you, the answer is a resounding yes  
 
*** Remember!The religious intrigues used these terms to distinguish themselves ( to get some benefits) from the general public***  
 
This is unnecessary conjecture so let’s just dispense with it and stick to the facts.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: If the answer is yes, then what term does Allah use, in Al-Quran, for these people?  
 
***Moazzam ! Zaalien (detraked), Kafiroon***  
 
Fine, but does Allah use the specific terms Jew (yehud) and Christian (nasara) for those who…allegedly follow the Torah and Injeel, respectively? Yes or no?  
 
Before you answer please take into account what you Lord says on the manner:  
 
2:113 And the Jews [al-yahoodu] say, The Christians [al-nnasara] follow nothing good, and the Christians say, The Jews follow nothing good, while they recite the (same) Book.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: C) Do you believe that Moses and Jesus were actual living breathing human beings?  
 
***Moazzam ! No***  
 
***REMEMBER! The rasool who posses the attributes of Quranic character Moses, Eisa (jesus) or any other one (described in Quran) all were/will be given the same book that is “ALKITAB” therefore the followers called AHL AL KITAB..***  
 
Oh, so you’re stating before Allah and man that, neither Moses nor Jesus existed as real living breathing human beings, is this really your position?! This is simply astounding to me. Allah, who created you and will give you death and raise you up again, tells you that Moses and Jesus existed as real living breathing human beings, but you’re going to tell us all that He’s wrong?!? Okay, tell us then:  
 
1. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Torah from Allah?  
 
2. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Injeel from Allah?  
 
No double talk and altering my question, thanks.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 11 June 2011Report Abuse
Badshah Salamat say...Salamat,no sorry i mean salaam :D  
 
Dear Dhulqarnain, i think Moazzam is saying that Al kitab have always been here and it is the same message given to every prophet. So if the same Al kitab were given to everyone, like Noh, then what did Al kitab call jews and christians then?  
 
What is a jew? Are the Quran refering to a group that thinks their mother must be jewish or the khazarians converts?  
 
What is a jew, which jewish groups are the Quran refering to, the sephardics or the khazarians,,,,but then, the khazarian jews didnt exist at the time Quran was revealed-......?  
 
and if the mother have been jewish for 250 years,,,then where did the Y chromosome of the "jewish" jews go? Did the Quran include these jews when it talks about jews?  
 
And if we go back, jews and christians follow pagan religions but have given them new names,,,,these stories and sons of God existed before jews and christians hijacked their belief ......What are these people called in the Quran?  
 
Its not only jews who say they are guided ones, hindus and other religious ppl claim the same.....  
 
A suggestion, if you do the break dance,sorry,, i mean break up the words, and dont use the term jew but the guided one, or any other meaning from the dictionary, lets see how the aya then looks :P  
 
Im very tired so have to go now, but ill be back soooooon :D  
 
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 11 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM,  
 
***Dear Dhulqarnain, i think Moazzam is saying that Al kitab have always been here and it is the same message given to every prophet. So if the same Al kitab were given to everyone, like Noh, then what did Al kitab call jews and christians then? ***  
 
A few points:  
 
1. Kitab hasn’t always been here, only Allah is Samad/Eternal.  
 
2. The message is the same only to the extent that each messenger was told to only serve Allah alone (Tauhid) and withdraw from the mushrikeen (Shirk).  
 
6:106 Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord; there is no god but He; and withdraw from the polytheists.  
Remember..shirk is unforgivable at the time of death, hence, hell for the mushrik.  
 
4:48 Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.  
 
4:116 Allah forgiveth not joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right).  
 
As I stated in my prior post, prophets were sent to their respective peoples, hence, they all couldn’t have brought the exact same message to all people. Yes, Al-Quran is a part of Al-Kitab, however, it isn’t exactly the same as Torah and Injeel, because it is the complete revelation to ALL of mankind. You and Moazzam must begin to grasp this essential difference, otherwise, you can just abandon Al-Quran and follow the bible if it’s all the same thing.  
 
***What is a jew? Are the Quran refering to a group that thinks their mother must be jewish or the khazarians converts? What is a jew, which jewish groups are the Quran refering to, the sephardics or the khazarians,,,,but then, the khazarian jews didnt exist at the time Quran was revealed-......? and if the mother have been jewish for 250 years,,,then where did the Y chromosome of the "jewish" jews go? Did the Quran include these jews when it talks about jews?***  
 
Listen, this is important…Allah is referring to people who identify themselves as Jews and Christians and what that means to the Muslim; these the details Allah has provided for you to know. You and Moazzam don’t seem to want to accept this for some reason. If Allah wanted us to know about Khazar or Sephardic etc., then He would provided those details, but He didn’t because it isn’t germane to theirs or your guidance.  
 
***And if we go back, jews and christians follow pagan religions but have given them new names,,,,these stories and sons of God existed before jews and christians hijacked their belief ......What are these people called in the Quran?***  
 
Whatever they were called or how long whatever existed, will not make the terms Jew and Christian disappear from Al-Quran nor the details which Allah has given about these two groups. Why are you and Mazzam having difficulty staying with the details which Allah has provided you? More and more you are drifting towards this ayat:  
 
10:15 And when Our clear ayats are recited to them, those who hope not for Our meeting say: BRING A QURAN OTHER THAN THIS OR CHANGE IT Say: It does not beseem me that I should change it of myself; I follow nothing but what was revealed to me; surely I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of a mighty day.  
 
***Its not only jews who say they are guided ones, hindus and other religious ppl claim the same.....***  
 
They can claim what they want, but Allah, specifically, addresses those who identify themselves as Jews and Christians. To my knowledge there is no mention of Hindus. Why won’t you and Moazzam accept this?  
 
***A suggestion, if you do the break dance,sorry,, i mean break up the words, and dont use the term jew but the guided one, or any other meaning from the dictionary, lets see how the aya then looks :P***  
 
Remember now, “guided ones” is not a designation which Allah gave those who identify themselves as such. Jews, on their own, took on the name—Jew/guided ones. Allah is simply repeating to Jews and us what they did…not what He did, to wit:  
 
“In the 5th century BCE, the Kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyrian King Sennaherib, and the ten tribes were exiled and lost. The only remaining Israelites were the residents of the Kingdom of Judah, and the term "Yehudi" or "Jew" came to refer to all the Israelites, regardless of their tribal ancestry.”  
 
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/640221/jewish/What-is-the-Meaning-of-the-Name-Jew.htm  
 
Do you see?  
 
Can you, according to Al-Quran, answer the following questions?  
 
1. Do you believe that Moses and Jesus were actual living breathing human beings?  
 
2. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Torah from Allah?  
 
3. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Injeel from Allah?  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: moazzam On 12 June 2011
Dear Dhulqarnain! Salam.  
 
Dhulqarnain! In altering my question and then answering your own question is rude and arrogant. By altering the question you simply admitted outright that your position is wrong and indefensible. It is insulting to me what you did and very disingenuous of you. I thought you were better than that, apparently, I was wrong.  
 
Moazzam Dear Brother , PAST IS PAST, I did it more specific by putting in brackets and rearranged as under , so as you may understand my stance more conveniently. I replied the rearranged question.  
Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past (Before “ALKITAB” which is beyond time and space), who identified themselves by the following designations?  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
Moazzam! Answer to both is NO  
 
REMEMBER! The rasool who posses the attributes of Quranic character Moses, Eisa (jesus) or any other one (described in Quran) all were/will be given the same book that is “ALKITAB” therefore the followers called AHL AL KITAB..***  
 
Dhulqarnain! Oh, so you’re stating before Allah and man that, neither Moses nor Jesus existed as real living breathing human beings, is this really your position?  
.  
This is simply astounding to me. Allah, who created you and will give you death and raise you up again, tells you that Moses and Jesus existed as real living breathing human beings, but you’re going to tell us all that He’s wrong?!? Okay, tell us then:  
Moazzam ! Yes, these are all generic templates (Qases) which possess eternal guidance for man kind beyond time and space.  
 
Dhulqarnain! 1. What specific prophet-messenger…received the Torah from Allah?  
 
2. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Injeel from Allah?  
Moazzam! My dear, the concept of “ALKITAB” is not clear to you yet. A thorough study of my previous relevant posts is pre requisite for further discussion.  
Any how, happy to see your vigilance, to seek the truth.  
 

Comments by: naeem sheikh On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Brother Moazzam: I really appreciate your hard work, indeed, made me clear about the concept of Alkitab and Qases(the generic templates), especially the quranic term YAHOOD AND NASARA. May Allah bless you with more wisdom.  
Especial thanks to Brother Dhulqarnain who helped me to analyze the matter from different angles, I had also been stuck at the same queries as brother Dhulqarnain raised typical points. He is a wise and knowledge worthy, gentle man.  

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
 
They can claim what they want, but Allah, specifically, addresses those who identify themselves as Jews and Christians. To my knowledge there is no mention of Hindus. Why won’t you and Moazzam accept this? Dhulqarnain  
 
:D  
 
Why we casnt accept this? Because we see that the same al kitab is given to every Rusool, because the rules and kalimaats are the same. Its USE is different dependent on whats needed in the society, then it operates as zaboor, Torat Injeel Furqqan and Quran. But it is the same book.  
 
and the SAME book given to EVERYONE, and it is the SAME BOOK which will be given to next gerations,,,,,then its rules and commands are not bound to specific time or group of people. ITs for EVERYONE who have passed, or to come.  
 
Now, the Quran never said Yahood are the group of people who call themself tribe of yehuda, did it? The Quran never said Al nasara is the group of people that call themself christians, no?  
 
1. What specific prophet-messenger…received the Torah from Allah?  
 
2. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Injeel from Allah?  
 
It is Moses and Eesa, who will recieve Al kitab IN EVERY ERA. It means that Moses and EESA is ATTRIBUTES and not names, so if you have the attribute of Eesa, and you use the Quran as injeel for people whos mentality is based on the belief that they are the guided ones, then YOU are Eesa.  
 
The Quran are talking about human mentality, and how that kind of psychology works on individual and group. For example, yahod is the guided ones, or those who dont take responsibility in life, and develop their mental capacity. That word would describe ANYONE who have that mentality, its not a reference to a group that happens to have this description as a name.  
 
Same is nasara, which is too a description of a mentality and not a name of a group.  
 
Same goes with muslim and momin muttaqi etc, its desciptions of character or achievments by people.  
 
 
 
We dont know the birthnames of the prophet, we know their attribute, the description of their actions, which is achievable for everyone if they follow the right path.  
 
We dont know where the book were found first, we dont know how it was recieved by the first one who observed it, we only know that this book is here and its given to every Moses ,Eesa, Abraham, Yousef and Mohammed of its time....  
 
@ Naeem Sheikh, yes indeed Dhulqanrnain is very wise, i think his questions will help others to understand the concept clearly . Im glad he joined Aastana and contributing to a healthy debate.
 
 

Comments by: naeem sheikh On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
Sister Nargis !Now i am forced to give you the letter of appreciation as well.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN MOAZZAM,  
 
***Moazzam! My dear, the concept of “ALKITAB” is not clear to you yet. A thorough study of my previous relevant posts is pre requisite for further discussion.***  
 
I’m not interested in studying YOUR HADITHS. I’m interested in studying HADITH AL-QURAN.  
 
SECTION (A)  
 
1. ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN AND NOT YOU, what specific prophet-messenger/rasul…received the Torah from Allah?  
 
What was his name?  
 
2. ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN AND NOT YOU, what specific prophet-messenger/rasul…received the Injeel from Allah?  
 
What was his name?  
 
I just want their names. I want NO conjectures OR “beyond time and space”, stuff.  
 
 
*** Moazzam Dear Brother , PAST IS PAST, I did it more specific by putting in brackets and rearranged as under , so as you may understand my stance more conveniently. I replied the rearranged question. Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past (Before “ALKITAB” which is beyond time and space), who identified themselves by the following designations?***  
 
Once again, I humbly request that you answer the question as I presented it to you and not rearrange it to suit yourself. Will you now honor my request this time? If so, then please answer the following:  
 
SECTION (B)  
 
Were there living breathing human beings walking around in the past (and present for that matter) who identified themselves by the following designations?  
 
1. Jews  
 
2. Christians  
 
Just yes or no. I don’t want conjectures or “beyond time and space”, stuff.  
 
Once you answer Sections A and B, we can the move on…step by step…  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUNN ALAIKUM, NAEEM SHEIKH,  
 
Thank you for your kind words.  
 
Dhulqarnaini-

Comments by: aurangzaib On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
Brother Dhulqarnain,  
 
Sorry, I have not been up-to-date with this remarkable thread where you have successfully taken Brother Moazzam and Sis Nargis to task upon their stupefying theories of “Attributes” and “the same Al-Kitab”.  
 
After going through the matter now, I have no hesitation in endorsing your views. I appreciate and second you and I think your very simple questions are not answered by them in a satisfactory way. Their answers symbolized a useless sidetracking and meaningless verbiage.  
 
On both counts mentioned above, our said companions have committed the atrocity of depriving the common Quran learner from an easy understanding of this Divine Book. They have adulterated it and garbled its straightforward narration with complex and intricate philosophy, which stands as nothing but excessive verbal logic in the same way as the “old Mo’tazillahs” are reported by the history as having indulged in, in a big way. The Mo’tazillas, likewise, had been hell bent upon the “attributes” issue and made Allah’s attributes as the main focus of their debates. They succeeded only in causing confusion, rift and disparity in the public, resulting finally in bloodshed and chaos, until they were eventually purged along with their “Attributes” philosophy.  
 
“Al-Kitab” is a term that has been rendered ambiguous and very boring through excessive, repetitive and unnecessary usage by our friends here. They maintain that “the same Al-Kitab” has been revealed every time upon every Messenger; and that Messengers were not particular living and known personalities, with a history and recognition of their own in their societies!!!  
 
They have written off the personalities of the chosen representatives of Divinity who were real Leaders of Mankind and must be acknowledged as such. The fact that their footprints have been proclaimed by the Almighty as the best example to be followed to achieve a blessed and benevolent life-style, does establish them as particular personalities with inspiring character, conduct, history, life and virtues. See Verse 33/21-22:  
 
“Laqad kaana la-kum fi rasoolil-laahi USWATUN HASANATUN li-mun kaana yarjool-laaha wal youmal-aakhira……..”  
 
How can one follow the USWA of a non-entity who is only an “attribute”, not a living personality with a whole life long background of a super conscious level of life?  
 
And “Faith and belief in the Unseen” is not possible unless faith is expressed in the “Messenger” (not in the attribute) who is sent, under the creative process to the mankind as a component factor of the scheme of creation and existence of human beings, to prepare them for the higher life in the cosmic scheme.  
 
And “the same Al-Kitab” repetition? How confusing? It was never the SAME AL-KITAB – in the past - as was finally revealed to my lord Mohammad. This phrase invented by our friends is grossly mis-leading.  
 
Since creation develops gradually from a lower level to a higher level of consciousness, it cannot readily comprehend all the spiritual and conscious values of the purpose to be achieved. As such, the Divine guidance comes GRADUALLY in the form of broad principles of eternal import, revealed through Messengers. That is why the teachings of the earlier Messengers do not deal with the minor details and do not follow the method of logical reasoning. Divine guidance pre-supposes that man will accept the divine teaching because of the inherent urge and appetite of man for such a teaching. The internal inquisitive of man has been left to work out the details by himself. As such, man goes on progressing from one level to another by dint of Divine guidance, multiplicated and broadened out by the right thinking of man consistent with his inherent urge for searching the truth. As a matter of fact, at the human stage, man received the Divine guidance revealed by the Creator as an essential concomitant of the larger process of creation.  
 
From the dawn of human life on earth, the Creator kept revealing to mankind through His Messengers the basic principles of moral rectitude and various aspects of human life, till a stage was reached where Divine guidance was revealed in a comprehensive form to cover all possible aspects of human life. When Divine guidance circumscribed all the detailed aspects of human life, the revelation of God through the Messengers came to its logical close because mankind had by then come to possess comprehensive code of moral rectitude and a group of human beings had by then come into existence which assimilated the Divine guidance in all its details and had conspicuously come out as a model and precedent for the entire mankind to copy.  
 
I have already lodged my complaint and objections against these theories of my friends. They have not been able to answer some of my questions too. I had asked them :  
 
1. Why to translate some names of the Messengers into attributes and why to retain some other names as proper names?  
 
2. An attribute is attributed to a personality, not in the air. So, the personality is important and must exist to bear and hold an attribute?  
 
3. All names in the world are actually attributes in their respective languages, because parents name their children after good attributes, and it is a general practice. So it is useless to raise this issue and discard the actual personalities for abstract attributes.  
 
In the end, I stand with your viewpoint and we together can try to convince our friends to give up their philosophy for the sake of an easy and simple understanding of Quran. On my part, I can award them the title of ‘great philosophers’ if they just do not garble the Quranic interpretations any further.  
 
God bless you.  
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
DHULQARNAIN: They can claim what they want, but Allah, specifically, addresses those who identify themselves as Jews and Christians. To my knowledge there is no mention of Hindus. Why won’t you and Moazzam accept this?  
 
***Why we cant accept this? Because we see that the same al kitab is given to every Rusool, because the rules and kalimaats are the same. Its USE is different dependent on whats needed in the society, then it operates as zaboor, Torat Injeel Furqqan and Quran. But it is the same book.***  
 
As I said earlier, yes, Al-Kitab is One Book from Allah, but it is comprised of sub-books, as well. Did Moses and Jesus receive Al-Quran, the last revelation to mankind before the coming of the Hour or did the Last Prophet receive Al-Quran? If they are all the same, why then, does Allah make this crucial distinction:  
 
5:48 And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a GUARDIAN OVER IT,THEREFORE JUDGE BETWEEN THEM BY WHAT ALLAH HAS REVEALED , and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; FOR EVERY ONE OF YOU DID WE APPOINT A LAW AND A WAY, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;  
 
This ayat is being addressed to the Last Prophet and it orders him to judge by what is revealed to him not what is prior of the Book. This ayat, as I’ve shown you before, also demonstrates that, although Al-Quran is part of the Book, it is also a separate entity from the Book before it, Torah, and, a guardian over it. This ayat shows sameness in the Book, but difference as well. Do you see? The ayat further confirms what I’m trying to get across to you when it says; “ FOR EVERY ONE OF YOU DID WE APPOINT A LAW AND A WAY, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people...” So, once again, not all people got the same/identical message except the message to embrace Tauhid and reject Shirk.  
 
***Now, the Quran never said Yahood are the group of people who call themself tribe of yehuda, did it? The Quran never said Al nasara is the group of people that call themself christians, no?***  
 
The Quran must come in the language of the people if it is to be a messenger to them, correct?  
 
14:4 And We sent no messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly.  
 
Well, yahud and nasara, in the English language, corresponds with Jew and Christian, respectively. Even the Arabic lexicons state this simple fact and, Quran backs them up on this issue. Even the Jews don’t contest this fact nor do the Christians/Nazarenes (nasara). Come on, now.  
 
 
DHULQARNAIN: 1. What specific prophet-messenger…received the Torah from Allah? 2. what specific prophet-messenger…received the Injeel from Allah?  
 
***It is Moses and Eesa, who will recieve Al kitab IN EVERY ERA.***  
 
Where do you GET this from?! Show me in Quran where Allah says this! This simply your conjecture/opinion. Allah rejects conjecture/opinion. Your speaking philososphically not Quranically.  
 
***It means that Moses and EESA is ATTRIBUTES and not names, so if you have the attribute of Eesa, and you use the Quran as injeel for people whos mentality is based on the belief that they are the guided ones, then YOU are Eesa.***  
 
You must substantiate this claim via al-Quran. Listen, Muhammad may or may not be a personal name, however, we can Quranically hypothesize that it may be an attribute and not a personal name based on the following:  
 
Al-Hamid (attribute)= to be praised; worthy of praise.  
 
Mu= doer of the hamid.  
 
So, via Al-Quran and not your conjecture/opinion/philosophy, shows us how Moses and Isa are not personal names, but attributes as possibly with Muhammad.  
 
 
***The Quran are talking about human mentality, and how that kind of psychology works on individual and group. For example, yahod is the guided ones, or those who dont take responsibility in life, and develop their mental capacity. That word would describe ANYONE who have that mentality, its not a reference to a group that happens to have this description as a name. Same is nasara, which is too a description of a mentality and not a name of a group. Same goes with muslim and momin muttaqi etc, its desciptions of character or achievments by people. ***  
 
A lot of these so-called muslims and polytheists/mushriks consider themselves to be guided, as you say, so why doesn’t Allah refer to them as yahud and nasara, then?, to wit:  
 
3:67 Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was an upright man, a muslim, and he was not one of the mushrikeen/polytheists.  
 
As you can see, yahud and nasara, are not used for mushrikeen.  
 
Ibrahim, Jew and Christian are proper names while muslim and mushrikeen are attributes.  
 
“You will know the truth to be the truth by ALLAH’s WORDS”…not your words or my words.  
 
****We dont know the birthnames of the prophet, we know their attribute, the description of their actions, …***  
 
You have to prove this now, starting with Moses and Jesus, via Al-Quran. Allah rejects conjecture/opinion in regard to Him and His Deen. We dont know where the book were found first, we dont know how it was recieved by the first one who observed it,  
 
***we only know that this book is here and its given to every Moses ,Eesa, Abraham, Yousef and Mohammed of its time....***  
 
Al-Quran is here…the prophet- messengers are gone, to wit:  
 
3:143 And Muhammad is but a messenger — messengers have already passed away before him. There are TWO messengers here today--Al-Quran...and the individual who recites it to others. There are no more prophets...ever.  
 
No more saying about Allah, His Deen, His Books, His Messengers or his Prophets without firm Quranic evidence=AYATS. The Arab Religionists, who you fervently oppose, say things without authority/Quran. Let’s not copy them.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: Maniza On 12 June 2011
Dear Aurangzaib,  
 
Am sorry to say that I actualy have the same meaning as dr.Qamer, Nargis and Moazzam, this was not through gammer but as a layman who saw through the traditional what the gist of the matter was :)  
 
p.s some of my friends have the same mind set regarding attributes and al-kitab, the same book, and a personality, a leader who becomes the Messenger.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM, AURANGZAIB  
 
Thank you for your support and kind words.  
 
***upon their stupefying theories of “Attributes” and “the same Al-Kitab”. ***  
 
Don’t forget…”beyond time and space”…  
 
Yes, stupefying is just how I would describe their positions..  
 
***After going through the matter now, I have no hesitation in endorsing your views. I appreciate and second you and I think your very simple questions are not answered by them in a satisfactory way. Their answers symbolized a useless sidetracking and meaningless verbiage. On both counts mentioned above, our said companions have committed the atrocity of depriving the common Quran learner from an easy understanding of this Divine Book. They have adulterated it and garbled its straightforward narration with complex and intricate philosophy, which stands as nothing but excessive verbal logic in the same way as the “old Mo’tazillahs” are reported by the history as having indulged in, in a big way. The Mo’tazillas, likewise, had been hell bent upon the “attributes” issue and made Allah’s attributes as the main focus of their debates. They succeeded only in causing confusion, rift and disparity in the public, resulting finally in bloodshed and chaos, until they were eventually purged along with their “Attributes” philosophy. “Al-Kitab” is a term that has been rendered ambiguous and very boring through excessive, repetitive and unnecessary usage by our friends here. They maintain that “the same Al-Kitab” has been revealed every time upon every Messenger; and that Messengers were not particular living and known personalities, with a history and recognition of their own in their societies!!! They have written off the personalities of the chosen representatives of Divinity who were real Leaders of Mankind and must be acknowledged as such. The fact that their footprints have been proclaimed by the Almighty as the best example to be followed to achieve a blessed and benevolent life-style, does establish them as particular personalities with inspiring character, conduct, history, life and virtues.***  
 
A stinging criticism for sure, but, unfortunately,it’s accurate. There is no doubt that Nargis and Moazzam are, as is yourself, highly intelligent people, and this why I am so dumbfounded by some of their positions. I just can’t wrap my head around it. I’m trying to convey to them that, in discussing this Quran, Allah makes it haram to do so without knowledge. As you are well aware of, Allah revealed knowledge not conjecture/opinion, hence, we cannot assign conjecture/opinion to His Quran/Words:  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord has only made haram indecencies, …and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and that you say of Allah what you know not.  
To say of Allah that which we do not know, Allah says this:  
 
24:15 When you received it on your tongues and spoke with your mouths that of which you had no knowledge, and you deemed it a trifle, while with Allah it was grievous.  
But..why is it grievous to say of what we have no knowledge/authority from Allah? Allah explains:  
 
2:168-169 …and follow not the footsteps of the devil. Surely he is an open enemy to you. He commands on you only evil and indecency, and that you speak against Allah what you do not know.  
If one continues to ignore the above ayats, then the following condition results:  
 
58:19 The devil has gained the mastery over them, so he has made them forget the remembrance of Allah. They are the devil’s party. Now surely the devil’s party are the losers.  
And the devil’s party must end up in the Fire.  
 
***How can one follow the USWA of a non-entity who is only an “attribute”, not a living personality with a whole life long background of a super conscious level of life?***  
 
I still waiting for them to answer this question, because I have no idea.  
 
And “Faith and belief in the Unseen” is not possible unless faith is expressed in the “Messenger” (not in the attribute) who is sent, under the creative process to the mankind as a component factor of the scheme of creation and existence of human beings, to prepare them for the higher life in the cosmic scheme.  
 
And “the same Al-Kitab” repetition? How confusing? It was never the SAME AL-KITAB – in the past -as was finally revealed to my lord Mohammad. This phrase invented by our friends is grossly mis-leading.  
“as was finally revealed to my lord Mohammad”  
 
Did one of them actually write –“my lord Muhammad?!, because that statement is shirk, to wit:  
 
9:31 They take their doctors of law and their monks for LORDS besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were commanded that they should serve one God only — there is no god but He. Be He glorified from what they set up (with Him)!  
 
I’m hoping that Nargis and Moazzam will change their positions. Time will tell.  
 
***I have already lodged my complaint and objections against these theories of my friends. They have not been able to answer some of my questions too. I had asked them :…In the end, I stand with your viewpoint and we together can try to convince our friends to give up their philosophy for the sake of an easy and simple understanding of Quran. On my part, I can award them the title of ‘great philosophers’ if they just do not garble the Quranic interpretations any further.***  
 
Well, between the three of us (Allah being the first), perhaps they will relent see things differently, give up the title of-- “great philosophers” , and simply be muslims.  
 
I had to critique what you wrote on this thread:  
 
http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?MID=2&SID=34  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: pervez On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
A stinging criticism for sure, but, unfortunately,it’s accurate. There is no doubt that Nargis and Moazzam are, as is yourself, highly intelligent people, and this why I am so dumbfounded by some of their positions. I just can’t wrap my head around it. I’m trying to convey to them that, in discussing this Quran, Allah makes it haram to do so without knowledge. As you are well aware of, Allah revealed knowledge not conjecture/opinion, hence, we cannot assign conjecture/opinion to His Quran/Words: By DHULQARNAIN  
 
Dear DHULQARNAIN,  
 
Great, I could not resist appreciating your such a nice para.  
ALLAH BLESS YOU WITH MORE WISDOM.  
 
I request you to please throw light on this thread as well, http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?OPT=ADDCOMMENTS&MID=7&SID=51&QID=1366#AddComments  

Comments by: Junaid On 12 June 2011Report Abuse
Auzubillah e Minashaitaanir rajeem;  
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.  
 
Dear Dhulqarnain, I have been reading this very interesting debate going on between you, sister Nargis and brother Moazzam. I would like to mention that everything was good earlier on but then I noticed something unusual. You just said Brother Moazzam or sister Nargis used the words "my lord Muhammad" which is something they never did (as per my observation).  
 
Please allow me to quote your words;  
**(Did one of them actually write –“my lord Muhammad?!, because that statement is shirk, to wit:  
9:31 They take their doctors of law and their monks for LORDS besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were commanded that they should serve one God only — there is no god but He. Be He glorified from what they set up (with Him)!  
I’m hoping that Nargis and Moazzam will change their positions. Time will tell. ) ** BY Dhulqarnain  
 
My friend Dhulqarnain, I would request you to kindly show me where sister Nargis or Brother Moazzam used the words “my lord Muhammad".  

Comments by: moazzam On 13 June 2011
Dear Brother Aurangzaib,Zubair, All Aastana members! Salam,  
 
 
Aurangzaib ! On both counts mentioned above, our said companions have committed the atrocity of depriving the common Quran learner from an easy understanding of this Divine Book. They have adulterated it and garbled its straightforward narration with complex and intricate philosophy, which stands as nothing but excessive verbal logic in the same way as the “old Mo’tazillahs” are reported by the history.  
 
Moazzam! Dear members; as this is the quranic research forum, I, write my inference which conceived in my mind after pondering into ALKITAB and the universal values as well.  
Same question could be asked for the translation of Respected Dr. Qamar , also about the SALAT, SOUM, HAJJ etc being presented at this blog, isn’t??  
 
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
***JUNAID: Dhulqarnain, I have been reading this very interesting debate going on between you, ...You just said Brother Moazzam or sister Nargis used the words "my lord Muhammad" which is something they never did (as per my observation). Please allow me to quote your words; Did one of them actually write –“my lord Muhammad?!, because that statement is shirk, to wit: I’m hoping that Nargis and Moazzam will change their positions. Time will tell. )--BY Dhulqarnain. My friend Dhulqarnain, I would request you to kindly show me where sister Nargis or Brother Moazzam used the words “my lord Muhammad".***  
 
If you read carefully what I wrote you will notice that...I never said they said –“my lord Muhammad?! I wasn't certain who made that comment. You will further notice that, my comment was framed as a...question. These marks--"?!" mean a question is being asked with "surprise/astonishment".  
 
What I did write and what I do mean is that, I hope Nargis and Moazzam change some of their positions, because some of them, according to Al-Quran, are wrong.  
 
I hope this clears the matter up.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM, PERVEZ,  
 
***Great, I could not resist appreciating your such a nice para. ALLAH BLESS YOU WITH MORE WISDOM. ***  
 
I didn't enjoy being critical of Nargis and Moazzam. They appear to be fine people.  
 
Thank you for your kind words. I really like this forum; very strong minds here. The only thing we must not do is conjecture. We must stand firmly behind Al-Quran and let it speak to us, not we read into it. This is what is meant by being--Quran only and alone!  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: moazzam On 13 June 2011
Respected Aurangzaib! As I am a meager student of Quran, kindly correct me with quranic references as you usually do.  
Aurangzaib! I have already lodged my complaint and objections against these theories of my friends. They have not been able to answer some of my questions too. I had asked them :  
Moazzam! In research work, correction instead of objection is required, issues must be addressed with logics and furnished with quranic references.  
Aurangzaib! 1. Why to translate some names of the Messengers into attributes and why to retain some other names as proper names?  
Moazzam! Please point out the exact case, where it happened?  
Aurangzaib!. An attribute is attributed to a personality, not in the air. So, the personality is important and must exist to bear and hold an attribute?  
Moazzam! The attributes and characters described in qases al Quran are generic templates beyond time and space, so that the man kind could seek guidance in each era.  
Aurangzaib! All names in the world are actually attributes in their respective languages, because parents name their children after good attributes, and it is a general practice. So it is useless to raise this issue and discard the actual personalities for abstract attributes.  
Moazzam! The name normally be given in its infant stage of life, and we know that, there is no any predestined event is being played at earth.  

Comments by: pervez On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
We must stand firmly behind Al-Quran and let it speak to us, not we read into it. This is what is meant by being--Quran only and alone!  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
Walaikum-us-salam brother Dhulqarnain-  
 
I fully stand by your position. I think , I will learn a lot from we think on the same lines. Would you like  
to please educate me on this thread http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?OPT=ADDCOMMENTS&MID=7&SID=51&QID=1366#AddComments , I shall be very thankful to you.  
 
Please tell me if you have translated Quran or you have your own web site or you recommend any translation  
of QURAN in urdu or in English from your point of you for me. I have read your post and find myself in mental  
harmony with you. I have read many traditional and Quranists translations of Quran but am satisfied with none  
so for. I am myself weak in Arabic , couldn't get time to learn Arabic. I need your help in learning Quranic concepts  
in their utmost purity.  
 
REGARDS WITH BEST WISHES.  
 

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear mortals, giant best better bester than bestest brains like Moazzam and me must have a special permit to post what we want so we can share our knowledge with you (back biters ,you can only talk in front of our back because we are one step ahead of you hahaha).  
 
I know you are jealous but heyyy, dont hate us just because we are beautiful, look is not everything, we have a visa card too (which is not working but we dont care :D :D )  
 
Like brother Moazzam said, this is research forum so we can analyze the exact core an aya in order to understand it fully from every angle, so we share only what we understand and how we see it. And thats a nice thing, we can share everything and say what we want without fat fatwahs-  
 
Mayb this thread will clear up why we look at the way we do,
 
 
 
http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=1248

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM, MOAZZAM,  
 
I assume that you are a muslim, which means, you are Quran only and alone for your guidance (to be muslim cannot mean anything other than Quran only and alone; see 6:106). Am I correct in this assumption? I will proceed as if I've assumed correctly.  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
By the way, 6:106...defines how to carry out salaa. Salaa, being allegiance to Allah.  
 
Anyway...  
 
I'm going to ask you two very simple questions. If the answers are yes, then no need for elaboration and we can move on. On the other hand, if any of your answers are no, then you MUST go to Al-Quran/the Words of Allah and post the ayat (s) where Allah confirms your position. No conjecture, no philosophizing; no baloney, just the Quranic ayat(s)/facts.  
 
According to Al-Quran/the Words of Allah, when Allah revealed any of His qara'a-s, which form Al-Kitab,...did He reveal it to a particular, single, living breathing human being?  
 
Yes or no.  
 
If your answer is yes, then, once again, according to Al-Quran/the Words of Allah, did He reveal:  
 
1. the Torah to a particular, single, living breathing human being?  
 
2. the Injeel to a particular, single, living breathing human being?  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: dawood On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
SA Dhulgarnain and other brs. and srs: I am posting some of my earlier comments in another thread regarding ALKITAB.  
Brother Moazzam: Thank you for your kind reply. As per my meager understanding, the term “ALKITAB” because of its unique characteristics and the message(s) is used for the book of Allah in each and every era. “ALKITAB” became the pivotal word referring to His book, in every civilization, past and present. It is however incomprehensible to me to even think that the physical form and the shape of this book was/is as that of today in any other previous era, say an era prior to the invention of paper. The language and its constructs, the numbers of letters and sentences, so on and so forth were according to the dictation and the constraints of every era. It is the message, the essence, the fundamental principles that remain unchanged since the dawn of the human civilization. My above understanding is informed by the following verses: ( I am using existing translations, good or bad have no choice at this time) 1.Ye People of the Book! Why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Law (Taurah) and the Gospel (Injeel) Were not revealed Till after him? Have ye no understanding? (3:65) As per my understanding, two points could be deduced from this verse: (i) The first part is talking about the Ahlul kitab in general that can include any group(s) until today. The second part makes it clear that it is referring to two groups of people in particular, one having Taurah and the other Injeel. The question arises, if they had the same book ALKITAB, what is the point of difference and why are the qualifiers of Taurah and Injeel needed? Does’t Alkitab contains Taurah and Injeel? My humble understanding is that the book of Allah, ALKITAB was also named or referred as “Taurah” by one group and as “Injeel” by the other group. Moreover, both of these groups are in the post-Ibrahamic era. Similar situation exists today with reference to the ALKITAB, also called ALQURAN. (ii) It also makes it clear that IBRAHIM went before these two groups, thereby indicating a time-line about a person that existed before these groups, notwithstanding the meanings of the word Ibrahim or the generic template that it provides. 2.The Messenger believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one believeth in Allah, His angels, His BOOKS, and His messengers. …." (2:285) What the phrase “BOOKS” is referring to? Would it not be right to conclude that this reference is for respective books given to respective messengers in their respective eras? Yet, each one is also called “ALKITAB?” 3. It is He Who sent down to thee, in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (Taurah) and the Gospel (Injeel) before this, as a guide to mankind. (3:3) Again why the BOOK, ALKITAB and its previous versions being named differently? Also, the ALKITAB confirms what went before it. If the same ALKITAB went before it what is the need to confirm it? Is ALKITAB=Taurah=Injeel=Quran? Or Taurah and Injeel are the subsets of the book ALKITAB? And before this, was the Book of Moses as a guide and a mercy: And this Book confirms (it) in the Arabic tongue; to admonish the unjust, and as Glad Tidings to those who do right. (46:12) Now the term ALKITAB is replaced with the term “Book of Moses,” which went before this Book, Quran? Why simple KITAB is used instead of ALKITAB? Is it because it’s a book in specific language for a particular era, and the term ALKITAB is a general terminology used for the book of Allah in any era? Same sense could be inferred in 2:89? My humble understanding once more is that the word ALKITAB always refers to the BOOK of ALLAH in each and every era, and the word BOOK perhaps refers to the various books along with other names given to those books in various societies, eras, etc. I leave it at that for someone more knowledgeable to wrestle with it. I am however open to any critique on my understanding and to guidance from other brothers and sisters.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 13 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Nargis,  
 
***Dear mortals, giant best better bester than bestest brains like Moazzam and me must have a special permit to post what we want so we can share our knowledge with you (back biters ,you can only talk in front of our back because we are one step ahead of you hahaha).***  
 
LOL you're so funny :D  
 
Please forgive me if you feel that I've behaved in a back biting fashion, it was not my intention. I don't believe the others thought they were back biting either.  
 
Yes, you and Moaz have the bestest brains in the whole wide world! :D I just want you guys to come from Al-Quran and not to conjecture/philosophize. Al-Islam is not philosophy, it's Deen.  
 
***I know you are jealous but heyyy, dont hate us just because we are beautiful, look is not everything, we have a visa card too (which is not working but we dont care :D :D )***  
 
We love you! :D I wish I was beautiful, too! :(  
 
***Like brother Moazzam said, this is research forum so we can analyze the exact core an aya in order to understand it fully from every angle, so we share only what we understand and how we see it. And thats a nice thing, we can share everything and say what we want without fat fatwahs-Mayb this thread will clear up why we look at the way we do, ***  
 
No doubt...just no conjecture. Let the ayats speak to you and not the other way around...can't get guidance otherwise.  
 
No Phat-wahs, here, Narg! :D  
 
"You are sooooo beautiful to meeee, can't you seeeeee,, you're everything I hoped for...you're everything I need"--Joe Cocker  
 
Dedicated to you, Narg.  
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00M1BDtC-jo  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
 
 
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Bhai Moazzam and very dear “Badshah Salamat”,  
 
My direct and to-the-point reflections on “THE SAME AL-KITAB” and the “ATTRIBUTES” theory might have looked too stern and for that I offer my unconditional apologies. You both are Aastana’s best brains and, above all, your hard work and utmost devotion is unmatched. Never harbor any unfriendly feelings towards me. I have never used an insulting or degrading word about your person; on the contrary, kept using the words ‘my friends’ or ‘my dear friends’, all the time.  
 
If Aastana is deemed an open discussion forum, then we have to scrutinize our friends “”personal opinions, inferences and conjectures”” mercilessly, and we must demand Quranic proof of what they are propagating. We also have to offer arguments and counter-arguments on theories we think not going exactly in consonance with the tenets of Quran; and where we feel some misleading elements continue to appear. At the same time, doubtlessly, once convinced Quranically, it won’t take, at least for me, more than a minute to alter my standpoint in your favor.  
 
With my apologies, the theories you are propagating are not Quranic translations, but your own inferences and conclusions FROM THE TRANSLATIONS. Naturally, there can be differences of opinion and you can be asked to substantiate your conclusions from other Quranic references, if possible, or logically & scientifically. So, no hard feelings, please.  
 
Look what havoc the term of “generic templates” plays with those personalities whose lifestyles and whose pursuit of divine guidance stand as beacons for mankind (33/21, 60/4-6, 68/2,3,4) “:-  
 
“Generic”: Not specific; typical of or relating to a whole group of similar things, rather than to any particular thing.  
 
Aurangzaib:  
Kindly note the word “THING” here. The word generic is used for “things”, and not for even SPECIFIC things!  
 
“Template”: a pattern made of metal, plastic or paper, which is used for making many copies of a shape or to help cut material accurately; something that is used as a pattern for producing other similar things.  
 
Aurangzaib:  
Kindly note again the words “metal, plastic or paper; and things”.  
 
So friends, it needs no proofs to highlight that the theory of “generic templates” has drastically and cruelly reduced the exalted persons of the Divine representatives, to …“things”… made of metal, plastic or paper. Don’t you think, it is going too far?  
 
Where has Quran defined Rusools as “generic templates” that your theory of “Attributes” interprets them to be?  
 
I won’t add more about “the Same Al-Kitab” theory than what I have written earlier. I have both Testaments in my hands right now. I don’t see a resemblance thereof with Quran. To say that they are the “same Al-Kitab” would be a far fetched conclusion. Have a look yourself. I have looked into them by setting aside the Books of Genesis, Samuel, Chronicles and Kings, etc. which contain almost no word of God.  
 
What makes me regret very deeply is the fact that these theories will not attract the early and middle stage learners towards Aastana. They might make them run away as I think they might become averse to our thought pattern and shun sharing with us.  
 
I do admit that both my dear friends are at a higher stage of learning and very few of us have reached that high level bordering with solid philosophy and logic. However, the question is to keep such higher philosophic level of thinking to oneself and let others fulfill their goals of learning in a simple, understandable and digestible way. You may not expose a junior level student to the Ph.D. level studies. Once in advanced stages, the learners can themselves jump to deep philosophical deliberations. In short, these theories may not be conducive to learning at all levels.  
 
Brother Moazzam has tried to answer my earlier questions and my comments go like this :-  
 
“”  
Aurangzaib!. An attribute is attributed to a personality, not in the air. So, the personality is important and must exist to bear and hold an attribute?  
Moazzam! The attributes and characters described in qases al Quran are generic templates beyond time and space, so that the man kind could seek guidance in each era. “”  
-------------------------------------  
Aurangzaib: Moazzam Bhai, where has Quran described the word “generic templates” and “beyond time and space” along with the names of Divine Messengers?  
And what is wrong in “seeking guidance in each era” without the generic templates?  
Aren’t people “seeking guidance in this era” without ever knowing the theory of “generic templates”?  
 
’””  
Aurangzaib! All names in the world are actually attributes in their respective languages, because parents name their children after good attributes, and it is a general practice. So it is useless to raise this issue and discard the actual personalities for abstract attributes.  
Moazzam! The name normally be given in its infant stage of life, and we know that, there is no any predestined event is being played at earth. ’””  
 
Aurangzaib: Moazzam Bhai, you have taken my question to a totally different side. I did not raise the question of infant stage or later stage. I said every name in the world is, as a routine, an attribute as we see the normal practice among humans that they name their children after good things or qualities. So almost every name is an attribute. Why then we give importance to names? Why do we recognize people with names, not attributes? You are Moazzam, again an attribute, isn’t it? Nargis --- again an attribute, isn’t it? Why do we take it as name to recognize a particular personality? Why don’t we say he or she could be anyone bearing the attributes of “azmat” or “Nargissiat”? If we say, aren’t we just creating confusion?  
 
About “predestined event”, We can’t give a ruling that “nothing is pre-destined”. Only God knows fully about different stages of His creative plan and the process of evolution within each stage of creation. I think He is capable of “emergent creation” whenever He might need it. We can’t speak on His behalf and pass a ruling. I think His Messengers were the manifestations of His “emergent creation”. I’m not sure.  
---------------------------------------------------  
 
I think it is enough. I am terribly busy. Don’t mind my criticism. You are free to reply in kind. I honestly mean some improvement, not a kind of deconstruction. It’s a mental exercise only to learn. I love you all.  
 
 
 
 

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Brother Aurungzeb, don’t worry, you can say what you want to Badshah Salamat Me:-D, i don’t mind your criticism, I don’t feel you're saying something coz of bad intentions or hatred. , you can say whatever you want to me, I do not mind at all.  
 
But everyone should know by now, that top Model Moazzam never go out of the Quran (Sometimes he do go out of his house and town though, we admit that) to blend in history, biology, hadith or science to explain the Quran. He's done with it and the point of being here is that we will share our understanding of the Quran and ask questions about it. And then it is to be examined and verified through the language and grammar rules in the Quran.  
He has provided references to the Quran; I will give a brief summary of his references to the Quraniq aya for why he thinks Al Kitab is given to everyone, i.e. why he thinks the instructions with the same content were given to every Nabi and human being
 
 
MOAZZAM:  
Let us ponder into AlKitab and note the following points, I will try to provide only sense of the verses.  
 
1) Go to the verse 3/2, here it is being declared that, NO any other system will be acceptable other than Allah’s one, which prevail forever.  
 
IT means that if it is ONE system, then its instructions must be the SAME. It doesn’t matter who the receiver is, but the message won’t change what so ever. IF Deen is the only accepted system, then the method to establish it is the same.  
 
2) Read the verses 3/3-4, the guidance which is being conceived in your mind while pondering into ALKITAB, must be verified from the ALKITAB which is in your hand. Also the verses having laws (taurat), glade tiding (injeel) and the verses which discriminates RIGHT from WRONG (Alfurqan) these are/ had been the source of guidance to the mankind before this era.  
 
IT means that any idea or thought a human being conceive by pondering into the Universe, must be verified and confirmed by the Guidiance available from our sustainer. No idea or thought that is out of the constitution, Al Kitab, will be implemented in Deen. People have to make a commitment to Allah (Salaat) and whatever we are told to be committed to by the Book is the direct sirate mustaqeem leading to the ordered Deen in 3:2. To achieve the desired Deen introduced in the Quran, one has to utilize the attributes of the book as they are meant to. These Attributes are called Injeel, Torat, Zaboor. If we break up the words then we can see the description of what it can help with or how it operates according to the society’s needs.  
 
3) Read the verse 3/18-19, here it is made realized that, Allah will accept only the DEEN-E ISLAM in each era, the people devastated this message due to their malicious/ego strutting/ intention.  
 
When it said today you DEEN is perfected, it means the DEEN was perfected BEFORE it was given to humanity. Didn’t Adam introduce the ism to Malaika? Did he not encourage them to follow the order from God? Didn’t Noh follow the instructions from Allah? Was not Abraham a Muslim? Didn’t the Quran confirm that he was a peace provider? Did not the Quran confirm that he were to establish Salaat? Did not the Quran confirm Rusool were sent to him? Did not the Quran give him two helpers to establish Salaat`? Is Not Salaat a commitment to the divine order? Didn’t they all struggle to establish DEEN, which is from God? Now why Islam would be introduced through the Quran only? Why would it partly be introduced as law or happy birthday news without the complete guidance?  
 
doubt?  
 
Then how do you explain ROOH, same rooh to Adam, same rooh to Maryam, same Rooh at the Qalb of S Mohammed, How do you explain?
 
 
Rest of his earlier post is clear and he requested everyone to look into the verses he quoted and their sense  
 
4) Read the verse 3/48, prophet Eisa was also given the ALKITAB, WISDOM, AL TAURAT, and AL INJEEL.  
 
5) Read the verse 3/64, it is addressed to AHL-E-KITAB (the holder of AlKitab) that, come to the commonalities (KALIMATIN), that we will not obey any other els commandments other than Allah’s.  
 
6) Come to the verse 3/65, this verse has normally been misinterpreted by orthodox translators. In fact this verse should be read in consolidation with verse 3/64, the sense being reflected is that,O! Ahl-e-kitab why you quarrels in the matter of IBRAHEEM, and which is REVEALED IN TAURAT AND IN INJEEL, after the agreement in the terms described above in verse 3/64 (the KALIMATIN SAWA UN BAINA NA WA BAINAKUM).  
 
7) Read the verses 15/41-49 in these verses the status of TAURAT AND INJEEL has been described, that it should be considered as jurisprudence. Also all the verdicts (decisions of disputes among the people) must be given according to the said jurisprudence.  
 
Especial attention should be paid at verse 5/48, here it is defined that, while making any decisions, you should be careful about the message conceived in your mind after pondering into ALKITAB, which must be validated by ALKITAB WHICH IS IN YOUR HAND. Remember this ALKITAB is a Procter (Muhaiminul alaih) over your conceived ideas in your mind.  
 
8) Read the verses 5/66-68, in these verses, it is much cleared that, the prosperity and overall success of the people, is based on the implementation of divine message written in TAURAT AND INJEEL (the verses of AlKitab).  
 
9) Go to the verse 5/110, here it is said that prophet Eisa was given ALKITAB, HIKMAH, TAURAT AND INJEEL.  
 
10) Read the verse 9/111, here it is very obvious that, the same message has been given in ALTAURAT, ALINJEEL, and ALQURAN (ALKITAB).  
 
This is from http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=1277  
 
Dr Uncle said in the same thread:-  
 
Dear members ,  
 
I agree with Moazzam as Quran says in verse 13 of sura 42  
(شَرَعَ لَكُمْ مِنَ الدِّينِ مَا وَصَّى بِهِ نُوحًا وَالَّذِي أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَمَا وَصَّيْنَا بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَى وَعِيسَى أَنْ أَقِيمُوا الدِّينَ وَلا تَتَفَرَّقُوا فِيهِ كَبُرَ عَلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ مَا تَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَيْهِ )  
 
“ He (Allâh) has ordained for You the same way of life( Deen ) which He ordained for Nûh (Noah), and that which we have inspired In You, and that which we ordained for Ibrahîm (Abraham), Mûsa (Moses?) and 'Iesa (Jesus) saying You should establish way of life (deen )and make no divisions In it (i.e. various sects ) Intolerable for the Mushrikûn ,It is that to which You call them."  
 
So basically the Book has always been the same . It was named or given a name by the prophet or its followers according to the usage of the BOOK or الکتاب .as explained by Moazzam .  
 
Another verse 29 of sura 50  
مَا يُبَدَّلُ الْقَوْلُ لَدَيَّ وَمَا أَنَا بِظَلامٍ لِلْعَبِيدِ (٢٩)  
"The orders never change from my side , because I am not cruel to those who follow my laws .”  
 
How Divine Authority can change his orders every now and then ? If it is so then how can he be علیم or خبیر etc .  
think of water being formed by the combination of two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of oxygen today .and tomorrow the combination changes .  
 
if laws of nature do not change how can the laws of nature concerning human beings ?  
 
Dr Qamar Zaman
 
 
Later i will post ref for attributes too, but enjoy this long post first :-D  
 
@Dhulqarnain, thank you for your lovely share, loved the song. How did the singer know about me??? :-D  
 
 

Comments by: Maniza On 14 June 2011
Dear All,  
 
Oxford dictionary: generic = a.pert. to a genus; of a general nature; not special; very comprehensive, as opposed to specific.  
genus = n. a race; a class; an order; a kind; an order; in logic, a class embrassing several particalars;  
 
template=n. a pattern of wood or metal cut to the shape required for a finished object, by which the conformity of the object to that shape may be tested.  
 
so in other words .... as moazzam has discribed, something that has a GENERAL MOULD, something used at ALL times..  
my understanding

Comments by: Nargis2 On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
I think its comprehensive when the term "generic templates" is used. Everyone should understand we are not talking about metals, plastic and "things".  
 
the word generic can be simply defined as "something general, universal and non specific" and the word template (for the purposes of our discussions) can very simply be defined as something that is used as a general pattern for others to copy or emulate or mold after.
 

Comments by: Maniza On 14 June 2011
dear nargis,  
 
you are SIMPLY correct. :)

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
***@Dhulqarnain, thank you for your lovely share, loved the song.***  
 
You're welcome, Narge. :D  
 
 
***How did the singer know about me??? ***  
 
a “generic template, from beyond time and space” ;D

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM.  
 
Nargis  
 
Moazzam  
 
Junaid  
 
Maniza  
 
Aurangzaib  
 
Pervez  
 
Dawood  
 
And anyone who I may have lft out.  
 
I have an idea, let's take the following ayat, 6:106, and see exactly what it's telling us. Let me say that, this ayat, is probably The Supreme Ayat in Al-Quran, so,....let's examine it carefully. Use ayats to support your position. No conjecturing, no opinions, no philoophizing, and no baloney.  
 
I hope all will participate. Time to get serious.  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists/mushrikeen.  
 
 
DHULQARNAIN-  
 

Comments by: Junaid On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dulqarnain, you have raised a good question and I would like to give it a try. However, before sharing my understanding regarding this particular verse and before asking one or two more questions which I have in my mind, I would request you to kindly enlighten me with the concept of "polytheists / mushrikeen" as per your understanding.  
Looking forward to your reply!

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***Brother Dulqarnain, you have raised a good question and I would like to give it a try. However, before sharing my understanding regarding this particular verse and before asking one or two more questions which I have in my mind, I would request you to kindly enlighten me with the concept of "polytheists / mushrikeen" as per your understanding.***  
 
LOL! That's what I you and the others to determine, but only using Al-Quran to do it.  
 
6:106 is the Supreme Ayat; The Furqan Ayat. It defines salaa, as well as, how to establish salaa.  
 
Looking forward to you reply :D  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Waqar On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear brother Dhulqarnain,  
 
<< 5:48 And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a GUARDIAN OVER IT,THEREFORE JUDGE BETWEEN THEM BY WHAT ALLAH HAS REVEALED , and do not follow their low desires (to turn away) from the truth that has come to you; FOR EVERY ONE OF YOU DID WE APPOINT A LAW AND A WAY, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will let you know that in which you differed;  
 
This ayat is being addressed to the Last Prophet and it orders him to judge by what is revealed to him not what is prior of the Book. This ayat, as I’ve shown you before, also demonstrates that, although Al-Quran is part of the Book, it is also a separate entity from the Book before it, Torah, and, a guardian over it. This ayat shows sameness in the Book, but difference as well. Do you see? The ayat further confirms what I’m trying to get across to you when it says; “ FOR EVERY ONE OF YOU DID WE APPOINT A LAW AND A WAY, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people...” So, once again, not all people got the same/identical message except the message to embrace Tauhid and reject Shirk.  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists/mushrikeen. >>  
 
Is 6:106 also being addressed to last prophet? I need some help to understand when and why a verse should be interpreted as being addressed to last prophet and when to general public.  
 
 
My second question is about your following statement.  
<< 3:143 And Muhammad is but a messenger — messengers have already passed away before him. There are TWO messengers here today--Al-Quran...and the individual who recites it to others. There are no more prophets...ever.>>  
 
The verse number is 3:144. You did not quote the complete translation of this verse. Here is the translation of complete verse from Muhammad Asad.  
"AND MUHAMMAD is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels? But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him]."  
I am not able to connect your two messengers (Al-Qurn and the individual who reciters to others) theory with this verse. Please help!  
 
Regards,  
Waqar  
 

Comments by: Junaid On 14 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dhulqarnain, Perhaps I couldn't explain my point properly.  
Let me try again :)  
 
6:106)  
ٱتَّبِعْ مَآ أُوحِىَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ لَآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ ٱلْمُشْرِكِينَ  
 
In order to comprehend verse (6:106), we primarily need to understand the real concept of ٱلْمُشْرِكِ which contains a prefix (AL).  
 
The same word مُشْرِكِ has been used in verse (24:03) as مُشْرِكَةً without the prefix (AL) and here it has been linked with another term زَانِيَةً which looks quite confusing to me. Please see the following verse;  
24:3)  
ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً وَٱلزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَآ إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ وَحُرِّمَ ذَٰلِكَ عَلَى ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ  
 
In fact you have used the term "polytheist" as an alternate for AL-Mushrik, which seems a bit difficult for me to grasp, since it does not fits in with verse (24:03) as per my understanding.  
I would request you to kindly elaborate why Al Mushrik has been translated as "Polytheist" and if this term (Polytheist) is a proper translation of Mushrik, then what is it to do with زَانِيَةً and how would this fit in verse (24:03)?  
 
Hope you'll understand my question this time :)

Comments by: aurangzaib On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Badshah Salamat,  
 
You have undoubtedly employed your best brains to bail out Brother Moazzam from the welter of confusion created by “generic templates”.  
 
You wrote :-  
 
“I think its comprehensive when the term "generic templates" is used. Everyone should understand we are not talking about metals, plastic and "things". “  
 
Aurangzaib:  
 
Excuse me,,,,,,,, when we are taking explanations from lexicons, we do not infer things like ….. “I think” ….. or ….”everyone should understand”…  
Dictionary is an absolute authority on the language and has to be followed in letter and spirit within the scope of meanings it elaborates. When it says “paper, metal, wooden and ‘things’ “ it does mean this grading and classification; and it does not leave space for you to …. “think”…. or as to how ….“everyone should understand”. And you cannot apply those “things” or “elements” on human beings unless the Dictionary allows you to !!! Not to speak of applying those inanimate things upon the Exclusive Exalted Human beings enjoying the Divine Mandate,,,,,,, beacons of light,,,,,,,, sources of inspiration,,,,,for the humanity !!!!  
 
Therefore, your “opinion” may not be acceptable because the use of “generic templates” for God’s Exalted Messengers is a manifest and utter disgrace and insult ---- What would they call it in ecclesiastical terminology? …. Yes, ”Blasphemous”, “sacrilegious”. Errrrr………Be very cautious about your safety please, dear me !  
And make some hurry to bring up some terminology from Quran that’s identical to “generic templates”, as a proof.  
 
Your references are OK. Every Messenger was given the Book. Nobody raised question about this fact and you exercised much energy in clarifying a point without a dispute over it.  
 
The problem is “THE SAME AL-KITAB”, “BEYOND TIME & SPACE” which represents a complete and absolute similarity; and it is THIS EXPRESSION that spoils the already existing satisfactory understanding in readers’ minds.  
 
Don’t we all know that any two Scriptures do not enjoy exact similarity? Al-Kitab symbolizes Divine Guidance, Divine Guidance descended in instalments, in bits and pieces, in total accord with the stage of consciousness human being had achieved at the given time; and corresponding to the capability of his comprehension in each evolutionary stage. Moses received only TEN COMMANDMENTS, as the history goes. I hope it is easy to understand.  
 
See that the Guidance for humanity, the Al-Kitab, the Deen was only completed in our Messenger’s era :-  
 
5/3: الیوم اکملت لکم دینکم و آتممت علیکم نعمتی و رضیت لکم الاسلام دینا  
THIS DAY (Or in this period) I HAVE PERFECTED FOR YOU YOUR DEEN AND COMPLETED MY FAVOUR UPON YOU AND APPROVED FOR YOU ISLAM AS DEEN.  
 
And  
 
6/115:  
أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّـهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَمًا وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلًا ۚ وَالَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّن رَّبِّكَ بِالْحَقِّ ۖ فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِينَ ﴿١١٤﴾ وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ۚ لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ ۚ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ ﴿١١٥﴾  
Then is it other than Allah I should seek as Judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail? And those to whom we gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters. AND THE WORD OF YOUR LORD HAS BEEN FULFILLED IN TRUTH AND IN JUSTICE. NONE CAN ALTER HIS WORDS, AND HE IS THE HEARING, THE KNOWING.  
 
See that these words were never said before except in Quran. So, the term “THE SAME AL-KITAB” for all Scriptures, may seem grossly unrepresentative. Why can’t we simply say “similar guidance” or “the same kind/nature of guidance” ---or some thing like that--- so that no questions arise?  
 
Good day.  
 
 
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***In fact you have used the term "polytheist" as an alternate for AL-Mushrik, which seems a bit difficult for me to grasp, since it does not fits in with verse (24:03) as per my understanding. I would request you to kindly elaborate why Al Mushrik has been translated as "Polytheist" and if this term (Polytheist) is a proper translation of Mushrik, then what is it to do with زَانِيَةً and how would this fit in verse (24:03)?***  
 
Okay, perhaps I see your question, now. Polytheist and idolater are both English terms for the Arabic term--mushrik. Translators simply use idolater and polytheist interchangeable, however, the Arabic term--mushrik (one who gives associates/partners to Allah), is used in both 24:3 and 6:106, and that is what is essential.  
 
Hope this cleared thing up.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Junaid On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dulqarnain, thank you for your reply.  
Just to mention that I am still trying to understand this concept but there is still one confusion. Actually I am a bit dumb as compared to other members on this forum, probably that's why I take some more time to understand simple concepts. My apologies in advance :)  
 
As far as 6:106 is concerned, I have no problem to consider AL Mushrik as Polytheist or idolater, however I am still unable to grasp the concept of "mushrik as "polytheist" in 24:03. What is it to do with Zaani?  
 
Let me try and explain verse 24:03 in a bit more detail;  
 
It says ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً which means zaani will get into a contract /Nikah with none other than zaania and / or mushrika ....  
It also says وَٱلزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَآ إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ which means zaania will get into a contract / nikah with none other than zaani and / or mushrik...  
 
What is the linkage between zaani and mushrik?  
WHY THESE TWO WORDS ARE USED TOGETHER?  
If "Mushrik" means idolater or polytheist, then what does "zaani" means?  
 
In fact, I would request you to please do me a favor and translate verse 24:03 replacing the word Mushrik with "Idolater" or "polytheist" and providing the suitable translation of word "Zaani" (If possible).  
I just want to see what is the linkage between "mushrik and zaani", also how the words "Idolater or polytheist" fits in with the context and subject matter of verse (24:03).  
 
Once it gets clear then we can move on to 6:106 !

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
My dear Brother aurungzaib are you saying you didnt understand what it was meant by “generic templates” ? did you really thought its meant a metal template which is given to everyone? Like in old bollywood movies, two brothers have same locket, and when they meet after 20 years they recognize eath other because that template, sorry, locket (it never occured as a possiblity that maybe one of them lost the locket in 20 years) hahahahaha  
 
Thank you brother you made me laugh, i didnt sleep well had to get up early and im sitting here bitter about missing out my ugliness sleep argghh.
 
 
and you said:-  
5/3: الیوم اکملت لکم دینکم و آتممت علیکم نعمتی و رضیت لکم الاسلام دینا  
THIS DAY (Or in this period) I HAVE PERFECTED FOR YOU YOUR DEEN AND COMPLETED MY FAVOUR UPON YOU AND APPROVED FOR YOU ISLAM AS DEEN.  
 
Can you please tell me the day/period when DEEN was perfected? and what day, period S Abraham were ordered to establish Salaat? Can he establish Salaat without having the "complete model" of Deen?  
 
then you said :- 6/115:  
أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّـهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَمًا وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلًا ۚ وَالَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّن رَّبِّكَ بِالْحَقِّ ۖ فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِينَ ﴿١١٤﴾ وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ۚ لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ ۚ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ ﴿١١٥﴾  
Then is it other than Allah I should seek as Judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail? And those to whom we gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters. AND THE WORD OF YOUR LORD HAS BEEN FULFILLED IN TRUTH AND IN JUSTICE. NONE CAN ALTER HIS WORDS, AND HE IS THE HEARING, THE KNOWING.  
 
I didnt get how we can :- See that these words were never said before except in Quran. ?  
 
So, we admit we are no experts in English and it’s not our mother tongue, but don’t tell anyone. My native language is Japanese and Moazzam is Chinese I “think”:-P , therefore, we may use certain words wrong .since no other objections have been raised previously, silly me assumed that everyone understood what was meant by the term “general template”  
 
But if we are to have a discussion about the words used in English by amature but beautiful top models like me and  
Moazzam,, we can start a discussion of your use of the word “MY LORD” for the Prophet, Even me, I badshah Salamat pak saaf “new branded atheistic” ”Blasphemous”, “sacrilegious” :D :D :D haven’t said that, so I object my lord, oops, your honor, I object. Daaaaamn I have many names, did you know mullah calls me kaafir, sunnishias calls me parwezi, parwezi calls me aastani (not ustanni ), and my mother called me “Lanati “(that doesnt even match my eye shadow :(). I swear I never swear but this time I swear am loved, I don’t even have to wait for paradise, its coming to me, thank you for all your beautiful “attributes” beyond time and space,(thts why i added Badshah salamat heard from the movie mughale azam) :-D :-D :-D  
 
can’t find the thread I’m sure I read somewhere (in an attempt to explain what it was meant by general templates) that the "RUSUL" are always mentioned in the context of a certain situation/event and it is primarily due to the situations/events in question that the RUSUL hold any significant importance.  
 
And if that is the case, then this is good because situations and events are people. Situations and Events can be categorized as THINGS! so The situations and events themselves are the generic templates. By extension the RUSUL in each situation/event also become generic models by which people deriving lessons from the "generic templates" can emulate and mould their reactions to similar situations after. Is it still confusing? buuu huuu what to duuu nouuuww?
 
 
 
Oh Lord have mercy (saying it with a deep deep manly bass voice) I know we will face more problems with this term “general templates”. Maybe someone will interpret it as “general in temple” or “template general” or “template Generalist” or “Gournalist in temple” or even worse and most feared “ginger hating ginger general in ginger temple”  
 
See, loads of possibilities here, I’m scared whats next :-O (and i miss my smiley emoticons :( http://i717.photobucket.com/albums/ww173/prestonjjrtr/Smileys/th_CryingSmiley.gif?t=1260429898)  
 
 
And if you are Buzzy, then im bee, together we are buzzy bee :-D :-D
 
 
 

Comments by: Iqbal kay shaheen On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
I swear I never swear but this time I swear am loved, I don’t even have to wait for paradise, its coming to me (81:13), thank you for all your beautiful “attributes” beyond time and space,(thats why i added Badshah salamat heard from the movie mughale azam) :-D :-D :-D  
 
:)......  
 

Comments by: Nargis On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
A ? :-D ,Iqbal ke shaheen,thank you for the aya, i didnt know about it ksm se. Here is a poem for you because your so nice:- Nahi tera basera chattano ke pahaar par, to pahaar hai, kar basera chattan par, or was it shaheen par? :-D hope you liked it  
 
2:132  
 
وَوَصَّىٰ بِهَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بَنِيهِ وَيَعْقُوبُ يَا بَنِيَّ إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَىٰ لَكُمُ الدِّينَ فَلَا تَمُوتُنَّ إِلَّا وَأَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ  
 
 
اور ابرہیم نے اپنے بیٹوں کو اسی بات کی وصیت کی اور یعقوب نے بھی یہی کہا کہ بیٹا اللہ نے تمہارے لیے یہی دین پسند فرمایا ہے، پس مرنا تو مسلم کی موت مرنا۔  
 
anyone noticed the word DEEN there,,,,  
 
word game:-  
TODAY  
 
PERFECTED  
 
DEEN  
 
and the oscar goes to,,,,MEEE :-D :-D -- If you can See, then kha ke mulee baja de talee

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***What is the linkage between zaani and mushrik? WHY THESE TWO WORDS ARE USED TOGETHER? If "Mushrik" means idolater or polytheist, then what does "zaani" means? In fact, I would request you to please do me a favor and translate verse 24:03 replacing the word Mushrik with "Idolater" or "polytheist" and providing the suitable translation of word "Zaani" (If possible). I just want to see what is the linkage between "mushrik and zaani", also how the words "Idolater or polytheist" fits in with the context and subject matter of verse (24:03). Once it gets clear then we can move on to 6:106 !***  
 
Tell you what, let’s do it this way, for the moment, put 24:3 aside and tell me this…how do YOU define the term mushrik? This should clear things up immediately.  
 
Following are the definitions for mushrik and zana:  
 
ZANA: to commit fornication; to commit adultery. Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 236  
 
Zana, in a word, is illegal sexual contact.  
 
SHARIKA: to be a companion; polytheist; idolatry; associate partners with Allah.Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 288  
 
Mu, as you know, is the doer of something. In this case, sharika.  
 
Now, it should be obvious the connection between mushrik and zina. I want you to fgure this out! If I tell you where's the fgrowth and fun in that! :D  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Waqar,  
 
***Is 6:106 also being addressed to last prophet? I need some help to understand when and why a verse should be interpreted as being addressed to last prophet and when to general public.***  
 
The answer lies in one letter/word-- ـك‎ pronoun – 2nd person masculine singular object. Given that the Last Prophet is the recipient of Al-Quran, and only him, he is the 2nd person masculine singular object. Allah is the 1st person masculine singular object. This is why we know that the ayat is referring directly to the Last Prophet. The following ayat also informs us that Al-Quran was revealed to the Last Prophet directly to him individually, but also applies now in the general sense:  
 
6:19 Say: What thing is the weightiest in testimony? Say: Allah is witness between you and me. AND THIS QURAN HAS BEEN REVEALED TO ME that with IT I may warn YOU AND WHOMSOEVER IT REACHES. Do you really bear witness that there are other gods with Allah? Say: I bear not witness. Say: He is only One God, and surely I am innocent of that which you set up with Him.  
 
***My second question is about your following statement.***  
 
DHULQARNAIN: 3:143 And Muhammad is but a messenger — messengers have already passed away before him. There are TWO messengers here today--Al-Quran...and the individual who recites it to others. There are no more prophets...ever.>>  
 
***I am not able to connect your two messengers (Al-Qurn and the individual who reciters to others) theory with this verse. Please help!***  
 
Good deal. Let’s look at this way. Ayats 6:19 will be helpful here as well, as well as, ayat 14:4. The human messenger, that was the Last Prophet, is now dead on our plane of existence. This we all agree on. Now, ayat  
 
6:19 says:  
 
“WHOMSOEVER IT (Al-Quran) REACHES”. When Al-Quran reaches an individual, it, in fact, was the messenger to that individual. It is both the messenger and the message simultaneously. Do you see?  
 
14:4 And We did not send any MESSENGER BUT IN THE LANGUAGE OF HIS PEOPLE, so that he might explain to them clearly; then Allah makes whom He pleases err and He guides whom He pleases and He is the Mighty, the Wise.  
 
Now, keeping in mind 3:143 (Last Prophet dead), 6:19 (whomsoever Al-Quran reaches), and 14:4 (messenger comes in the language of his people) what language did Al-Quran come to you in? I’m English speaking so Al-Quran , that is, per 14:4,came to me in the language of my people—English speakers, hence, it was/is the messenger to me. What language do you speak?  
 
I hope these ayats cleared things up for you.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 15 June 2011Report Abuse
SALAAMUN ALAIKUM, NARGE, and AURANGZAIB,  
 
I’m hoping against hope that you and Aruangzaib will join the discussion soon on 6:106.  
 
Once this ayat is understood by you guys and the other members, things like:  
 
1. muhammad is my lord  
 
2. same Al-Kitab  
 
3. generic templates  
 
4. beyond time and space  
 
5. what day/period when DEEN was perfected?  
 
etc., and other such craziness will simply vanish.  
 
Here’s my advice Narge and Moaz…KEEP IT SIMPLE! LESS IS MORE!  
 
Ayat 6:106 is a perfect example of keeping it simple and less is more, yet, look how absolutely comprehensive in scope it is!  
 
If we declare ourselves to be muslims, that is, to be Quran only and alone...then we need to begin to act like it. Allah is not kidding with us about this Deen. Here’s a reminder from Him:  
 
24:15 When you received it on your tongues and SPOKE WITH YOUR MOUTHS that of which YOU HAD NO KNOWLEDGE, and you deemed it INSIGNIFICANT while with Allah it was GREAT.  
 
2:168-169 O men, eat the lawful and good things from what is in the earth, and follow not the footsteps of the devil. Surely he is an open enemy to you. He enjoins on you only evil and indecency, and that YOU SPEAK AGAINST ALLAH WHAT YOU KNOW NOT.  
 
We really do have to watch what we say people.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: moazzam On 15 June 2011
Dear Dhulqarnain ,All Aastana members. Salam,Remember I normally provide the sense of verses by tasreef al ayat, not the direct translation.  
Read the verse 104-106 in consolidation with 112-117,the sense of verse under question 6/106 would be cleared to you . Note the following points  
1)verse 104 جَاءَكُم بَصَآئِرُ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ = Material written in Alkitab, also Ayaat scattered in the universe (as pointed out by this Alkitab)  
2) Verse 105  
كَذَلِكَ نُصَرِّفُ الْآيَاتِ = the basic and essential rule to understand the message of alkitab, (as quran explain itself).  
3) Verse 106 اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ  
Follow whatever conceived in your mind (through the human conscious system provided by your sustainer) while tasreef al ayat in Alkitab(pondering into )  
لاَ إِلَـهَ  
إِلاَّ هُوَ وَأَعْرِ  
ضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ  
You have to follow the divine message/orders only; there should be no intermingling of any other material parallel to the Alkitab( restrain to follow the hadith/history)  
4)Verse 112  
وَكَذَلِكَ جَعَلْنَا لِكُلِّ نَبِيٍّ عَدُوًّا شَيَاطِينَ الْإِنسِ وَالْجِنِّ يُوحِي بَعْضُ  
هُمْ إِلَى بَعْضٍ زُخْرُفَ الْقَوْلِ غُرُورًا وَلَوْ شَاءَ رَبُّكَ مَا فَعَلُوهُ فَذَرْهُمْ وَمَا يَفْتَرُونَ  
Especial attention should be given at “youha ba’z hum ila ba’z” .Infact we are restrained to consult any man written material in conflict with Alkitab(history,hadith-like narrations) Now compare both type of “ nuzool alwahy” in both the above verses.  
5) verse 114 أَفَغَيْرَ اللّهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَ  
مًا وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلاً وَالَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّن رَّبِّكَ بِالْحَقِّ فَلاَ تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِينَ  
 
Would you legislate rules and laws by consulting other than Alkitab, whereas you have complete, detailed ALKTAB,(so ponder into this book then what ever conceived in your mind would be “MUNAZZIL MIN-ALLAH)  
6)Verse 115  
وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلاً لاَّ مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ  
This is also attributes to this ALKITAB AND LAWS OF UNIVERS on which we have to trust in, while legislation the laws of the society.  
7)verse116  
وَإِن تُطِعْ أَكْثَرَ مَن فِي الْأَرْضِ يُضِلُّوكَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللّهِ إِن يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلاَّ الظَّنَّ وَإِنْ هُ  
مْ إِلاَّ يَخْرُصُونَ  
If you will follow the majority based rules (like majority is authority),then you may lose the right path. Because majority follows their own thoughts and preconceived theology.  
CONCLUSION:- STUCK ON ALKITAB AND UNIVERSAL LAWS TO LEGISLATE THE LAWS AND RULES IN THE ISLAMIC STATE.  
Remember :- The term "LAST PROPHET" used by religious intrigues is against ALKITAB.letter/word-- ـك‎ pronoun any body in any era who wants guidance from Allah.  
Dhulqarnain! The answer lies in one letter/word-- ـك‎ pronoun – 2nd person masculine singular object. Given that the Last Prophet is the recipient of Al-Quran, and only him, he is the 2nd person masculine singular object. Allah is the 1st person masculine singular object. This is why we know that the ayat is referring directly to the Last Prophet. The following ayat also informs us that Al-Quran was revealed to the Last Prophet directly to him individually, but also applies now in the general sense:  
Moazzam! The answer is given above.

Comments by: Junaid On 16 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
Brother Dhulqarnain, before sharing my thoughts, let me remind you again what I said earlier on. I said I am a bit dumb as compared to other participants, therefore please bear with me.  
In fact I am also a sophist (a title given to me by someone who is inventing his own deen, based on assumptions), which means I may have the tendency of deceiving people.  
I am thinking and I am thinking again that if I am dumb, I cannot be a sophist and if I am a sophist then I cannot be a dumb, since sophistry is an act which cannot be performed by dumb guys.  
 
You said;  
**(let’s do it this way, for the moment, put 24:3 aside and tell me this…how do YOU define the term mushrik? This should clear things up immediately. ) by dhulqarnain  
 
I think it's a good idea but let me think if I can keep aside one aayat of Quran to understand the meaning of a word given in another aayat.  
 
Why is this word used in 24:03?  
 
Let me try an analyse this verse according to the meanings you have provided.  
 
**(ZANA: to commit fornication; to commit adultery. Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 236  
Zana, in a word, is illegal sexual contact.  
SHARIKA: to be a companion; polytheist; idolatry; associate partners with Allah.Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 288  
Mu, as you know, is the doer of something. In this case, sharika.) by dhulqarnain  
 
It actually says ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً which means zaani will get into a contract /Nikah with none other than zaania and / or mushrika ....  
It also says وَٱلزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَآ إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ which means zaania will get into a contract / nikah with none other than zaani and / or mushrik...  
 
Now as per the meanings provided by you, the verse says;  
 
ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً  
A (male) who commits "fornication / adultery / Illegal sexual contact" will get into contract (nikah) or can be the companion of none other but (A female) who commits "fornication / adultery / illegal sexual contact" and / or (a female) who is a doer of idolatry / associates partner with Allah.  
 
ٱلزَّانِيَةُ لَا يَنكِحُهَآ إِلَّا زَانٍ أَوْ مُشْرِكٌ  
A (female) who commits "fornication / adultery / Illegal sexual contact" will get into contract (nikah) or can be the companion of none other but (A male) who commits "fornication / adultery / illegal sexual contact" and / or (a male) who is a doer of idolatry / associates partner with Allah.  
______________________________________________________________________  
 
To tell you the truth, I am trying my level best to understand the linkage between (committing adultery / having illegal sexual contact) and (doing idolatry / associating partners with Allah).  
 
Although you want me to figure it out and you are right that there is no growth and fun if you tell everything to me, but the problem is that our topic of discussion is not (24:03) and I am using this verse only to understand the real meaning of MUSHRIK. Therefore (keeping in mind that I am a dumb) I would request you to please share your understanding with me and enlighten me about how these two words are related to each other and what is common between idolater and adulterer.

Comments by: moazzam On 16 June 2011
Dear Aastana members. THE SENSE OF QURANIC TERMINOLOGY “ALYOUM”  
That is the time when Islamic state came into being and execution of accountability taken place.  
Verse 45/28 رَى كُلَّ أُمَّةٍ جَاثِيَةً كُلُّ أُمَّةٍ تُدْعَى إِلَى كِتَابِهَا الْيَوْمَ تُجْزَوْنَ مَا  
كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ  
 
Verse 57/15  
فَالْيَوْمَ لَا يُؤْخَذُ مِنكُمْ فِدْيَةٌ وَلَا مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مَأْوَاكُمُ النَّارُ هِيَ مَوْلَاكُمْ وَبِئْسَ الْمَصِيرُ  
Verse 36/65  
الْيَوْمَ نَخْتِمُ عَلَى أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَتُكَلِّمُنَا أَيْدِيهِمْ وَتَشْهَدُ أَرْجُلُهُمْ بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْسِبُونَ  
 
Verse 40/17  
الْيَوْمَ تُجْزَى كُلُّ نَفْسٍ بِمَا كَسَبَتْ لَا ظُلْمَ الْيَوْمَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ  
See the verses 45/34-35, 46/19-20 these verses also providing the sense of الْيَوْمَ (TIME OF MAKAFAT E AMAL)as an accountability day(when Islamic state became in to being)  
Verse 10/92 The time of Makafat e amal of FIRAON has been described as  
فَالْيَوْمَ نُنَجِّيكَ بِبَدَنِكَ لِتَكُونَ لِمَنْ خَلْفَكَ آيَةً وَإِنَّ  
كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ عَنْ آيَاتِنَا لَغَافِلُونَ  
 
LET US ANALYZE THE PORTION OF VERSE UNDER QUESTION (quoted by Aurangzaib) ie الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلاَمَ دِينً  
To comprehend the sense of this part of the verse 5/3 at least the relevant portion was suppose to take ie الْيَوْمَ يَئِسَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِن دِينِكُمْ فَلاَ تَخْشَوْهُمْ وَاخْشَوْنِ الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْ  
لاَمَ دِينً  
In fact we have to read the Surah e Maida from start to 5/7 focus attention at this part of the verse 5/5  
الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ  
لَّكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَّهُمْ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ إِ  
When legislation starts in the establish Islamic state and the process of accountability comes in execution, that is the time period,you achieved the goal of الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي .  
Mind no last prophet has been discussed ,rather the achievement of goal(to establish the Islamic state at the basis of values prescribed in these verses has been described.  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 16 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
DHULQARNAINLet’s do it this way, for the moment, put 24:3 aside and tell me this…how do YOU define the term mushrik? This should clear things up immediately.  
 
***I think it's a good idea but let me think if I can keep aside one aayat of Quran to understand the meaning of a word given in another aayat.***  
 
 
LOL! Yes, it was a good idea and is still a good idea! The problem is…you have yet to answer the question.  
 
You're far from dumb Junaid and I know the term mushrik cannot be a new term to you?  
 
So, once again, tell me the DEFINTION of shirk/mushrik which YOU USE, otherwise, we will just keep spinning our wheels here and get absolutely nowhere.  
 
Thanks.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 16 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamum, Moazzam,  
 
***Remember :- The term "LAST PROPHET" used by religious intrigues is against ALKITAB.letter/word-- ـك‎ pronoun any body in any era who wants guidance from Allah.***  
 
DHULQARNAIN: The answer lies in one letter/word-- ـك‎ pronoun – 2nd person masculine singular object. Given that the Last Prophet is the recipient of Al-Quran, and only him, he is the 2nd person masculine singular object. Allah is the 1st person masculine singular object. This is why we know that the ayat is referring directly to the Last Prophet. The following ayat also informs us that Al-Quran was revealed to the Last Prophet directly to him individually, but also applies now in the general sense:  
 
A couple of things:  
 
1. How is using Last Prophet “religious intrigue and against A-Kitaba/ Al-Quran"?  
 
2. Does “kha” mean-- pronoun – 2nd person masculine singular object?  
 
Yes or no  
 
I really could not understand the rest of your post, sorry.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Junaid On 16 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dhulqarnain;  
you said;  
**(The problem is…you have yet to answer the question.) by Dhulqarnain  
 
You know that's why I used the term "dumb' for myself, coz once again I failed to convey my point to you :(  
No worries!  
I can try once again :)  
What I was trying to tell you since the beginning, is that I had the same understanding of the word :MUSHRIK" as you do i.e. "one who associate partners with Allah"  
BUT!!!!  
Then I read verse (24:03) and I got totally confused, and now I am standing in the middle of nowhere.  
If I go with my initial understanding regarding MUSHRIK as one who associate partners with Allah, then I am unable to link this word with ZAANI and ZAANIA.  
You know, a confused person cannot say anything with confidence, which means I am unable to translate this word right now and that's why I am requesting you to help me.  
 
What is the link between "an adulterer or a person (male /female) who commits illegal sexual act" and "a person who associates partners with Allah"? What is similar or common between an adulterer and an Idolater?  
 
Why a female who commits illegal sexual acts gets into nikah with none other than a male who is adulterer or a male who associates partners with Allah?  
AND  
Why a male who commits illegal sexual acts gets into nikah with none other than a female who is an adulterer or a female who associates partners with Allah?  
 
In simple words, I am getting doubtful about the meaning of MUSHRIK as "one who associates partners with ALLAH", and I need your help in this regard. Please enlighten me and convince me through logic, that Mushrik means "Idolater" or "one who associates partners with Allah" and this meaning fits in both (6:106) and (24:03).  
 
Hope you'll understand my problem this time :)

Comments by: moazzam On 17 June 2011
Brother Dhulqarnain! , I astonished, you did not bother to understand my post which i wrote at your extreme desire to know the sense of 6/106  
Dhulqarnain!  
Here’s my advice Narge and Moaz…KEEP IT SIMPLE! LESS IS MORE!  
 
Ayat 6:106 is a perfect example of keeping it simple and less is more, yet, look how absolutely comprehensive in scope it is!  
 
 
Dhulqarnain! . How is using Last Prophet “religious intrigue and against A-Kitaba/ Al-Quran"?  
Moazzam! The word last prophet is not used any where in Quran. .Letter/word-- ـك‎ in verse 6/106 اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ  
pronoun any body 2nd person masculine singular object, to whom's mind the message conceives,while pondering into alkitab, in any era who wants guidance from Allah.  
 
 
Dhulqarnain! Does “kha” mean-- pronoun – 2nd person masculine singular object?  
 
Moazzam! Yes  
 
Dhulqarnain! I really could not understand the rest of your post, sorry.  
Moazzam! Re-try to understand it, because you seemed very much conscious about the verse 6/106, in fact the essence of “NUZOOL/ WAHY” especially the concept of NUZOOL AL KITAB has been described.  
 

Comments by: Maniza On 17 June 2011
Dear All,  
 
Many of you on the blog and in private have again and again attacked brother Moazzam on writing in a complcated manner, As far as I have seen brother Moazzam has ALWAYS made it simple, read his comments CAREFULLY, same for Nargis.  
 
Others have with their pen written intriguing and long long comments, taken up science and history to prove their views. Making personal remarks, insinuating and openly calling them athesists and even kafir. I suggest this thread be read and re-viewed objectively. So that we can learn from it.  
 
Its a shame that where we cannot agree to disagree we resort to such megear levels. I am not taking sides, have always been object but I think this was the time to remind All that this is a platform for learning. You have been invited into the study room to learn from dr.Qamar, I dont think anyone would appreciate such behaviour when they invite students as guests in their living room, and for them to act as such, including myself. I too have made mistakes and am the first to admit them.  
 
So a request to All, lets stop bashing each other, and make Aastana the way it was before and not a redicule like other blogs.  
 
This is my last comment on the matter.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 17 June 2011Report Abuse
Salamun Moazzam,  
 
***Brother Dhulqarnain! , I astonished, you did not bother to understand my post which i wrote at your extreme desire to know the sense of 6/106***  
 
I hope I didn’t offend you Moaz. I simply couldn’t get through it. It was not my intention to offend. Please accept my apology for any hurt feelings.  
 
You must begin to use less “intellectual/philosophical language if you’re going to be readily understood. Just my opinion.  
 
Dhulqarnain wrote: How is using Last Prophet “religious intrigue and against A-Kitaba/ Al-Quran"?  
 
***Moazzam! The word last prophet is not used any where in Quran. .Letter/word-- ـك‎ in verse 6/106 اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ ***  
 
I use the term/phrase Last Prophet, because Allah refers to him as the…khatama al-nabiyina.  
 
33:40 Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the prophets. And Allah is ever Knower of all things.  
 
KHATAMA: To seal; to end; last. Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 148  
 
My saying “Last Prophet”, is because I’m English speaking and the messenger came to me in my language.  
 
14:4 And We sent no messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly. Then Allah leaves in error whom He pleases and He guides whom He pleases. And He is the Mighty, the Wise  
 
If you wish, I could change and use instead-- Seal of the Prophets. Let me know.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: Junaid On 17 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dhulqarnain;  
You said;  
**(I use the term/phrase Last Prophet, because Allah refers to him as the…khatama al-nabiyina. ) by Dhulqarnain  
 
I would request you to please confirm whether the term used in this particular verse is KHATAM or KHATIM !  
 
If it is KHATAM (with a zabar ), then please tell me what is the difference between KHATAM and KHATIM  
OR  
Are these two the same and it makes no difference whether it's KHATAM or KHATIM?  
 
Why am I asking this?  
Because I have seen people using the word "Khaatimah" (with a zer) in their common language in order to represent "END" while in 33:40, I noticed that it is "Khatam" (with a zabar) which sounds a but different. (Not sure why)  
 
What exactly does SEAL OF PROPHETS mean?  
According to dictionary, it is;  
SEAL  
–noun  
1. an embossed emblem, figure, symbol, word, letter, etc., used as attestation or evidence of authenticity.  
2. a stamp, medallion, ring, etc., engraved with such a device, for impressing paper, wax, lead, or the like: The king took the seal from his finger and applied it to the document.  
3. the impression so obtained: It was unmistakably the royal seal on the document.  
 
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seal  
 
 
And do you think the term PROPHET is an appropriate translation for the word ٱلنَّبِيِّ ?  
 
According to Wikipedia, the definition of prophet is;  
 
PROPHET:  
In religion, a prophet is an individual who is claimed to have been contacted by the supernatural or the divine, and serves as an intermediary with humanity, delivering this newfound knowledge from the supernatural entity to other people.[1][2] The message that the prophet conveys is called a prophecy.  
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophet  
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 
Now please don't say what you said in reply to my previous question;  
**(I want you to fgure this out! If I tell you where's the growth and fun in that!) by Dhulqarnain  
 
NOTE: I am still looking forward to your answer regarding my previous post.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 17 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
Yes, I see what you mean, now.  
 
I have to do some more research into exactly what---Al-Mushrikeen, means.  
 
I'm questioning this for eample:  
 
Can Jews, Christians and the so-called Muslims be labelled as part of Al-mushrikeen, or...do these groups of people exhibit mushrik behavior, burtare still not of the mushrikeen.  
 
Do you get my point?  
 
Looking forward to your help in this matter, as well as, the others.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Junaid On 17 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
**(Can Jews, Christians and the so-called Muslims be labelled as part of Al-mushrikeen, or...do these groups of people exhibit mushrik behavior, burtare still not of the mushrikeen.) by Dhulqarnain  
 
Brother Dhulqarnanin, I think we are getting closer towards a mutual understanding. Almost the same kind of questions came into my mind when I did some research on the term AL-MUSHRIKEEN.  
BUT  
Unfortunately I failed to reach any conclusion.  
Now I can see some hope though!  
 
Another confusion;  
What is common between MUSHRIK and ZAANI  
OR  
What is common between MUSHRIKAH and ZAANIAH  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 17 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Moazzam,  
 
DHULQARNAIN: (I use the term/phrase Last Prophet, because Allah refers to him as the…khatama al-nabiyina. )  
 
***I would request you to please confirm whether the term used in this particular verse is KHATAM or KHATIM ! If it is KHATAM (with a zabar ), then please tell me what is the difference between KHATAM and KHATIM OR Are these two the same and it makes no difference whether it's KHATAM or KHATIM? Why am I asking this? Because I have seen people using the word "Khaatimah" (with a zer) in their common language in order to represent "END" while in 33:40, I noticed that it is "Khatam" (with a zabar) which sounds a but different. (Not sure why) ***  
 
I don’t know the answer to your question. What I do know is the root word kha-ta-mim خ ت م and I gave you the definition in my prior post. Now, if the word can mean something other than seal/last--IN Al-Quran, then, please share it with us, thanks.  
 
 
***What exactly does SEAL OF PROPHETS mean? According to dictionary, it is; SEAL –noun  
1. an embossed emblem, figure, symbol, word, letter, etc., used as attestation or evidence of authenticity. 2. a stamp, medallion, ring, etc., engraved with such a device, for impressing paper, wax, lead, or the like: The king took the seal from his finger and applied it to the document.  
3. the impression so obtained: It was unmistakably the royal seal on the document. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seal ***  
 
True, but it also means:  
 
a. To close with or as if with a seal.  
 
b. To close hermetically (so as to be airtight).  
 
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seal  
 
Now, which of our definitions most approximates the one Allah is using in His Quran? It must be “to close”. Listen, there cannot possibly be anymore prophets, because Al-Quran is the final message from Allah. Certainly if there were more messages to come from Allah, then, of course, more prophets would be needed to receive those messages, but this is not the case, hence, khatama, can only mean “last”, that is, as far as Al-Quran is concerned.  
 
***And do you think the term PROPHET is an appropriate translation for the word ٱلنَّبِيِّ ? According to Wikipedia, the definition of prophet is; PROPHET: In religion, a prophet is an individual who is claimed to have been contacted by the supernatural or the divine, and serves as an intermediary with humanity, delivering this newfound knowledge from the supernatural entity to other people.[1][2] The message that the prophet conveys is called a prophecy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophet ***  
 
The term prophet works for me, but it could be translated better perhaps?  
 
***NOTE: I am still looking forward to your answer regarding my previous post.***  
 
What is the question again?  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 19 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
I spent the last couple of days thinking about your excellent question regarding Al-Mushrikeen/The Polytheists in relation to 24:3 and zana. Following is my understanding.  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
I’ll start with ayats 6:106. Ayat 6:106 tells us to follow what is REVEALED FROM ALLAH and that THERE IS NO GOD BUT HE.  
 
From this then, we can begin to get an understanding of who the mushrikeen/polytheists were and are;  
 
1. they did/do not follow any revealed book/message from Allah.  
2. nor did/do they accept only Allah as God, the Creator.  
3. as a result of 1 and 2, one becomes of the mushirkeen/polytheists—to follow lies and idols.  
 
Let’s look at an experience with Abraham:  
 
37:85-86 When he (Ibrahim) said to his father and his people: What is it that you worship? A lie-- gods besides Allah-- do you desire?  
 
Speaking of Abraham, in ayat 6:161, he is declared by Allah to be guided--a monotheist, thus, not of the mushrikeen/polytheists.  
 
6:161 Say: Surely, as for me, my Lord has guided me to the right path; to a most right deen, the millet/dictates of Ibrahim the upright one/ monotheist, and he was not of the polytheists.  
 
The mushrikeen/polytheists, apparently, were/are fervent about their beliefs to the extent that, they turned their backs on him and Abraham’s own father threatened to injure/kill hm.  
 
37:90 So they turned their backs on him, going away.  
 
19:46 He said: Dislikest thou my gods, O Abraham? If thou desist not, I will certainly stone thee. And leave me for a time.  
 
So, we can conclude some things as to who the mushrikeen were/are by the following five positions which they hold:  
 
1. they did/do not follow any revealed book/message from Allah.  
 
2. they did/do not accept only Allah as God, the Creator.  
 
3. they follow lies and idols.  
 
4. they are not guided/on the straight path.  
 
5. they are not monotheists.  
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord makes haram only indecencies/fahish, such of them as are apparent and such as are concealed, and sin and unjust rebellion, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and that you say of Allah what you know not.  
 
29:45 Recite that which has been revealed to thee of the Book and keep up salaar. Surely salaa prevents indecency/fahsih and evil; and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greater (force). And Allah knows what you do.  
 
So, in coming back to above ayat 24:3 and zana, in relation to the mushrikeen, it my understanding that those who participate in zana can only marry those who also participate in zana or who follow a belief system/lifestyle which embraces the above 5 positions. Those who participate in zana, obviously, their salaa is not the salaa of Alllah (the salaa of Allah would prevent/make impossible for anyone to do fahish/indecencyshameful deeds i.e. zana or the rest of the above five positions.)  
 
Now, of course, one who participates in zana can marry a believer if he/she renounces zana and disbelief and submits to Allah/become muslim.  
 
The following three ayats, in my understanding, further define Allah’s salaa.  
 
6:151-153 Say: Come! I will recite what your Lord has forbidden to you: associate nothing with Him and do good to parents and kill not your children for (fear of) poverty — We provide for you and for them — and draw not nigh to indecencies/fahish, open or secret, and kill not the soul which Allah has made sacred except in the course of justice. This He commands upon you that you may understand. And approach not the property of the orphan except in the best manner, until he attains his maturity. And give full measure and weight with equity — We impose not on any soul a duty except to the extent of its ability. And when you speak, be just, though it be (against) a relative. And fulfil Allah’s covenant. This He commnds you that you may be mindful/remember; And (know) that this is My path, the right one/sirat-al-mustaqeem, so follow it, and follow not other ways, for they will lead you away from His way. This He commands you that you may have taqwa.  
 
Hopefully this is helpful to your question.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
 
 

Comments by: Junaid On 20 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Dhulqarnain, let me summarize what I have understood from your comments so far;  
 
Salaah = Following the system or ideology based on the concepts provided by Rabb in Al-Kitaab.  
Mushrik = one who follow systems or ideologies based on the material other than what has been defined in Al-kitaab.  
 
I think it's quite clear now that we both are on same wavelength, as far as the term "Mushrik" is concerned.  
 
Now few words on the concept of ZINA as given in (24:03) which is still unclear;  
 
You said;  
**(my understanding that those who participate in zana can only marry those who also participate in zana or who follow a belief system/lifestyle which embraces the above 5 positions. Those who participate in zana, obviously, their salaa is not the salaa of Alllah (the salaa of Allah would prevent/make impossible for anyone to do fahish/indecencyshameful deeds i.e. zana or the rest of the above five positions.) by Dhulqarnain  
 
Frankly speaking, I am unable to understand your point!  
As per my observation, a lot of male individuals involved in indecency and adultery, having illegal relations with many women at a time, yet they try to seek a female life partner who is good in character and has never been involved in immodesty or adultery. Most of the times these characterless male individuals marry women having excellent character.  
Let me share my personal experience;  
A friend of mine was an ideal example of a lose character male. He was involved in drinking, drugs, parties and was having sexual relations with at least a dozen different women. He got married to a lady whom I know personally. The lady was an ideal woman, having a great character, a clear example of a modesty, who has guarded her chastity throughout her life. Also to mention that you can see a lot of examples where adulterers look for life partners who are good in character and who were never involved in adultery.  
 
Now tell me why this happens, when it is clearly written in (24:03) that "a male who commits illegal sexual acts gets into nikah with none other than a female who is an adulterer or a female who associates partners with Allah" (if I accept your explanation as true).  
Isn't the situation I have defined above contradicts (24:03)?  
 
What is the linkage between MUSHRIK and ZAANI?  
What is common between these two terms?  
 
NOTE: I am assuming that we both agree on the meaning of MUSHRIK as "one who follow the ideology based on material other than Al kitab".

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 20 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
DHULQARNAIN: my understanding that those who participate in zana can only marry those who also participate in zana or who follow a belief system/lifestyle which embraces the above 5 positions. Those who participate in zana, obviously, their salaa is not the salaa of Alllah (the salaa of Allah would prevent/make impossible for anyone to do fahish/indecencyshameful deeds i.e. zana or the rest of the above five positions.)  
 
*** Frankly speaking, I am unable to understand your point! ***  
 
I know, I wasn’t completely pleased with how I expressed the above idea either. I just have to make due until I think of some better phrasing. :D  
 
***As per my observation, a lot of male individuals involved in indecency and adultery, having illegal relations with many women at a time, yet they try to seek a female life partner who is good in character and has never been involved in immodesty or adultery. Most of the times these characterless male individuals marry women having excellent character.***  
 
Good character isn’t always enough.  
 
***Let me share my personal experience; A friend of mine was an ideal example of a lose character male. He was involved in drinking, drugs, parties and was having sexual relations with at least a dozen different women. He got married to a lady whom I know personally. The lady was an ideal woman, having a great character, a clear example of a modesty, who has guarded her chastity throughout her life. Also to mention that you can see a lot of examples where adulterers look for life partners who are good in character and who were never involved in adultery. Now tell me why this happens, when it is clearly written in (24:03) that "a male who commits illegal sexual acts gets into nikah with none other than a female who is an adulterer or a female who associates partners with Allah" (if I accept your explanation as true). Isn't the situation I have defined above contradicts (24:03)?***  
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
29:45 Recite that which has been revealed to thee of the Book and keep up salaa. Surely salaa prevents/makes impossible indecency/fahish and evil/munkar; and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greater force. And Allah knows what you do.  
 
Is your friend is she a…believer? It is my understanding that 24:3 is addressing believers. Believing men and women would not do zina as it would violate their salaa. Many of the mushrikeen exhibit what might be deemed good character, but because they reject 6:106. Their character then, as far as Allah is concerned, is not enough, hence, to get involved in zina can be rationalized. As I said though, for the believing person zina is made impossible, because salaa prevents shameful deeds/indecencies/fahish (zina) and evil deeds/munkar.  
 
***What is the linkage between MUSHRIK and ZAANI? What is common between these two terms? ***  
 
The Mushrikeen do not call Allah to mind, hence, they do not follow Allah’s salaa. Allah's Salaa prevents/makes impossible shameful deeds such as zina, however, the mushrikeen have no such restraints. This is my understanding of the connection between these two terms. Now don’t get me wrong, some believers can do mushrik type behavior (i.e. neglect their salaa; not having proper understanding of something) without being of The Mushrikeen.  
 
***NOTE: I am assuming that we both agree on the meaning of MUSHRIK as "one who follow the ideology based on material other than Al kitab".***  
 
I don’t like the term ideology, because an ideology may or may not reflect reality accurately. I prefer simply to say that, The Mushrikeen are either oblivious of Allah’s Deen, in regard to its Laws of Morality, or are in rejection of them.  
 
I hope we are inching closer to a common understanding, here.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Junaid On 21 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
JUNAID: meaning of MUSHRIK as "one who follow the ideology based on material other than Al kitab".  
 
DHULQARNAIN: I don’t like the term ideology, because an ideology may or may not reflect reality accurately.  
 
JUNAID: Alright brother, it's not a big deal. Probably I shouldn't have used the word IDEOLOGY, when a suitable word DEEN is available. However I would like to mention that I've used the word IDEOLOGY only to represent the concepts of MUSHRIKEEN, who obviously are not the followers of DEEN. They follow man-made concepts which means IDEOLOGY or SYSTEM defined by a group of elites.  
 
I couldn't have said it this way that "MUSHRIKEEN are those who follow a DEEN based on the material other than AL-KITAAB.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: The Mushrikeen are either oblivious of Allah’s Deen, in regard to its Laws of Morality, or are in rejection of them.  
 
JUNAID: Where are these laws defined? In AL-KITAAB isn't it? Therefore all those who follow different "aalims", "priests", "rabbees", "Molvees". "Imams" and the material known as man made "SHARIA" which we see in the books of hadith and history, and those who interpret AL-KITAAB according to the man made sharia or hadith, those who are divided into sects, are all MUSHRIKEEN. Also those who follow socio-economic systems defined by Elites, those who become subservient to the elites (willingly or unwillingly) can be regarded as MUSHRIKEEN.  
 
Think about all the US citizens who are bound to follow the idiot Ben Bernanke and his lies in shape of QE 1, QE 2, Qe 3 etc. or who still believe that war of terror is a real war and not a game of so called ELITES, or who believe that George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Hilary Clinton and Obama are sincere towards common citizens. Those citizens who are contributing their taxes to fund the WARS imposed on various nations to control their resources and to fulfill the agendas of Elites, their banks, their Oil corporations and their arms manufacturing corporations, are nothing but MUSHRIKEEN. (Whether you agree with me or not).  
 
DHULQARNAIN: Good character isn’t always enough. Is your friend is she a…believer? It is my understanding that 24:3 is addressing believers.  
 
JUNAID: I guess, character in terms of moral and ethical values, is one of the most important criteria to judge a person. Anyway, It depends on how you define the term "BELIEVER". All I can say is that I am yet to meet a person in my life who completely fits into the definition of BELIEVER according to what I have understood so far.  
BTW: the lady is a Muslim (just like other Muslims today) albeit she possess a high moral character and she has guarded her chastity since her childhood. She believes in Quran and she believes in peace and harmony. This is all I can say about her. On the other hand, the guy who got married to her was a party boy, having relations with various women, and even after marriage, he is involved in these kind of relationships. He is deceiving his wife but the woman trusts him blindly.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: 24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
JUNAID: My dear friend, I would definitely like to know how you translated this verse. See this;  
ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً the word is يَنكِحُ and you have translated this word as "have sexual relations with".  
Why and how? Could you please provide a reference?  
As per my understanding, يَنكِحُ cannot be translated as "having sexual relations", by any means.  
Remember, the suitable word (according to your own statement) for "illegal sexual relations" is ZINA and not يَنكِحُ  
As a matter of fact, يَنكِحُ represents the concept of NIKAH or a contract, which means the verse says;  
AL-ZAANI can marry / get into contract with none other than a ZAANIA أَوْ MUSHRIKAA. (I have left أَوْ as it is).  
 
What do you say?  
 
I do hope we both are learning a lot from this debate :)

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 21 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***Salaam Dhulqarnain; I do hope we both are learning a lot from this debate :)***  
 
I am learning a great deal. Exchanging with you is one of the very few times that I feel I’m in a discussion as opposed to a debate! :D  
 
***JUNAID: However I would like to mention that I've used the word IDEOLOGY only to represent the concepts of MUSHRIKEEN, who obviously are not the followers of DEEN. They follow man-made concepts which means IDEOLOGY or SYSTEM defined by a group of elites. I could have said it this way that "MUSHRIKEEN are those who follow a DEEN based on the material other than AL-KITAAB. ***  
 
Yes, I agee. The mushrikeen do have a deen, it’s just not the Deen of Allah/Deen of Al-Islam:  
 
9:33 He it is Who has sent His Messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth that He may make it prevail over all religions/DEENS, though the polytheists/al-mushrikeen are averse  
 
DHULQARNAIN: The Mushrikeen are either oblivious of Allah’s Deen, in regard to its Laws of Morality, or are in rejection of them.  
 
***JUNAID: Where are these laws defined? In AL-KITAAB isn't it? Therefore all those who follow different "aalims", "priests", "rabbees", "Molvees". "Imams" and the material known as man made "SHARIA" which we see in the books of hadith and history, and those who interpret AL-KITAAB according to the man made sharia or hadith, those who are divided into sects, are all MUSHRIKEEN. Also those who follow socio-economic systems defined by Elites, those who become subservient to the elites (willingly or unwillingly) can be regarded as MUSHRIKEEN.***  
 
It is my understanding that you are not completely accurate here. Look at it this way, all those who do shirk are not of The Mushrikeen , however, all of The Mushrikeen do practice shirk. Do you see the difference?  
 
Here’s an ayat to illustrates my point:  
 
22:17 Those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians and the Magians and the polytheists/The Mushrikeen — surely Allah will decide between them on the day of Resurrection. Surely Allah is Witness over all things.  
 
You’ll note that there are six groups mention:  
1. Believers  
2. Jews  
3. Sabians  
4. Christians  
5. Magians/Zoroastrians  
6. The Mushrikeen  
 
It appears to me that the following groups, the Believers, the Jews, the Sabians, the Zoroastrians, and the Christians have a one God/Monotheism concept, and possibly a revealed book, whereas, the Mushrikeen, have neither. While the Jews and Christians do participate in some shirk behavior, Allah, as you can see from above ayat 22:17, does not lump them or the others with the Mushrikeen.  
 
***JUNAID: I guess, character in terms of moral and ethical values, is one of the most important criteria to judge a person. Anyway, It depends on how you define the term "BELIEVER". All I can say is that I am yet to meet a person in my life who completely fits into the definition of BELIEVER according to what I have understood so far.***  
 
Let’s see how Allah defines believer, or better stated—those who trust:  
 
4:162 But the firm in knowledge among them and the believers/trusters believe/trust in that which has been revealed to thee and that which was revealed before thee, and those who keep salaa/adhere to Allah’s commands and zakaa/purify themselves and believe in Allah and the Last Day — these it is to whom We shall give a mighty reward.  
 
23:1-9 Successful indeed are the believers, Who are humble in their salaa, And who shun what is vain, And who act for the sake of purity, And who restrain their sexual passions—Except in the presence of their mates or those whom their right hands possess, for such surely are not blamable, But whoever seeks to go beyond that, such are transgressors —And those who are keepers of their trusts and their covenant, And those who keep a guard on their salaa.  
 
So, the believers/trusters:  
1. believe/trust in what was revealed (6:106 or 107)  
2. keep salaa.  
3. keep zakaa.  
4. restrain themselves sexually unless scripturally appropriate.  
5. shun what is vain/meaningless.  
 
***BTW: the lady is a Muslim (just like other Muslims today) albeit she possess a high moral character and she has guarded her chastity since her childhood. She believes in Quran and she believes in peace and harmony. This is all I can say about her. On the other hand, the guy who got married to her was a party boy, having relations with various women, and even after marriage, he is involved in these kind of relationships. He is deceiving his wife but the woman trusts him blindly.***  
 
I can say this about your lady friend:  
 
1. she is compliant with the sexual restrain part of her salaa.  
2. she is still doing shirk until she comes to 6:106.  
3. she should trust Allah like she trusts her husband .  
 
Btw, did she marry a so-called muslim or Jew or Christian?  
 
ALLAH: 24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
***JUNAIDMy dear friend, I would definitely like to know how you translated this verse. See this; ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً the word is يَنكِحُ and you have translated this word as "have sexual relations with". Why and how? Could you please provide a reference? As per my understanding, يَنكِحُ cannot be translated as "having sexual relations", by any means. Remember, the suitable word (according to your own statement) for "illegal sexual relations" is ZINA and not يَنكِحُ As a matter of fact, يَنكِحُ represents the concept of NIKAH or a contract, which means the verse says; AL-ZAANI can marry / get into contract with none other than a ZAANIA أَوْ MUSHRIKAA. (I have left أَوْ as it is). What do you say?***  
 
Maybe I’m beginning to see your question, now. The ayat is translated as “sexual relations” , but the Arabic term is nikah, marriage. Is this what you are questioning? If I’m reading you correctly now, state once more what your oblection/question is.  
 
Pickthall Translation: 24:3 The adulterer shall not marry save an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress none shall marry save an adulterer or an idolater. All that is forbidden unto believers.  
 
Zina, for me, remains illegal sex, that is, sex outside of marriage. Marriage is defined by Allah to be between a male and a female (1, 2,3, or 4).  
 
Am I getting closer to your request?  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 22 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Badshah Salamat,  
 
I read your post of 15 June on this thread very late. The problem with you is that you turn sarcastic and the discussion loses its essence.  
 
This comment of yours is full of two elements :-  
 
1. Ridicule  
2. Blame game  
 
You are right, the “generic templates” are beyond my understanding and I can also, like you, just laugh upon it, as many, many other people are already laughing. I am afraid, I don’t have much to add to what I have already presented.  
 
I understand that you believe in Quran alone, so I asked for reference of this terminology from Quran. No response. There is probably NONE!  
 
You had tried to teach me something from dictionary, but I was too dumb to fully comprehend. I had pointed out that you can’t define lexical meanings in your own way by saying….”I think”…. Etc. You gave me no answer! Having no answer, you actually resorted to ridicule in which you have acquired masterly prowess, which doubtlessly goes to the detriment of Aastana’s academic and literary image.  
 
You have passed remarks on 5/3 and 6/115. Youm, as we understand is the period, and obviously with an AL, it is the particular period when Quran was descending upon Mohammad pbuh i.e., the period of the life of the Messenger. Whatever else you understand from this verse, which makes you ridicule me, will be your own assumption which you can of course share with me without being too sarcastic. I can behave like a young student of yours. But please don’t try to sidetrack the issue in ridicule. And in commenting on 6/115, you have missed this verse altogether and have sarcastically commented only on 6/114 which was added for the sake of context only.  
 
You have included many out of context things too in your comments.  
 
What is that stuff about being “Experts in English”? You have tried to ridicule my arguments, I suppose. One only does that kind of things if he/she has no satisfactory answers.  
 
Where have I branded some people as blasphemous or sacrilegious?  
 
Is it again the question of being Experts or non-Experts in English? Ha,ha,ha. Or is it equivalent to taking refuge in a blame game? It seems we have had, per chance, a good opportunity to indict some innocent soul! Isn’t it? I have read Sis Maniza’s comment too in this context! Look carefully at what I actually said :-  
 
“the use of “generic templates” for God’s Exalted Messengers is a manifest and utter disgrace and insult ---- What would they call it in ecclesiastical terminology? …. Yes, ”Blasphemous”, “sacrilegious”. “  
 
It’s a theory, an opinion, a concept which is labeled, and rightly too. You may not agree with it. Again the English stuff! Isn’t it different, to label a theory, from labeling a person? I don’t know English, perhaps! You may be right! I am ready to take lessons from you.  
 
You do successfully sidetrack things by medium of being jokingly sarcastic. This policy might not add much substance to the theories offered.  
 
 
Badshah Salamat:  
can’t find the thread I’m sure I read somewhere (in an attempt to explain what it was meant by general templates) that the "RUSUL" are always mentioned in the context of a certain situation/event and it is primarily due to the situations/events in question that the RUSUL hold any significant importance.  
 
Aurangzaib:  
It is a totally personal idea, without substance. I have already given the Quranic reference where Rasool is declared “Uswatan Hasanatan” for “All of you”. You can ask Brother Moazzam to translate this Quranic term in his own style!  
---------------------------------------  
I really admire very much the following “Pearls of Wisdom” that have left me bereft of speech: (“Lagta he keh Gaarri Patri se poori tarah utar chuki hay”) :  
 
 
Badshah Salamat:  
And if that is the case, then this is good because situations and events are people. Situations and Events can be categorized as THINGS! so The situations and events themselves are the generic templates.  
 
Aurangzaib:  
I don’t say for nothing that such argumentation is nothing but meaningless verbiage, called Ilm-ul-Kalaam.  
“…..situations and events are people….???? ….situations and events can be categorized as things…..??? ……the situations and events themselves are the generic templates…..????” W—h—a—t ?  
 
Any authority for such meaningless and far-fetched utterances?... Nothing? …. No problem. It seems you believe in the theory of: “Keh rahaa hoon junoon men kya kya kuchch, Kuchch na samjhe khuda kare koi”. I would try to give these pearls of wisdom suitable publicity so that everyone learns what reality is!  
 
 
If anyone is ready to question my favorite title of “MY LORD MOHAMMAD pbuh” by calling it SHIRK, he is welcome, you included.  
 
And remember, we, all of us, BELIEVE IN QURAN BY HISTORY, CONVICTION AND FAITH, NOT BY ANY PROOF OF ITS VALIDITY. So, conviction and faith play a very powerful role in what we think and how we act. So, let us stop asking for proof of everything that Quran says!  
 
Good day.  
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 22 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Aurangzaib  
 
***AURANGZAIB: If anyone is ready to question my favorite title of “MY LORD MOHAMMAD pbuh” by calling it SHIRK, he is welcome, you included.***  
 
***AURANGZAIB. I said that it was a matter of PERSONAL PREFERENCE. And after that I also explained the technicalities of this title. I do not think it is a matter of debate…. And no sacrilege to God is committed by calling the Prophet pbuh a Lord.***  
 
I question you and it is a matter of dispute. Listen, Aurangzaib, you nor I nor anyone else has the right to any “personal preference” regarding Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Deen, His Messengers, and His Prophets. We can only state of the aforementioned what Allah has given us the authority to state. Your saying “lord Muhammad” and “p.b.u.h.” makes you no different than Nargis and Moazzam on the issue of “generic templates”, “same Al-Kitab”, “and beyond time and space”. In fact, you would be more wrong than them, because maybe they have some far-fetched sematical point their making, but you have no grounds at all for your position. If you ignore this, then, yes, you are engaging shirk, and, you will mislead yourself and others who may adopt your position out of their regard for you. If you are truly Quran only and alone, then you must be consistently Quran only and alone and have no personal preferences which contradict Al-Quran.  
 
Following was my original response to your post written here:  
 
http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=10  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
Salaamun Alaikum, Aurangzaib  
 
AURANGZAIB *** So, the word Lord alone, in itself, is not necessarily an attribute of God Almighty. And no sacrilege to God is committed by calling the Prophet pbuh a Lord. There is a House of Lords in England. The honourable Justices are also called My Lord. The word Lord Mayor is commonly used, etc. God bless you…***  
 
AURANGZAIB *** If you carefully go through my comments you will find that I have avoided making this a question of faith, belief or conviction. I said that it was a matter of PERSONAL PREFERENCE. And after that I also explained the technicalities of this title. I do not think it is a matter of debate. And it is not a matter at all of dispute. You are free to call my Lord pbuh, as you would deem best according to your own level of love and reverence for him. As a matter of fact, brother, we would prefer keeping this blog free from confrontations of any kind. Neither we are rigid and stubborn, nor authoritative. We love peace and impart the message of peace.***  
 
MUBASHIR ***Dear Mr Aurangzeb, The Qur'an does not allow Muhammad (S) to be a lord to any one, but regards him to be the servant of THE LORD (Allah SWT). Muhammad was a kind teacher not master (Aaqa). Kindly stand corrected as your example may mislead others.***  
 
I have to agree with Mubashir on this one for the following Quran reasons:  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord; there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
10:15 And when Our clear messages are recited to them, those who have no hope of meeting with Us say: Bring a Quran other than this or change it. Say: It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I follow nothing but what is revealed to me. Indeed I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the chastisement of a grievous day.  
 
3:64 Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).  
 
9:31 They take their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were enjoined that they should serve one God only — there is no god but He. Be He glorified from what they set up (with Him)!  
 
 
1. Ayat 6:106 tells the Last Prophet to follow what is revealed from him from his Lord/Rabb.  
 
2.In Ayat10:15 the Last Prophet states that he followed nothing but what revealed to him.  
 
3. With ayats 6:106 and 10:15 in mind then, we can now examine the rightness or wrongness of referring to the Last Prophet as--- lord.  
 
4. We can now ask ourselves, in regard to 6:106, does the revelation/Al-Quran ever refer the Last Prophet as—lord? Of course, the answer is no. According Al-Quran/The Words of Allah, Allah has reserved the title Lord for Himself.  
 
5. Ayat 3:64 puts the final word to this matter when it states……“THAT NONE OF US SHALL TAKE OTHERS FOR LORDS BESIDES…”  
 
6. Ayat 9:31 shows that others did take lords/arbabs besides Allah and, by doing so, committed shirk. You wrote: “There is a House of Lords in England. The honourable Justices are also called My Lord. The word Lord Mayor is commonly used…”. While this is true, ayat 3:64 precludes lord as a title from being given to the Last Prophet.  
 
7. Ayat 6:106 states to “follow what is revealed from your lord”. If the Last Prophet can be referred to as lord, then it makes him prone to be followed, along with Allah, as an arbab/lord. Of course this is what the sunni/shia world has done anyway.  
 
8. We can now ask ourselves, in regard to ayat 10:15, did the Last Prophet refer to himself —lord? Of course, again, the answer is no, because to have done so would have put him opposition to ayats 6:106; 3:64; 9:31; and 10:15.  
 
To be Quran only and alone for our guidance, that is, be muslins, we must rid ourselves of the habit of assigning things to Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Prophets, and His Messengers which Allah did not authorize, to wit:  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord makes haram only indecencies/fahish,…and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and that you say of Allah what you know not.  
 
A couple of examples in this regard are the popular use of P.B.U. H/ SAWAS and Allah is GreaterAllahu Akbar. Nothing in Quran supports these thing. They are from man, hence, they are bida--innovation and shirk.  
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 22 June 2011Report Abuse
Brother Dhulqarnain,  
 
A very short answer to your question, which I had posted some time ago:-  
 
"""""In continuation of the above, one more thing. See the meaning of the Lord, accoding to Cambridge Advanced Learners’s Dictionary:  
lord noun  
/lɔːd/ /lɔːrd/ [C]  
•  
a male peer  
•  
INFORMAL a man who has a lot of power in a particular area of activity.  
 
So, the word Lord alone, in itself, is not necessarily an attribute of God Almighty. And no sacrilege to God is committed by calling the Prophet pbuh a Lord. There is a House of Lords in England. The honourable Jutices are also called My Lord. The word Lord Mayor is commonly used, etc.  
God bless you. """"  
 
I hope this right meaning of the word "Lord", from the right source, would offset the misunderstanding this word creates in our minds in the Quranic perspective.  
 
Moreover, you might agree or not, SHIRK is not embodied in idol worship or in "titles" given to people. SHIRK is symbolized in your actions/deeds. To follow the way of life not in consonance or harmony with Divine Guidance is SHIRK. Much has been written on this topic earlier.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 22 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Aurangzaib,  
 
***A very short answer to your question, which I had posted some time ago:- """""In continuation of the above, one more thing. See the meaning of the Lord, accoding to Cambridge Advanced Learners’s Dictionary: lord noun  
/lɔːd/ /lɔːrd/ [C] • a male peer • INFORMAL a man who has a lot of power in a particular area of activity.  
So, the word Lord alone, in itself, is not necessarily an attribute of God Almighty. And no sacrilege to God is committed by calling the Prophet pbuh a Lord. There is a House of Lords in England. The honourable Jutices are also called My Lord. The word Lord Mayor is commonly used, etc. God bless you. """" I hope this right meaning of the word "Lord", from the right source, would offset the misunderstanding this word creates in our minds in the Quranic perspective. ***  
 
I’m aware of the Oxford definition, as is Allah, I'm sure, but here’s the point; Oxford isn’t or shouldn’t be your Quran (see 10:15) or final authority on this issue. Allah is your final authority (see 6:106). If you are being sincere, then you know that Allah has provided no authority to label His prophet as “lord”. Allah refers to Himself as Lord and, by your assigning this designation to the Last Prophet, like it or not, you are giving them equal status with Allah. The Lords of England shouldn’t be carrying this title either. Many of them write laws counter to Allah’s Laws, because they think themselves, as those who follow them, lords and gods along with Him. Look hard at this ayat again:  
 
9:31 They take their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were enjoined that they should serve one God only — there is no god but He. Be He glorified from what they set up (with Him)!  
 
This ayat is clear Aurangzaib, come on, now. Clearly, Allah is making the case against any individual using this title, because of the authority that is imbued in it. I’m certain that some of the people mentioned in ayat 9:31 felt like you, that is, that the title, lord, is innocuous, but Allah rejects that notion and goes on to refer to them as doing shirk! The sunni and shia world have already elevated the Last Prophet to lord/god status and you are simply reinforcing it.  
 
Even you, somewhere in your mind, have a problem with “lord” being assigned to the Last Prophet, hence, your phrasing: Aurangzaib: “So, the word Lord alone, in itself, is not necessarily an attribute of God Almighty”. Your use of…”not necessarily” indicates that, lord, could very well be an attribute of Allah. Allah calls Himself –Al-Rabb. Have you any evidence from Al-Quran that the Last Prophet called himself…Rabb or abdul Rabb? This is what Allah says the Last Prophet said:  
 
10:15…follow nothing but what is revealed to me. Indeed I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the chastisement of a grievous day…  
 
Now,do you trust/believe the same way as the Last Prophet, In 10:15? Did Allah reveal to him the to be called lord/rabb?  
 
Here’s your salaa: 6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
Again, saying p.b.u.h. is also bida/innovation. Allah has never told you say any such thing. You are simply saying things from religion and not fom Deen of Allah/Deen of Al-Islam..  
 
Your stance in this issue provides an excellent illustration of--- “establish solaa and establish zakaa”. Your salaa, that is, your allegiance to Allah in carrying out His Commands, appears strong to me, however, on this issue at least, you need to do zakaa. Zakaa, means to purify, but, purify what? It can only be the salaa! You need to further purify your salaa by removing all expressions/forms of shirk. You know full well that you have no Quranic authority to say p.b.u.h., or to assign the title “lord” to the Last Prophet, none. Oxford is not from you LORD Allah, but Al-Quran is. To say of Allah for what you don’t have the authority is shirk…like it or not…want it or not, it is what it is, bro.  
 
Will you be like Pharaoh when he was asked the following:  
 
79:17-18 Go to Pharaoh, surely he has rebelled. And say: Wilt thou purify/zakaa thyself?  
 
***Moreover, you might agree or not, SHIRK is not embodied in idol worship or in "titles" given to people. SHIRK is symbolized in your actions/deeds. To follow the way of life not in consonance or harmony with Divine Guidance is SHIRK. Much has been written on this topic earlier.***  
 
I agree. Shirk is an action, because choice is involved in it. To determine if your actions are shirk or not, refer to what Allah says on the matter. in Ayat 9:31 Allah has spoken in resounding fashion.  
 
Come on man, don’t lose your credibility!  
 
If your position is correct, then you must post the AYATS which proves your position. I don’t want hadeeths from any source other than Hadith Al-Quran.  
 
Looking forward to your reply and acceptance of ayats, 6:106, 10:15, and 9:31.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: moazzam On 23 June 2011
 
Aurangzaib! “The use of “generic templates” for God’s Exalted Messengers is a manifest and utter disgrace and insult ---- What would they call it in ecclesiastical terminology? …. Yes, ”Blasphemous”, “sacrilegious”.  
Moazzam! I have already been writing about the “Blasphemous” in my previous posts some where at blog, it seems you are well familiar with the ulterior inter-religious use of this MULLAHS term “Blasphemous” to suppress ang let down each others.  
My dear Brother; I meant “generic templates = tamsileel = Characters used as an eternal examples, like HAROOT MAROOT in the Qases of Suleman, so that the people of any era can see the role of this character in their time.  
Brother, as you have good command over English language, please help me to choose any other appropriate word to make the participants understand my view point.  
I hope you know about many tamaseel, metaphors in Quran has been used. Although I don’t agree with G A Pervez (the pioneer) at many issues, he also used the term “TAMSILEE WAQIA” to Qissa Adam o Iblees.  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 23 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Moazzam,  
 
Moazzam, instead of using the phrase—“generic templates”, which for many here, was/is confusing, isn’t it just easier to say—model, a term which everyone is familiar with? Why the insistence on generic template? Anyway, I’m still not certain, in the light of Al-Quran anyway, exactly what you mean by this phrase and I’m certainly not interested in wading through your many posts in an attempt to find out. So, here’s my thought, why don’t you, for argument sake, just refrain from using generic templates and use the term model? Make sense? The mark of a true intellectual is not the use of fancy words and clever phrases, which all to often only cause confusion, but rather to demystify terms and concepts so that anyone can easily grasp what is being presented. The anti-intellecual seeks to mystify, because he/she is ego driven and not taqwa driven. Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing you of being anti-intellectual.  
 
With that said, I would like to challenge your idea on generic templates from the following perspective. From reading Al-Quran I see one, perhaps two, models—The Messenger and Abraham.  
 
Allah says, in ayat 33:21, that in the Messenger you have an excellent example/model:  
 
33:21 Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the Latter day, and remembers Allah much.  
 
But Allah also says, in ayats 21:24 16:120, that Abraham was made Iman to the nations, and, for the Messenger to follow him as a model.  
 
2:124 And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He.  
 
16:120 Surely Abraham was a model, obedient to Allah, upright, and he was not of the polytheists….16:123 Then We revealed to thee: Follow the faith of Abraham, the upright one; and he was not of the polytheists.  
 
So, are the generic templates…or just one model to be followed? I conclude that there is only one model to follow—The Messenger, because both the Messenger and Abraham only followed 6:106  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
Just to be clear, The Messenger, is not the Last Prophet as the example to follow, but the Message/Al-Quran, that is the model to be followed. One model, not many models.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: moazzam On 24 June 2011
DearDhulqarnain , Aastana Members!  
Dhulqarnain! instead of using the phrase—“generic templates”, which for many here, was/is confusing, isn’t it just easier to say—model, a term which everyone is familiar with? Why the insistence on generic template?  
Moazzam! Kindly try to understand my view point not the phrase “generic template”, as I have already asked Brother Aurangzaib (being an articulate in English language) to assist in this regard,  
“NO PROBLEM YOU MAY USE ANY TERM/WORD WHICH DEEMS FIT TO PRODUCE THE SENSE I WANT TO CONVEY”.  
Dhulqarnain! Anyway, I’m still not certain, in the light of Al-Quran anyway, exactly what you mean by this phrase and I’m certainly not interested in wading through your many posts in an attempt to find out.  
Moazzam! If you are certainly not interested to find out, and in wading through my posts then ………………………?  
Dhulqarnain! So, here’s my thought, why don’t you, for argument sake, just refrain from using generic templates and use the term model? Make sense?  
Moazzam!This is not the game of words rather the view points. Template or Generic Template featuring to, possessed and infatuated being role model as defined, depicted and exercised resultantly. Which covers all aspects of the character whether name, message or teachings are concerned.  
Dhulqarnain! With that said, I would like to challenge your idea on generic templates from the following perspective. From reading Al-Quran I see one, perhaps two, models—The Messenger and Abraham.  
Moazzam!This forum is for tafheem and research in Quran, there is no slot to challenge or encounter. But any correction with quranic references will always be appreciated.With a humble request, if any one of us (Aastana members) lacks to be made up and guided.  
Dhulqarnain! Allah says, in ayat 33:21, that in the Messenger you have an excellent example/model:  
Moazzam! Yes of course, the messengers of the time in his society in any era (whether having attribute of MOSES, IESA, NOOH, YOUSUF ETC should be role model to his Ummah,in each aspect of life. Remember this process will be continued till the last day.  
Dhulqarnain! But Allah also says, in ayats 2:124 ,16:120, that Abraham was made Imam to the nations and, for the Messenger to follow him as a model.  
Moazzam!Yes it is right, Please go through the translation of Dr Qamar from 2/124-131 to comprehend the matter. Remember; these characters will be repeated in this world, time and again till the last day.  
Dhulqarnain: So, are the generic templates…or just one model to be followed? I conclude that there is only one model to follow—The Messenger, because both the Messenger and Abraham only followed 6:106.  
Moazzam!Yes, CHARACTER IBRAHEEM is/was/ will be the role model for every one to follow and to establish the commandments of ONLY Allah.  
 
Dhulqarnain! Just to be cleared, The Messenger, is not the Last Prophet as the example to follow, but the Message/Al-Quran, that is the model to be followed. One model, not many models.  
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Moazzam! Alquran is a message not the model.  
Remember THE CHARACTER IBRAHEEM WHO PROVIDED/PROVIDES THE BASIC PRINCIPLES AND FOUNDATION OF ISLAMIC STATE, WOULD BE THE MODEL FORE EACH AND EVERY MOMIN/MUSLIM/IMAM/RASOOL.  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 24 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Moazzam,  
 
DHULQARNAIN: So, are the generic templates…or just one model to be followed? I conclude that there is only one model to follow—The Messenger, because both the Messenger and Abraham only followed 6:106.  
 
***Moazzam!Yes, CHARACTER IBRAHEEM is/was/ will be the role model for every one to follow and to establish the commandments of ONLY Allah… Remember THE CHARACTER IBRAHEEM WHO PROVIDED/PROVIDES THE BASIC PRINCIPLES AND FOUNDATION OF ISLAMIC STATE, WOULD BE THE MODEL FORE EACH AND EVERY MOMIN/MUSLIM/IMAM/RASOOL.***  
 
Well then, if you truly believe your above statements, then there is only ONE TEMPLATE (singular) –Abraham, and not generic templates (plural) as you’ve been insisting upon. The main question then, is--- what made Abraham the role model to the nations? It can only be that his unwavering adherence to 6:106!  
 
6:106 Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He; and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
Allah says of Abraham:  
16:120 Surely Abraham was a model, obedient to Allah, upright, and he was not of the polytheists….  
16:123 Then We revealed to thee: Follow the faith of Abraham, the upright one; and he was not of the polytheists.  
 
Today there are no prophets around so who is our role model today? Remember, Al-Quran gives few details about any prophet. So, what model today, can, in full detail, be used as a model for full individual and social character development? It can only be Al-Quran—THE MESSENGER/MESSAGE. Abraham and Al-Quran are both summed up in one ayat—6:106. Again, what made Abraham the imam/model to the nations was his strict adherence to 6:106. Al-Quran, in an ayat, IS 6:106. In fact, all of the other ayats serve as the DETAILS for 6:106.  
 
6:106  
1. Follow that which is revealed to thee from thy Lord — there is no god but He;  
2. and turn away from the polytheists.  
 
Without strict adherence to the above two commands, neither the individual nor society can have success in this world or the world to come. This is the ayat of Salaa. It is the Sirat-l- Mustaqeem. This is our model.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 25 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Brother Moazzam,  
 
You wrote :-  
 
"My dear Brother; I meant “generic templates = tamsileel = Characters used as an eternal examples, like HAROOT MAROOT in the Qases of Suleman, so that the people of any era can see the role of this character in their time.  
Brother, as you have good command over English language, please help me to choose any other appropriate word to make the participants understand my view point."  
 
I highly appreciate this constructive approach, which is the first solution oriented step in this verbal wrestling. Don't mind my using the word "verbal". Had it ever been "mental" or "intellectual", I wouldn't have to use the word "verbal".  
 
It so happens that usually some oversight occurs, intentionally or unintentionally, and we, or our ardent supporters, egoistically start an armed combat to justify that oversight, rather than making amends to smooth things out. And then, there ensues a protracted and perceptibly useless verbal battle.  
 
Now that you have asked, I humbly offer the alternative of "generic template". You can choose either "ROLE MODEL" or "EXEMPLARY CHARACTER". Both these terms are embodied in Quranic verses where the Almighty has declared the Exalted Personality of my lord Mohammad pbuh as "USWATAN HASANATAN" and as "INNAKA LA 'ALA KHULUQIN AZEEM". Don't mind the numbers of verses. I have so many times quoted them and they met with such a criminal disregard that I was disposed to skip them altogether. Instead, the most advanced knowledge in Science and Physics had to be employed.  
 
I wish you the best and I wish you peace and safety. General Templates had reduced the Great Personality of our beloved Mohammad to a mere non-entity, consisting of paper, wood or metal pattern. Still your supporters tried their best to legitimize this term in utter defiance of English Dictionaries.  
 
At least one and a half billion Muslims (and many others) love my Lord from the depths of their hearts. They can't listen a word that diminishes or lowers his exalted status even to the minutest degree. And there is a "Tauheen-e-Risalat" law in force in the homeland which has already incriminated you to gross violation. Anyone insulting my Lord's personality by lowering his exalted divine status is liable to death - and it is a death thru law or through direct assault beyond law. The killer in this particular perspective can't be punished by Law. You had exposed yourself to a grave situation, dear friend. Your terminology has already classified our website as "Anti-Islam" in the record of the concerned authorities. We are under strict surveillance, very reliable sources inform me.  
 
I, upon oath, dissociate myself with that demeaning terminology. I solemnly affirm that I have no part in propagating that terminology; and these pages are witness that I have done my best to refute, negate, reject and nullify it to the best of my abilities.  
 
There is a group of two dear friends who is airing an imaginary fire between you and me. Let us tell them that we are and remain family friends and differences in thinking don't result in severed relations among people having saner convictions. Let us get together one of these days with one or two more friends who eagerly want such a meeting between us since long, and let us enjoy each other's company and sort out certain aspects of the matter in their entirety. Let us tell all that egocentricity is the actual enemy.  
 
God bless you.  
 
I recommend that it was an oversight, or selection of a wrong word by my Brother Moazzam. And since he has taken steps to switch over to other terms befitting to the great personality of my lord Mohammad pbuh, nobody may take a serious view of that oversight any longer.

Comments by: aurangzaib On 25 June 2011Report Abuse
Brother Dhulqarnain,  
 
Again, a very short submission.  
 
LORD is a word of English language. When we use English language, we are subjected to the rules of that language and we take the right meanings from its authority, which is called Dictionary.  
 
LORD according to one of the most reputable English Dictionaries, IS A MAN. The source does not define it in terms of GOD, or MASTER, etc.  
 
Rest of it is in my last post. I don't wish to discuss your long "charge sheet" or the Verses you quote in their Arabic perspective.

Comments by: Nargis On 25 June 2011Report Abuse
At least one and a half billion Muslims (and many others) love my Lord from the depths of their hearts. They can't listen a word that diminishes or lowers his exalted status even to the minutest degree. And there is a "Tauheen-e-Risalat" law in force in the homeland which has already incriminated you to gross violation. Anyone insulting my Lord's personality by lowering his exalted divine status is liable to death - and it is a death thru law or through direct assault beyond law. The killer in this particular perspective can't be punished by Law. You had exposed yourself to a grave situation, dear friend. Your terminology has already classified our website as "Anti-Islam" in the record of the concerned authorities. We are under strict surveillance, very reliable sources inform me. Aurungzaib  
 
AND  
 
I, upon oath, dissociate myself with that demeaning terminology. I solemnly affirm that I have no part in propagating that terminology; and these pages are witness that I have done my best to refute, negate, reject and nullify it to the best of my abilities. Aurungzaib  
 
 
 
OH....  
 
MY...  
 
 
GOD....  
 
 

Comments by: moazzam On 25 June 2011
BROTHER AURANGZAIB AND AASTANA MEMBERS! REGARDS.  
Remember THE CHARACTER IBRAHEEM WRITTEN IN QURAN WHO PROVIDED THE BASIC PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THE FOUNDATION OF ISLAMIC STATE, SHOULD BE LAID DOWN IN EVERY HUMAN SOCIETY IS CALLED GENERIC TEMPLATE.  
AND THE PHYSICAL PERSONALITY WHO POSSES THE SAME ATTRIBUTE IN ANY SOCIETY WILL BECOME THE ROLE MODEL FORE EACH AND EVERY PHYSICAL EXIISTED PERSONALITY( MOMIN/MUSLIM/IMAM/RASOOL).  
Allah taught/teaches (55/1) “ALKITAB / QURAN/ ROOH ALQUDS” to his Rasool/imam through pondering  
into it,which is called nuzool alkitab/wahy/ conceiving ideas in his mind ( the certain understanding).  
So the way to make the people understand through “MASAL( I CALL IT THE GENERIC TEMPLATE),See the verses 17/85-89, 39/27,30/58, 18/54.  
As I always use to mention that, ALKITAB is beyond time and space, all prophets will/ has/had been using this AL-ROOH/AL-KITAB to guide their ummah in their respective era. The name of prophets and all characters used in Qases (stories) are JUST attributes not the physical personalities ( being the generic templates /masal), which possess eternal guide message.  
, "My dear Brother; I meant “generic templates = tamseel(masal) = Characters used as an eternal examples, like HAROOT MAROOT in the Qases of Suleman, ABULAHAB,YAHOOD, NASARA,MAJOOS, AS-HAB E FEEL ,YAJOOJ MAJOOJ ETC.  
Aurangzaib! Now that you have asked, I humbly offer the alternative of "generic template". You can choose either "ROLE MODEL" or "EXEMPLARY CHARACTER". Both these terms are embodied in Quranic verses where the Almighty has declared the Exalted Personality of my lord Mohammad pbuh as "USWATAN HASANATAN" and as "INNAKA LA 'ALA KHULUQIN AZEEM". Don't mind the numbers of verses  
Moazzam! REMEMBER THE MODELS IN THE SOCIETIES NORMALLY PRODUCE BY THE GENERIC TEMPLATES(masal) written in Quran.  
Aurangzaib! I wish you the best and I wish you peace and safety. General Templates had reduced the Great Personality of our beloved Mohammad to a mere non-entity, consisting of paper, wood or metal pattern. Still your supporters tried their best to legitimize this term in utter defiance of English Dictionaries.  
Moazzam! KINDLY TRY TO UNDERSTAND OUR VIEW POINT.  
Aurangzaib! At least one and a half billion Muslims (and many others) love my Lord from the depths of their hearts. They can't listen a word that diminishes or lowers his exalted status even to the minutest degree. And there is a "Tauheen-e-Risalat" law in force in the homeland which has already incriminated you to gross violation. Anyone insulting my Lord's personality by lowering his exalted divine status is liable to death.  
Moazzam Who is insulting Muhammad? one and a half billion Muslims or the QURANISTS ( those are in numbers) calling to escalate /enhance his mission (to rescue the mankind from the cruel claws of plunderers and the clutch of religious intrigues, ultimately enhancing his EXALTED STATUS.  
MIND! HENCE I SEEN THE QURANIC LIGHT, I SAY WHAT EVER I SEE, I NEVER AFRADE BY ANY THREAT OR DEATH.  

Comments by: Junaid On 25 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
AURANGZAIB: The killer in this particular perspective can't be punished by Law. You had exposed yourself to a grave situation, dear friend.  
 
JUNAID: There is no such law which protects extra judicial killing in the name of blasphemy. For example the beast who killed innocent Salman Taseer in the name of so called "blasphemy" is still behind the bars, and he won't be coming out for sure.  
 
Note: We are living in a civilized world, not a jungle!

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 25 June 2011Report Abuse
AURANGZAIB,  
 
***LORD is a word of English language. When we use English language, we are subjected to the rules of that language and we take the right meanings from its authority, which is called Dictionary. LORD according to one of the most reputable English Dictionaries, IS A MAN. The source does not define it in terms of GOD, or MASTER, etc. ***  
Fine , no problem, but here’s the problem though…if lord is just an English word, which you find comfortable applying to the Last Prophet, then what is the word, in Al-Quran, for lord in the English? You must provide this evidence, sir, otherwise, you are doing nothing more than conjecturing. I’ve given the term for lord from Al-Quran---arbab, but you reject this, and, instead, elevate the Oxford dictionary over Al-Quran itself as justification for your conjecture/rejection.  
 
***I don't wish to discuss your long "charge sheet" or the Verses you quote in their Arabic perspective.***  
 
LOL! Of course not, because you have no Quranic ground to stand upon. Al-Quran is militating against you in this matter of the use of “lord” as it regards the Last Prophet. The “charge list” as you call it, is not my charge list…it’s ALLAH”S CHARGE LIST! And yes, I do come from the Arabic perspective, because Al-Quran is written from an Arabic perspective. Here, let me give you the Quranic definition of Arabic in regard to Al-Quran, to wit:  
 
ARUBA-AIN-RA-BA- ع ر ب : Expressing one’s mind clearly; to be pure and free from faults of speech; those who speak clearly; eloquent. Dictionary of Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 364-365  
 
Does this not describe Al-Quran, perfectly?  
 
Now, here’s the ayat where you can read the application of this definition---from Allah, THE LORD of the Worlds:  
 
41:3 A Book of which the ayat are fully detailed, an ARABIC (insert the above definition here) Quran for a people who know —  
 
Al-Quran is Book of absolute Truth and Fact. We are expressly forbidden to offer conjecture/opinion as Quranic fact. See below.  
 
Here let me reiterate the “charge list”, perchance you may wake up and stop misleading yourself and others.  
 
You are in violation of the following ayats concerning the use of “lord”, “pbuh”, and referring to “Quranic theories”.  
 
1. You are in violation of 7:33, in that, you are saying of Allah’s Messenger that of which you have no knowledge and saying that of which Allah has not given you the authority to say. This is HARAM and FAHISH to do.  
 
2. You are violation of 9:31 where Allah has equated the taking of lords beside Him as SHIRK.  
 
3. You are in violation of 17:36 where Allah commands not to pursue anything of which you have not the knowledge.  
 
4. You are in violation of 6:106 because you following something which was not revealed.  
 
5. You are in violation of ayats 2:136; 3:84; 4:150; and 4:152. All of these ayats forbid making ANY DISTINCTION between Allah’s messengers and prophets. Calling the Last Prophet lord and not the others lords as well, is making a HUGE DISTINCTION.  
 
6. You are in violation of ayats 12:40 and 53:23 where Allah addresses those who give names without His Authority.  
 
7. You are in violation of ayats 10:36 and 53:28 where Allah forbids the following of conjecture.  
 
There are more ayats which you are in violation of, but I think these sufficiently make the Quranic point.  
 
LOL!! Now, in light of the above Quranic evidence , are you seriously going to continue to stand by the Oxford dictionary, as a rationalization for continuing to refer to the Last Prophet as lord and to use pbuh, really?  
 
Given the above Quranic evidence, if you continue to stay the course you’re presently on, you will show yourself to be nothing but a conceited fool/mushrik and a servant of Shaitan, whose only objective is to heap mockery upon Allah, His Deen and His Messenger Prophet. Those who say of Allah what He has not given them the knowledge of or authority for have Shaitan as their Commander:  
 
2:168-169 O men, eat the lawful and good things from what is in the earth, and follow not the footsteps of the Shaitan. Surely he is an open enemy to you. He COMMANDS on you only evil and indecency, and that you speak against Allah what you know not  
 
24:21 Surely Shaitan commands indecency and evil.  
 
58:19 The Shaitan has gained the mastery over them, so he has made them forget the remembrance of Allah. They are the devil’s party. Now surely the devil’s party are the losers.  
 
Wake up and stop being a brat!  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Zubair On 25 June 2011
 
Main Entry: lord  
 
Part of Speech: noun  
 
Definition: master  
 
Synonyms: aristocrat, baron, bishop, captain, commandant, commander, count, dad, don, duke, earl, governor, king, leader, liege, magnate, man upstairs, marquis, monarch, nobility, noble, nobleman, old man, overlord, parliamentarian, patrician, peer, potentate, prince, royalty, ruler, seigneur, sovereign, superior, viscount  
 
Main Entry: divinity  
 
Part of Speech: noun  
 
Definition: absolute being; divine nature  
 
Synonyms: celestial, deity, genius, god, goddess, godhead, godhood, godliness, godship, guardian spirit, higher power, holiness, lord, prime mover, sanctity, spirit  
 
Antonyms: devil, evil  
 
 
Main Entry: god  
 
Part of Speech: noun  
 
Definition: supernatural being worshipped by people  
 
Synonyms: Absolute Being, All Knowing, All Powerful, Allah, Almighty, Creator, Divine Being, Father, God, Holy Spirit, Infinite Spirit, Jah, Jehovah, King of Kings, Lord , Maker, Yahweh, daemon, deity, demigod, demon, divinity, holiness, idol, master, numen, omnipotent, power, prime mover, providence, soul, spirit, totem, tutelary, universal life force, world spirit  
 
http://thesaurus.com/browse/Lord?rh=dictionary.reference.com&__utma=1.857781193.1309024638.1309024638.1309026512.2&__utmb=1.3.9.1309026518066&__utmc=1&__utmx=-&__utmz=1.1309024638.1.1.utmcsr=(direct)|utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(none)&__utmv=-&__utmk=10718388  
 

Comments by: William On 27 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear all,  
 
The titles of “Lordship” and “Honour” are granted and assigned to individuals by an authority. If “Muhammed” (if he indeed existed, or a person of similar rank) was not assigned such a title, then it is implausible to designate such an appellation as suggested.  
 
Thank you  
 
Regards  
 
William  

Comments by: William On 27 June 2011Report Abuse
Dear Brother Moazzam,  
 
Thank you for your extensive explanation regarding “generic templates” – it makes perfect sense to me!  
 
Regards  
 
William  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 28 June 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, William,  
 
***The titles of “Lordship” and “Honour” are granted and assigned to individuals by an authority. If “Muhammed” (if he indeed existed, or a person of similar rank) was not assigned such a title, then it is implausible to designate such an appellation as suggested.***  
 
Good deal.  
 
***Dear Brother Moazzam, Thank you for your extensive explanation regarding “generic templates” – it makes perfect sense to me!***  
 
Good, then maybe you can rephrase and explain it to me, thanks.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
 
 

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 01 July 2011Report Abuse
Jay Ram Jee ki  
 
Shri Junaid asked "why the translation of verse posted by shri dhulqarnain, translated the verse so Mushrik can only have sexual relations with ZAANIA or MUSHRIKA" Whats link between this two actions? If Nikah means sexual relations in marrige then what is zina?  
 
Namaste

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 01 July 2011Report Abuse
Shri JUNAID to Dhulqarnain : My dear friend, I would definitely like to know how you translated this verse. See this;ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً the word is يَنكِحُ and you have translated this word as "have sexual relations with". Why and how? Could you please provide a reference? As per my understanding, يَنكِحُ cannot be translated as "having sexual relations", by any means. emember, the suitable word (according to your own statement) for "illegal sexual relations" is ZINA and not يَنكِحُ As a matter of fact, يَنكِحُ represents the concept of NIKAH or a contract, which means the verse says; AL-ZAANI can marry / get into contract with none other than a ZAANIA أَوْ MUSHRIKAA.  
 
I demand clarification.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 02 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow -cow  
 
According to deen Islam, sexual relations are only permitted in the state of marriage. Those who practice zina are those people who are married and decide to have sex outside of the marriage (adultery) or those who are not married and are having sex with another single person (fornication) or a person who is married (fornication). Of course, those who are guilty of zina can still get married, but not to believers. I imagine that if two people guilty of zina get married one of them could still do zina by stepping outside of the marriage. Would you marry your daughter or son to someone that you know is guilty of premarital sex or adultery? This is my understanding of 24:3. If you have different understanding then please share it with me.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: William On 02 July 2011Report Abuse
Dear All,  
 
“Generic template” is a compound of two words. The first word describes the quality or attribute of the second. “Generic template” could be classified as an adjective phrase. In order to understand this phrase, it is important to examine the values of both words.  
 
As an adjective, the word “generic” helps to describe the quality or characteristic of something that is not specific but belongs or relates to a class, group or genus. For example, “HD” is a generic term in reference to all High Definition Televisions, regardless of whether they are plasma or LCD.  
 
Below is an excerpt from the Oxford English Dictionary (online):  
 
Characteristic of or relating to a class or type of objects, phenomena, etc.; applicable to a large group or class, or any member of it; not specific, general. Freq. opposed to specific.  
 
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/77527  
 
(You will need a subscription to access the site)  
 
A template can be classed as a design, layout or preset used as a standard for producing an end product. The Oxford English Dictionary states that a template is:  
 
An instrument used as a gauge or guide in bringing any piece of work to the desired shape; usually a flat piece of wood or metal having one edge shaped to correspond to the outline of the finished work; also used as a tool in moulding, and as a guide in forming moulds for castings or pottery, in an automatic lathe, etc.  
 
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/198927  
 
The value of the word has also been transferred or used figuratively:  
 
4. transf. and fig.  
 
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/198927  
 
For this reason, a template can be classed as a device, which provides information as to how something works and how it should be constructed / established.  
 
It could be said that “Generic template” is a framework that provides details / information / methods to achieve the intended result(s). This could be a website template, a building template or establishing a working process. A generic template can be classified as a blueprint or a model which objects, processes or systems can be based on.  
 
The main objective of the Quran is to lead the people out of darkness into the light (refer to ayat 14:1). The Quran is a directive for the individual citizens of the state, in order to understand their rights, duties and implications (refer to 2:43, 5:55, 7:3 and 62:10). The Quran is a legislative dossier that forms a constitution for the state to implement (refer to 2:2-3, 5:44, 6:71-72, 17:78). The Quran is a complete guide for mankind, and everything it encompasses is an example for mankind to aspire to (refer to 16:89, 18:54, 30:58 and 39:27).  
 
Regardless of whether the “Prophets” were real people or characters, their roles examples should be simulated. As I have stated in another post, that generic templates:  
 
“ ...in the context suggested, is ultimately a reference to scenarios or situations in which knowledge can be used and applied to our daily lives. Therefore, certain roles and examples can be adopted by individuals in order to solve problematic situations.”  
 
It could be said that the Quran is a generic template and its laws can be implemented by any state in any given period. Although it is not directly stated, “Generic Template” is a concept which is conceived from the ideology of the Quran (please refer to the ayas referenced above for further details). The idea “generic template” is subject to semantics.  
 
Please share your thoughts  
 
Regards  
 
William  

Comments by: Mubashir Syed On 02 July 2011Report Abuse
Dear Dhulqarnain, find find my comment inline for one of your sentence and a link for a thread to understand facts for zina nad fohash.....  
 
Dulqarnain : Of course, those who are guilty of zina can still get married, but not to believers.  
 
Mubashir : I thought in tratditional understanding Zina means adultery by a MARRIED person then where is the question of getting married to Zani ?? Oh i forgot Men can marry four, so could be for second, third and fourth marraige which should be with ZANI's......wait a minute then what should first wife do? coz she is believer and hubby darling becomes zani. Should they talaq talaq talaq? Even it we ignore above concerns ( God forbid) then is this law only for Men and not for women as they can marry only one??  
 
Never ever heard in any part of world a marraige proposal which said " Our son had sex with 10 girls so we are looking for a girl who had sex with atleast 5 guys"  
 
Last but not the least so traditionalist mean if someone does Zina than he is not a believer??? Then there might be two sectors" Muslim Zani" and "Muslim Believer"  
 
Please ponder by goin thru below thread, brother we seriously need to think............  
 
http://aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?MID=2&SID=44&QID=404  
 
Note : With hopeful eyes to hear possitive response from ya side.  
 
Thanks,  
Mubashir Syed.  

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 02 July 2011Report Abuse
Namaste Dhulqarnain  
 
Let uss think like this, I'm a deewoted believer of ganga maia, in my religion everyone believe in cows and what you call stone Gods. We are also chaste and believe in man woman say hello in same bedroom only after marriage. Can i chaste believer in my own God marri a muslim woman ? We are both believers and keep ourself out from impure action replays. You also asking "Would you marry your daughter or son to someone that you know is guilty of premarital sex or adultery? " Yes, i would. Im not marring my daughter or son with someones past, but with a human being. now, with the blessing of bhagwan her/his partner will agree to live only with one partner after marrige. In my both eyes, humans are humans. why we not let them be humans and try make them Devi Devta, and that too only throuh adultery? why your God so obsess with adultery? Yellow cow ask everyone on forum, would you not marrige to someone who have premarital adultery? I also asking questions here but no answering http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=1400  
 
Dhannewaad

Comments by: Tabrez On 03 July 2011Report Abuse
Wa alaikum Namaste, let me change the question a bit...........  
 
Would you marry your son or daughter who is gulity of premaital sex or adultery with a so called pure guy/girl??  
 
Tabrez Mabadaulat

Comments by: Nargis On 03 July 2011Report Abuse
 
According to deen Islam, sexual relations are only permitted in the state of marriage. Those who practice zina are those people who are married and decide to have sex outside of the marriage (adultery) or those who are not married and are having sex with another single person (fornication) or a person who is married (fornication). Of course, those who are guilty of zina can still get married, but not to believers. I imagine that if two people guilty of zina get married one of them could still do zina by stepping outside of the marriage. Would you marry your daughter or son to someone that you know is guilty of premarital sex or adultery? This is my understanding of 24:3. If you have different understanding then please share it with me. Dhulqarnain, the last of the best :D  
 
 
 
Salaam Dhulqarnain , :D  
 
If someone is "guilty" of premarital sex or adultery get their 100 lashes (as suggested in the traditional translation), can they marry a pure chaste untouched believer?  
 
Why has God given the sentence for sex outside of marriage but not pedophilia or homosexuality?  
 
And why are not lesbians mentioned under the “azaab” for gays. Is it not written only for men who used to be ….errmm...? Not nice: D?  
 
What is their punishment according to the Quran?  
Is it a clear certain punishment for every crime (worse than adultery) given in the Quran, why only adultery?  
 
And it is not true that a mushrik marry only Zani and zania only marry a mushrik.  
 
The key word is: - ASSOCIATION  
 
What is the link between these two words in that particular aya, why is it stated these two are getting married only, when it’s not true? I know loads of “impure” people getting married to untouched girls from Pakistan, and I know loads of “Muslims” getting married to “nonbelievers”  
 
So something is definitely ignored by our understanding here …  
 
Everyone who is using the traditional translation is not presenting his own understanding, but he is presenting the translators ignorance.  
 
These questions we are raising today should have been raised by EVERYONE who read the traditional translation, and ask the author what he missed out and what did he overlook. Such words cant be from the rusool, its impossible that a well thought out intelligent message supposed to be all-including, is lacking information at other required places. Even a normal lawbook by humans is well concidered and embracing every area of a every crime one know of.  
 
Wonder how many “Zanis” were beaten half dead by the prophets by 100 lashes, I wonder how they investigated peoples bed activities and what kind of a prophet would allow daughter and mothers be beaten in public in front of their fathers and brothers.
 
 
 
these questions need to be pondered on

Comments by: Nargis On 03 July 2011Report Abuse
To me it is looking like zani and mushrik is partners in crime and not partners in bed

Comments by: Nargis On 03 July 2011Report Abuse
Sorry i mean it looks like they are partners in crime and not partners in life,,,, :-D :-D :-D

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 03 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum,Nargis, Junaid, Yellow Cow, Mubashir,  
 
It is apparent that you did not find my previous argument convincing as to why believers (Quran only and alone) cannot marry with the zina, so let me arge it from this perspective.  
 
NARGIS, wrote: What is the link between these two words in that particular aya, why is it stated these two are getting married only, when it’s not true? I know loads of “impure” people getting married to untouched girls from Pakistan, and I know loads of “Muslims” getting married to “nonbelievers”  
 
Do you really know lots of muslims, Nargis? The so-called muslims that you know, unless they are Quran only and alone for their guidance, are not muslims at all. According to Al-Quran they are the mushrikeen and practice fahish, in that, they give Allah partners in guidance---the so-called Sunnah/Hadiths of the Last Prophet.  
Allah says:  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord forbids only FAHISH, such of them as are apparent and such as are concealed, …and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority,..  
 
17:32 And go not near the zina: surely it is FAHISH. And evil is the way.  
 
Given the above two ayats, these so-called muslims you know, truly reflect ayat 24:3! You see, they cannot be Quran alone muslims and do the fahish…openly or concealed.  
 
Now, back to 24:3.  
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot marry with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is haram to believers.  
 
If one is truly Allah/Quran alone, then to marry one who practices fahish i.e. giving Allah partners in guidance, is a violation of ayats 17:32 and 7:33. The fahish discussed in 24:3, apparently, is about sex, but not necessarily, nonetheless, ANY TYPE OF FAHISH IS HARAM, including the zina of extramarital and premarital sex types. The command upon the believer is to be chaste until they are married.  
 
24:33 And let those who cannot marry remain chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace…  
 
Marriage, as defined by Allah, is between a man and woman (up to 4 women per one man). This is why homosexuality is both zina and fahish, hence, haram in Deen of Islam.  
 
4:3 And if you fear that you cannot do justice to orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, or three, or four;…  
 
Hope this clarifies things.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
You jumped over every question and you continue with new old ortodhoks translation. you can see 24/3 is not explained but you get new ayats. Looking 7.33 My Lord ONLY forbids fahish.. And then in 2.173 is say ONLY haraam for you are Dead meat, and blood, And the flesh of swine, And that on which Any other name hath been invoked Besides that of God. ONLY mean only always,last ayat 4 thing are ONLY haraam, in 7.33 ONLY Fahish is haram. no part of meat blood or flesh of swine is zina,sex or marrige. You jump over question but now you explain what is said, what is ONLY fahasha in 2.173?

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
I read 4.3,mean you can marry 4 woman if you cant deal justly with orphans? It means first you must have orphans in house that you cant deal justly with? Only those with orphans can marry 4 woman? Two condition , *one, first have orphans, second, *cant deal justice with them. how will marry 4 women solve problem of unjustice ?

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
You say 24:3 The adulterer cannot marry with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is haram to believers.  
" cannot marry" is either a command or information, if command then wrong command, if information then wrong information because you say can not to that which are impossible.It is possible that happen so information wrong.

Comments by: William On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Dear all,  
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot marry with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is haram to believers.  
 
The translation to this verse makes no sense whatsoever! The clause itself is mainly directed at those commit adultery. If the above clause stipulates that an adulterer can only marry an “adulteress” or an “idolatress” (and vice versa), is this directed towards a divorcee? If a married man commits adultery, who is to say that the marriage will end? What if he is still married? The punishment for such an act, according to traditional translations is that an individual who commits “Zina” should receive 100 lashes (refer to 24:2). However, the penalty does not impose a divorce!  
 
The verse also states that “and it is haram to believers”. Does this section of the verse constitute that “Zina” is “haram” for the believers or is it stating that marrying an “adulteress or an idolatress” (and vice versa) is “haram” for believers? If one is to commit adultery, are they now classed as an unbeliever? How strange! (This may have been mentioned previously)  
 
For arguments sake, let’s go with the idea that the clause is justified, and that any “believer” who commits “Zina” must marry someone who has also committed “Zina”, why then would an “Idolater” / “idolaters” who are not “believers” in the slightest, be a marriage option for “believers” who commit “Zinah”?  
 
24:33 And let those who cannot marry remain chaste until Allah makes them free from want out of His grace…  
 
Again, this verse makes no sense; it is suggestive that Allah intervenes in our lives, and this verse violates the concept of free will. I will provide a few ayas, based on the traditional translation, so that we can see why this is contradictory, and the need for Quranic revision.  
 
You will never find a change in Our Laws. (17:77)  
Your destiny rests with yourselves, now that you have been reminded. (36:19)
(taken from QXP)  
 
As you can see, there is a complete contradiction with the above verse!  
 
4:3 And if you fear that you cannot do justice to orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, or three, or four;…  
 
This translation makes little or no sense! Is this specific to those adults who are not yet married and have taken on the responsibility of adopting an orphan? Why would this impact on regular citizens of the state? Is this verse in reference to orphans and marriage? (Yellow-cow has already written this I think – sorry didn’t realise until now, as I was about to post)  
 
Please share your thoughts  
 
Thank you  
 
Regards  
 
William  

Comments by: Junaid On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
It's been a long time and I can see that your attention was diverted to another issue. Anyway, lets start from where we ended our discussion last time.  
 
In your last post, you translated verse (24:03) as;
 
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
My question to you was;  
My dear friend, I would definitely like to know how you translated this verse. See this; ٱلزَّانِى لَا يَنكِحُ إِلَّا زَانِيَةً أَوْ مُشْرِكَةً the word is يَنكِحُ and you have translated this word as "have sexual relations with". Why and how? Could you please provide a reference? As per my understanding, يَنكِحُ cannot be translated as "having sexual relations", by any means. Remember, the suitable word (according to your own statement) for "illegal sexual relations" is ZINA and not يَنكِحُ As a matter of fact, يَنكِحُ represents the concept of NIKAH or a contract, which means the verse says; AL-ZAANI can marry / get into contract with none other than a ZAANIA أَوْ MUSHRIKAA. (I have left أَوْ as it is). What do you say?  
 
Unfortunately, I didn't get a clear reply from your side, rather you replied with the following question;  
 
Maybe I’m beginning to see your question, now. The ayat is translated as “sexual relations” , but the Arabic term is nikah, marriage. Is this what you are questioning? If I’m reading you correctly now, state once more what your oblection/question is.  
 
Dear friend, my question was quite clear, that how you have translated the term NIKAH as sexual relations? Please see the translation you've quoted. I hope this time I'll get the reply.  
 
What is the linkage between MUSHRIK and ZANI and why ZINA has been given so much importance when a lot of more serious crimes are being committed by mankind today? Why specially ZINA? and why not RAPE, FRAUD, CHEATING, ROBBERY, EXTORTION, MASS MURDERS or EXPLOITATION of society through White collar crimes?  
 
Please note that the concept of adultery became an essential part of Jewish and Christian religions after they got corrupted by priests and rabbees. Adultery was declared as sin for general public but was the favorite hobby of various priests and rabbis who exploited nuns serving into churches and temples. The same concept was transferred to Muslims (along with all the myths, dogmas and rituals) when Deen was converted into a religion, divided into multiple sects. Why is it so that this adultery is common between man made religions? Where are other serious crimes? Where are the punishments?  
 
Also to mention that you have completely ignored few very important points given by sister Nargis in her post above.  
 
In fact now you've came with another statement which is causing a lot of confusion to me;  
You said;
 
 
Marriage, as defined by Allah, is between a man and woman (up to 4 women per one man). This is why homosexuality is both zina and fahish, hence, haram in Deen of Islam.  
 
My question is that Quran has made no distinction or discrimination between men and women, rather the term يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ and يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُو۟ا has been used. Now tell me how is it possible that such a big discrimination has been made by giving men a right to marry 4 women at a time? Can a woman also marry 4 men at a time? If not then why such discrimination?  
OR  
Is it that you misunderstood the verse? If not then show me a single verse from Quran where there is a discrimination between men and women. Why in this case then?
 
 
One more important question;  
 
You seem to agree with almost every word translated by traditional interpreters, except a single word "SALAAH". Tell me why do you think only one word in Quran has been wrongly translated, when all other words are properly interpreted by these people?  
When you completely agree with everything else including SHIRK, FAHASH, ZINA, SAUM, HAJJ, NISA etc. why do you think the traditional scholars have wrongly translated SALAAH? When all the other terms have been translated according to the concepts given in books of hadith, taken from Jews and Christians and you have no problem to accept them, why you have problem in accepting just one word as correct? (Provided that the lexicons also show that SALAAH means a ritual prayer of Muslims. )  
OR  
Let me ask this way;  
If the traditional interpreters could wrongly translate SALAAH, then don't you think other words could also be translated incorrectly???

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Nargis, Junaid, Yellow Cow, William,  
 
***You jumped over every question and you continue with new old ortodhoks translation.***  
 
I didn't jup over anything. You are assuming that every so-called traditional translation of an ayat is incorrect, this is a mistake my friend.  
 
Anyway…  
 
***you can see 24/3 is not explained but you get new ayats.***  
 
I explained 24:3 clearly to you and you haven’t refuted it, QURANICALLY, yet.  
 
***Looking 7.33 My Lord ONLY forbids fahish.. And then in 2.173 is say ONLY haraam for you are Dead meat, and blood, And the flesh of swine, And that on which Any other name hath been invoked Besides that of God. ONLY mean only always,last ayat 4 thing are ONLY haraam, in 7.33 ONLY Fahish is haram. no part of meat blood or flesh of swine is zina,sex or marrige. You jump over question but now you explain what is said, what is ONLY fahasha in 2.173?***  
 
1. Nothing is fahasha in 2:173, however, fahasha is, nonetheless, haram to do…yes or no?  
 
2. Fahasha comes under what Allah has made haram…not the other way around. In other words, not everything haram is fahasha, but everything fahasha, is haram, get it?  
 
***I read 4.3,mean you can marry 4 woman if you cant deal justly with orphans? It means first you must have orphans in house that you cant deal justly with? Only those with orphans can marry 4 woman? Two condition , *one, first have orphans, second, *cant deal justice with them. how will marry 4 women solve problem of unjustice ?***  
 
My bringing up ayat 4:3 was only to establish how MARRIAGE IS DEFEINED in Deen Islam, that was the extent of it. My purpose was to show that any sexual relations contrary to the established marriage definition would be an act of zina (which is fahasha) according to ayat 17:36. Zina, as a specific fahasha behavior, is haram according to ayat 7:33. In this, I have proven my position.  
 
***You say 24:3 The adulterer cannot marry with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is haram to believers.  
" cannot marry" is either a command or information, if command then wrong command, if information then wrong information because you say can not to that which are impossible.It is possible that happen so information wrong.***  
 
It is not impossible, if, the believing man and woman, truly keep their salaa! Here, examine 29:45  
 
29:45 Recite that which has been revealed to thee of the Book and keep up Salaa (allegiance to Allah and to obey His Commands). Surely Salaa prevents/makes impossible fahasah and munkar; and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest (force). And Allah knows what you do.  
 
What Allah makes haram and fahish IS a command and those who keep their Salaa will not do what is haram or fahish. Here’s another ayat for you to consider:  
 
33:35 Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and THE BELIEVING MEN AND THE BELIEVING WOMEN, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women, and the humble men and the humble women, and the charitable men and the charitable women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and THE MEN WHO GUARD THEIR CHASTITY AND THE WOMEN WHO GUARD, and the men who remember Allah much and women who remember — Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward.  
 
The people/mindset described in the above ayat are those who follow Quran only and alone for their guidance. These people/BELIEVERS will not marry those whose lifestyle/behavior is one that is not chaste/believing, as it would be haram and fahasha to do so. This ayat, 33:35, then, is consistent/shabaha with 24:3.  
 
Get this, I didn’t say anything…Allah has said this to you.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
1. Nothing is fahasha in 2:173, however, fahasha is, nonetheless, haram to do…yes or no?  
 
2. Fahasha comes under what Allah has made haram…not the other way around. In other words, not everything haram is fahasha, but everything fahasha, is haram, get it?  
 
my answar  
why you not seeing word INNAMA, that means ONLY.  
 
2.173 said OnLY this is haraam VS.  
7. 33 also say ONLY Fahsah is haraam  
 
Only means nothing else is haraam, only what is mention. If 2.173 say ONLY cows are haraam, it means ox are not haraam. get it?that is power of word "only". If i say you only need 50 rupees, it means that is no question of needing more or less money than 50 rupeeie. why it is said ONLY fahsah is haraam, when its a lie because MORE things in 2.173 is declare haraam?And they also har ONLY haraam? This is simple question you must answar. Im sorry i assume you are posting ortodhox translation, what translation is this and how he have translated the words? Brathar see again, you jumped over logical question rigarding your claim of zani and mushrik. I can post again ? you one thing also get , it is not Allah saying, it is you who say what your tichar and translator say to you. Tichar must see why word only is used on two different objekt when order is same, which is "haraam". Allah never say Only tea is haraam, then other place say only water is haraam, this it two orders. Asak your tichar why he dont read word only? dont confuse Allah with your translator, they are different at not same. dhannewad

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
It is not impossible, if, the believing man and woman, truly keep their salaa! Here, examine 29:45  
 
my answar  
Yes it is possible a believer marry a zani. If atheist prostitute convert to islam and stop his work, she can marry a virging muslim, or do you mean she must find preworking,ex prostitute for her self? Or what if muslim man or woman commit mistake of zina withut marrige, and they say tauba ataghfar, must the society produce two zanis to marry these guiltys? I have full knolledge you will not respond on my question again.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
*** You seem to agree with almost every word translated by traditional interpreters, except a single word "SALAAH". Tell me why do you think only one word in Quran has been wrongly translated, when all other words are properly interpreted by these people? ***  
 
This is your gross misperception. What I do understand is that not every ayat is translated inaccurately.  
 
*** Let me ask this way; If the traditional interpreters could wrongly translate SALAAH, then don't you think other words could also be translated incorrectly???***  
 
Of course I do and I would be foolish not to take that into account, however, in regard to 24:3; 17:32; 7:33---they have it right.  
 
***Dear friend, my question was quite clear, that how you have translated the term NIKAH as sexual relations? Please see the translation you've quoted. I hope this time I'll get the reply.***  
 
I’m not translating nikah as sexual relations, I’m defining nikah as marriage between one man and one wife or one man and 2 wives or one man and 3 wives or one man and 4 wives. Allah has established nikah FOR the LAWFUL EXPRESSION OF SEXUALITY. I’m defining the term zina as sexual expression outside of nikah as established by Allah. The translator wants to restrict it to adultery and fornication, but the term, in my understanding, is broader than just those two conditions.  
1. extra-marital  
2. pre-marital  
3. homosexual  
4. beastilality  
5. pedophilia  
 
***AL-ZAANI can marry / get into contract with none other than a ZAANIA أَوْ MUSHRIKAA. (I have left أَوْ as it is). What do you say?***  
 
This is exactly my position. The zani can marry each other and mushrikeen, however, they are haram for the BELIEVER to marry. This is the essential point of 24:3.  
 
***What is the linkage between MUSHRIK and ZANI and why ZINA has been given so much importance when a lot of more serious crimes are being committed by mankind today? Why specially ZINA? and why not RAPE, FRAUD, CHEATING, ROBBERY, EXTORTION, MASS MURDERS or EXPLOITATION of society through White collar crimes? ***  
 
You’re asking and entirely different question now. The point of 24:3, as I said a moment ago, was to make clear to the believer that the zani and the mushrikeen are haram for marriage. Do you agree with that? Yes or no?  
 
*** Also to mention that you have completely ignored few very important points given by sister Nargis in her post above. ***  
 
I hope to get to them all, however, I’m attempting to stay focused on 24:3 and not hop all over the sand box.  
 
***In fact now you've came with another statement which is causing a lot of confusion to me;  
You said***  
 
DHULQARNAIN: Marriage, as defined by Allah, is between a man and woman (up to 4 women per one man). This is why homosexuality is both zina and fahish, hence, haram in Deen of Islam.  
 
***My question is that Quran has made no distinction or discrimination between men and women, rather the term يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ and يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُو۟ا has been used. Now tell me how is it possible that such a big discrimination has been made by giving men a right to marry 4 women at a time? Can a woman also marry 4 men at a time? If not then why such discrimination? OR Is it that you misunderstood the verse? If not then show me a single verse from Quran where there is a discrimination between men and women. Why in this case then?***  
 
Would yo not consider 2:228, 4:3 and 4:22-23...dicriminatory?  
 
2:228…And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise,  
 
What?! Listen, if you think Allah is being discriminatory then you must take that up with Him.  
 
And yes, Allah has made a distinction between a man and woman in regards to marriage. Ayat 4:3 details who a man can marry and ayats 4:22-23 detail who a man cannot marry. Marriage in Deen Islam is directed at the man and who he can and cannot marry—not the woman.  
 
4:3 And if you fear that you cannot do justice to orphans, MARRY SUCH WOMEN as seem good to you, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you will not do justice, then (marry) only one or that which your right hands possess. This is more proper that you may not do injustice.  
 
4:22-23 And MARRY NOT WOMEN whom your fathers married, except what has already passed. This surely is indecent and hateful; and it is an evil way. Forbidden to you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your paternal aunts, and your maternal aunts, and brother’s daughters and sister’s daughters, and your mothers that have suckled you, and your foster-sisters, and mothers of your wives, and your stepdaughters who are in your guardianship (born) of your wives to whom you have gone in — but if you have not gone in to them, there is no blame on you — and the wives of your sons who are of your own loins; and that you should have two sisters together, except what has already passed. Surely Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful,  
 
Now, do you find an ayat directed at women where Allah says “MARRY SUCH MEN as seem good to you, two, or three, or four…” and/or, “And MARRY NOT MEN…”? and then goes on to give the details as He did for the man? You see, these ayats are directed at men detailing who they can and cannot marry. This is the distinction. Open your eyes, man. What are you talking about?!  
 
If I haven’t answered your question by this time, then, there is no answer for you, at least from me anyway.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
 

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Wrong, why al nisa translated to women in 4.3 but wife in 2.183-186 ? word alnisa hav not singular, what is word for one singel woman?sometime your tichar translate zauj to wife, sometimes nisa to wife, sometims same word translate to women. confusion. One question, what is nisa meaning in 49.11?

Comments by: Junaid On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
Before going into further discussion, I would like to know that on what basis have you given the following statement?  
 
You said;
 
 
Of course I do and I would be foolish not to take that into account, however, in regard to 24:3; 17:32; 7:33---they have it right.  
 
How can you confirm that they have it right?  
 
Please check all the lexicons and all the Arabic dictionaries and you'll find Ritual Prayer as the translation of SALAAH. Now tell me on what basis you refused to accept Ritual Prayers as translation of SALAAH and you have accepted ZINA, FAHASH and NISA as correct?  
 
I would request you to kindly provide a clear answer after doing some more research (if possible).

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
DHULQARNAIN: 1. Nothing is fahasha in 2:173, however, fahasha is, nonetheless, haram to do…yes or no? 2. Fahasha comes under what Allah has made haram…not the other way around. In other words, not everything haram is fahasha, but everything fahasha, is haram, get it?  
 
***my answar why you not seeing word INNAMA, that means ONLY. 2.173 said OnLY this is haraam VS. 7. 33 also say ONLY Fahsah is haraam ***  
 
2:173 He has made haram you only what dies of itself, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked. Then whoever is driven by necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin is upon him. Surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord makes haram only fahasha, such of them as are apparent and such as are concealed, and sin and unjust rebellion, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and that you say of Allah what you know not.  
 
In ayat 2:172-173, Allah is telling us what He has only made haram in regard to what we can consume into our bodies.  
 
In ayat 7:33, Allah is telling us what He has only made haram in regard to mindset.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: It is not impossible, if, the believing man and woman, truly keep their salaa! Here, examine 29:45  
 
***my answar Yes it is possible a believer marry a zani. If atheist prostitute convert to islam and stop his work, she can marry a virging muslim, or do you mean she must find preworking,ex prostitute for her self? Or what if muslim man or woman commit mistake of zina withut marrige, and they say tauba ataghfar, must the society produce two zanis to marry these guiltys? I have full knolledge you will not respond on my question again.***  
 
LOL!, you’re kidding me, right? This is exactly what I’ve been saying to you.! What do you think I mean by belief system/mindset/lifestyle? Wake up and read, will you!  
 
DHULQARNAIN: The people/mindset described in the above ayat are those who follow Quran only and alone for their guidance. These people/BELIEVERS will not marry those whose LIFESTYLE/BEHAVIOR is one that is not chaste/believing, as it would be haram and fahasha to do so. This ayat, 33:35, then, is consistent/shabaha with 24:3.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: So, in coming back to above ayat 24:3 and zana, in relation to the mushrikeen, it my understanding that those who participate in zana can only marry those who also participate in zana or who follow a BELIEF SYSTEM/LIFESTYLE which embraces the above 5 positions. Those who participate in zana, obviously, their salaa is not the salaa of Alllah (the salaa of Allah would prevent/make impossible for anyone to do fahish/indecencyshameful deeds i.e. zana or the rest of the above five positions.)  
 
Certainly those who do zina, fahasha, and shirk as a lifestyle, belief system, or mindset can stop and become of those mentioned in the following ayat. And, if they do that, then, they would no longer be of the zina and mushrikeen, now would they?  
 
33:35 Surely the men who submit and the women who submit, and THE BELIEVING MEN AND THE BELIEVING WOMEN, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and the truthful women, and the patient men and the patient women, and the humble men and the humble women, and the charitable men and the charitable women, and the fasting men and the fasting women, and THE MEN WHO GUARD THEIR CHASTITY AND THE WOMEN WHO GUARD, and the men who remember Allah much and women who remember — Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward.  
 
Now, likewise, those mentioned in the above can stop doing Salaa and become of mushrikeen and do fahasha and zina as a lifestyle. Now, if a muslim man or woman does an act of zina or fahish, well, that doesn’t necessarily mean they have resorted back to the mindset/lifestyle of those who practice zina/fahish, but it could. If they are found out then his or her mate can certainly divorce over it.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***Before going into further discussion, I would like to know that on what basis have you given the following statement? You said; Of course I do and I would be foolish not to take that into account, however, in regard to 24:3; 17:32; 7:33---they have it right. How can you confirm that they have it right? I would request you to kindly provide a clear answer after doing some more research (if possible).***  
 
Tashreef and the assistance of The Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar.  
 
***Please check all the lexicons and all the Arabic dictionaries and you'll find Ritual Prayer as the translation of SALAAH. Now tell me on what basis you refused to accept Ritual Prayers as translation of SALAAH and you have accepted ZINA, FAHASH and NISA as correct?***  
 
41:2-3 A revelation from the Beneficent, the Merciful. A Book of which the ayats are fully detailed, an Arabic Quran for a people who know —  
 
Where can one find the full details on how to perform a raka? No ritual prayer in Deen Islam.  
 
11:87 They said: O Shu‘aib, does thy salaa command thee that we should forsake what our fathers worshipped or that we should not do what we please with regard to our property? Forsooth thou art the forbearing, the right-directing one!  
 
How does a ritual prayer command anything?  
 
29:45 Recite that which has been revealed to thee of the Book and keep up salaa. Surely salaa prevents/makes impossible indecency and evil; and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest (force). And Allah knows what you do.  
 
Salaa prevents/makes it impossible for one to do fahsha and munkar. Ritual praying certainly hasn’t prevented/made this impossible fashsa and munkar for the so-called muslims, thus, salaa cannot be a ritual prayer.  
 
When it comes to zina, fahish, and nisaa…these terms are not difficult to understand.  
 
I’ve noticed that you continue to ask question after question. This demonstrates that you have not refuted my position concerning 24:3 and you are now running away. Will you now concede the point that my position is the correct one or, will you just simply continue to pose more and more questions and then not resolve those either?  
 
Just stating that you don't agree with me is no refutation of my position unless you can prove it, via Al-Quran, where I am incorrect.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
2:173 He has made haram you only what dies of itself, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked. Then whoever is driven by necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin is upon him. Surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord makes haram only fahasha, such of them as are apparent and such as are concealed, and sin and unjust rebellion, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and that you say of Allah what you know not.  
 
In ayat 2:172-173, Allah is telling us what He has only made haram in regard to what we can consume into our bodies.  
 
In ayat 7:33, Allah is telling us what He has only made haram in regard to mindset. Dhulqarnain  
 
If so, where have Quran this? You say Quran only and you add explainsation to Quran from yourself? Never have Quran say one haraam rule is for eating and one is for mind, it say only whats haraam, fashah or what mention in 2.173. Why you add explanation to Quran, who give you authoroty? Show where Quran say i 2.173 this is about food or show where Fahsha is said to be different from 2.173 ? Only Quran no explanaition from yourself thank you.

Comments by: Junaid On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
My aim is not to indulge in a meaningless debate, rather I am trying to make you re-think and re-analyze the concepts. Obviously no one can claim that he/she has mastered all the concepts and that his/her inference is final and unchangeable. There is always some room for more research and analysis. This is what I am trying to do i.e. I am trying to make you think some more. To me, an unchangeable state of mind where we reach a conclusion that no further improvement is needed, reflects stagnation. It's not the matter of winning or losing, rather it's all about understanding Quran in a better way. I am trying to keep you and myself away from getting stagnated.  
 
Whats wrong with it if we revisit all the pre-conceived ideas and concepts and do some more research?  
After all we are all human beings and we are prone to mistakes.
 
 
You said that you are taking help from Tashreef and the assistance of The Dictionary of the Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar.  
 
OK fine but that is one person, a human being just like you and me and he is not free from mistakes. Even he can misunderstand things can't he?  
What I mean to say is that we should not simply depend on one source, rather we must try and cross check everything using multiple sources. After all it's Quran we are dealing with and not our personal ego. Questioning the inference of a scholar is better than developing a wrong understanding regarding Quranic terms.  
Let me tell you that all the known lexicons including Taj ul Urros, Lisaan ul Arab, Lane etc, provides the meaning of SALAAT as Prayer. Why are you so confident that all these dictionaries are wrong?  
Likewise if all these dictionaries provide the same meaning for ZINA, SHIRK, FAHASH, How can you say that these dictionaries are providing the correct translation?  
Please remember that the first translation of Quran was done by a Persian Scholar and all the dictionaries and lexicons were compiled during Ummayyad and Abbasid Era when most of the scholars were Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians. How could you judge these translations on merit?  
 
As far as Tasreef is concerned, I can tell you that the meaning of SHIRK as "Distortion of Ideology" and the meaning of ZINA as "distortion of Quranic message" (as defined by Dr. Qamar) also fits in perfectly with tasreef. Most importantly, the references from lexicons and dictionaries are also provided if you read the following article;  
http://www.aastana.com/urdu/viewer.asp?id=50  
 
Having said that, I must clarify one thing that I don't mean to say you are wrong and I am right, OR I am wrong and you are right. In fact I am just trying to make you think some more and that's it.  
 
BTW: If you think your understanding is correct and it needs no further improvement, then you can always tell me to stop debating further. I won't mind that at all.
 
 
You said;  
I’ve noticed that you continue to ask question after question. This demonstrates that you have not refuted my position concerning 24:3 and you are now running away.
 
 
Perhaps "running away" is not a suitable word for a debate. Let me tell you once again that my purpose is not to refute or accept what you are saying. Rather I am trying to analyze my understanding, by comparing it to your inference. Probably that is the reason why I am asking so many questions. You can believe in whatever you want and I cannot force my understanding upon you. Likewise I have my own concepts and you cannot change them forcefully. All we can do is to try and convince each other by providing proper understanding and clear references, but unfortunately this is not happening right now. I may be wrong here but you can ask anyone if your point of view regarding MUSHRIK and ZAANI has been understood properly or not. I'll be glad to see someone who comes in with a statement that he / she completely understood your point.  
 
As a matter of fact, I am getting more confused because everything seems to be mixed up right now. My question was very simple and that was, "what is the linkage between MUSHRIK and ZANI". I gave you an example of a Muslim woman who got married to a Muslim man but the man was an adulterer whereas the woman never had any sort of relations with any person before getting married. This was a very simple concept which turned into something very complicated, when you refused to accept the woman and the man as Muslims. I mean what criteria are you using to judge people? Come on mate it's a simple equation. They are Muslims and they believe in all what you believe. Now tell me why a "Zaani" got married to a woman who was never touched by a man before marriage? And of course she was not a "mushrika" since she clearly believes in Allah alone?  
 
Later on the discussion got diverted towards NIKAH and sexual relations, because it was you who came up with a strange new translation which was never seen before. Let me quote your translation once again;
 
 
24:3 The adulterer cannot have sexual relations with any but an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can have sexual relations with her but an adulterer or an idolater; and it is forbidden to believers.  
 
I simply challenged this translation and you could have easily avoided further confusion by accepting this translation as incorrect and saying "sorry I translated the word NIKAH wrongly". You see? only 6 words would have saved a lot of time and energy from both of us. Did you do that?  
 
Now you are saying that Salaa prevents/makes it impossible for one to do fahsha and munkar.  
 
Tell me where did Salaa, fahsha and munkar came into this discussion? We were simply talking about Mushrik and Zani and you opened up a new topic. Anyway, I can tell you that I know a lot of namaazis who pray 5 times a day and they are so involved in their prayers that they don't go near fahsha and munkar. This shows that prayers can prevent a person from fahsha and munkar. How can you deny that?  
 
Finally you also said; Where can one find the full details on how to perform a raka? No ritual prayer in Deen Islam.  
 
What about RUKU and SUJOOD? What about verse (5:06)? How would you translate that?  
Tell me where are the details regarding Zakaat in Quran? Nothing is there but you still gave it a meaning. How so?  
Where are the details regarding ZINA? Nothing is there but you still call it adultery. What are the conditions which apply to ZINA? can you show me details from Quran? What does Quran says about Zina. How do we do it?  
Where are the details regarding NIKAH mentioned in Quran? Can you exactly provide a procedure of Nikah from Quran?  
 
Now please don't say why I am asking these questions, coz it's you who brought in new topics.

Comments by: UmeAimon On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salam Dhulqarnain,  
 
I think you are mixing up two things... zina means adultry and adultry can be in anything way of life too... That does not mean extramarital sex is being allowed. Quran gives seperate orders for that.  
But mind you not in 4:3... you have it wrong it has already been proven already somewhere.  
 
UmeAimon

Comments by: Nargis On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
11of sura 49 ,  
 
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لا يَسْخَرْ قَومٌ مِنْ قَوْمٍ عَسَى أَنْ يَكُونُوا خَيْرًا مِنْهُمْ وَلا نِسَاءٌ مِنْ نِسَاءٍ عَسَى أَنْ يَكُنَّ خَيْرًا مِنْهُنَّ  
 
This verse has always been misinterpreted without any exception . how can word " قوم " be translated as a male .  
In this verse the word قوم " “ means a strong nation , in this verse word قوم " “ is from ق و م which has the meaning of being strong قوام " " حاکم " the one who has some footing . the meaning of " نساء " is self explanatory i.e. people who have no footing and proverb used here for " نساء "is " ھن " although here in this verse " نساء " means people who have no footing as opposed to people who are called " قوم " .  
 
QAUM is a mixture of both males and females, still the PRONOUN ضمیر used is that of Male – MASCULINE. So, a masculine pronoun can include a group of both males and females and the use of respective pronouon will be governed by the form and nature of the Noun that has been used in the beginning of the sentence. (QAUM - Masculine)  
 
Likewise, NISAA is again a QAUM, though a weaker one, consisting of both males and females. Still a FEMININE PRONOUN can be used for this society of mixed people. Why? Because the NOUN used here is taken, under the rules, as feminine (NISAA).  
 
For all of you who may still be searching, I have one small hint from Allama Pervaiz’ Tabweeb ul Quran. Kindly check page No.1048, and go downwards under Chapter عورت –  
 
6 th line. It reads as under :-  
 
جیسے نسائکم - تمیاری بیویاں – مجازی معنوں میں یہ لفظ قوم کے اس طبقہ کے لئے آیا ہے جو جوہر مردانگی سے عاری ہو ---  
 
Though the Scholar calls it MAJAZI MA’ANI, but the fact remains that he was well aware of this meaning and could use it with confidence and authority.  
 
whats the singular of "Nisaa" ? whats "A WOMAN " ?  
 
Traditional translation 49:11:-  
 
“Let not some men (Qoum) among you laugh at others”  
“Nor let some women (Nisa) laugh at others”  
 
It is clear that Qoum and Nisa are antonyms. Now let’s take a look at another translation :  
 
“No group of people should indulge in mocking/ridiculing another people”  
“nor group of women should indulge mocking/ridiculing other women”  
 
If we look at the first section, the word “people” constitutes of men and women, so there is no need to create a second section specifically related to “women”  
 
“Yaskhar” the “masculine singular imperfect verb” has been used once, for both parties i.e. it has been used for “Qoam” and for “Nisa”  
 
If Qoum and Nisa are antonyms, then we firstly need to understand what Qoum is in order to establish the meaning of “Nisa”  
 
Qoum is from the root: Qaf – Waw – Miim = stand still or firm, rose/stand up, managed/conducted/ordered/regulated/superintended, established, made it straight/right, maintain/erect/observe/perform, set up, people/community/company, abode, stature/dignity/rank. aqama - to keep a thing or an affair in a right state.  
 
From the above, we can clearly see that “Qoum” is positive, with high rank, which is in a right state.  
 
To understand what Nisa is, we do need to have a “refresher” and go back to basics in order to understand what the conditions are of nouns in relation to gender.  
 
As we are well aware, there are two forms of gender in Arabic; masculine and feminine – there is no neuter. Effectively this means each noun must be either masculine (true or figurative) or feminine (true or figurative). There are certain figurative nouns that are deemed feminine as standard – i.e. human body parts (hand, eye), natural entities such as wind, geographical names such as towns, countries and so on.  
 
If Nisa is the antonym of Qoum, then it is suggestive that Nisa is negative, with low rank, in a bad state. If Qoum is a country / nation / a people in a good state, of high stature and rank, then clearly Nisa is a weaker nation / people.  
 

Comments by: Modudi On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
UmeAimon saahiba;  
 
Aap ne farmaya;  
zina means adultry and adultry can be in anything way of life too... That does not mean extramarital sex is being allowed. Quran gives seperate orders for that.  
 
Kya aap batana pasand farmain gi ke Quran mein extramarital sex ke baare mein kya likha he aur kahan?  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
I will reply to the bulk of your post later as I only have one post left for today.  
 
***What about RUKU and SUJOOD? What about verse (5:06)? How would you translate that?  
Tell me where are the details regarding Zakaat in Quran? Nothing is there but you still gave it a meaning. How so? Where are the details regarding ZINA? Nothing is there but you still call it adultery. What are the conditions which apply to ZINA? can you show me details from Quran? What does Quran says about Zina. How do we do it? Where are the details regarding NIKAH mentioned in Quran? Can you exactly provide a procedure of Nikah from Quran? Now please don't say why I am asking these questions, coz it's you who brought in new topics.***  
 
Some, if not all of the details, are in the definition of those terms. For example, Al-Quran does not give details for sujood/prostration as a ritual (as defined traditionally) in Al-Quran, because the word doesn’t mean physical prostrating. Now, if sujood really means, by Quranic definition, to be submitting/obedient, then definition itself has provided the details and the rest of Al-Quran will come to support that definition with other details. And the same with zina, ruku, salaa, zakaa, etc.  
 
***I simply challenged this translation and you could have easily avoided further confusion by accepting this translation as incorrect and saying "sorry I translated the word NIKAH wrongly". You see? only 6 words would have saved a lot of time and energy from both of us. Did you do that?***  
 
Of course I did but you don’t pay attention:  
 
DHULQARNAIN TO JUNAID ON 21 JUNE 2011: Maybe I’m beginning to see your question, now. The ayat is translated as “sexual relations” , but the Arabic term is nikah, marriage. Is this what you are questioning? If I’m reading you correctly now, state once more what your oblection/question is?  
 
***Tell me where did Salaa, fahsha and munkar came into this discussion? We were simply talking about Mushrik and Zani and you opened up a new topic.***  
It’s called…providing details and a convincing argument.  
 
***Anyway, I can tell you that I know a lot of namaazis who pray 5 times a day and they are so involved in their prayers that they don't go near fahsha and munkar. This shows that prayers can prevent a person from fahsha and munkar. How can you deny that?***  
 
It isn’t the ritual preventing them from doing fahsha and munkar. It is obeying Allah’s command in the ayat which is preventing them doing those things! Without mentioning the ritual prayer, ask one of your friends why he or she isn’t doing fahsha and munkar and tell what they say.  
 
Anyway let's just focus for now on 24:3 and ayats pertinent to it.  
 
So, let’s do it this way. Please, via Al-Quran, define the following words in 24:3 for me so that I can know EXACTLY what YOU MEAN they mean. Do not bounce questions back at me, thanks. Please use English and transliteration no Arabic as I cannot read that as well. No long drawn analysis, just the definition per Quran, thanks. For example, does zanee mean adulterer or fornicator or neither? Which?  
 
It’s like I always say…everything is in the definition.  
 
Alzzanee  
 
yankihu  
 
illa  
 
zaniyatan  
 
mushrikatan  
 
almu/mineena  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Nargis On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
Surat Noor 2-3 “fajildo” is translated to "whip" on their skin  
 
“Jild” has a root “jeem-Laam-Daal”. Other words that are derived from this root are jild and mujild. “jild” means something that protects / safeguards. That is why skin is called “Jild” because it protects against the outside.  
 
Mujild Kitab = a book that has a cover (which protects the sheets inside so they are not demolished)  
 
The word mi-ata = مئة has been translated into hundreds... which in reality means "very much". The number 100 is used because “100” is considered to be “very much”.  
 
If one looks at Edward william lanes explanation, you will see that “Zina” does not only mean “fornication”, but it has alternative meanings too.  
 
Zina: Zay-Ya-Nun = to mount, the mounting upon a thing, to commit fornication / adultery, fornicator / adulterer. (For further information please refer to http://www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm )  
 
Similary,the english word adultary : adultery  
"voluntary violation of the marriage bed," c.1300, avoutrie, from O.Fr. avoutrie, aoulterie, noun of condition from avoutre/aoutre, from L. adulterare "to corrupt" (see adulteration). Modern spelling, with the re-inserted -d-, is from early 15c. (see ad-). Classified as single adultery (with an unmarried person) and double adultery (with a married person). O.E. word was æwbryce "breach of law(ful marriage)." Adultery Dune in Arizona corresponds to Navajo sei adilehe "adultery sand" and was where illicit lovers met privately.  
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=adultery

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
NARGIS:If one looks at Edward william lanes explanation, you will see that “Zina” does not only mean “fornication”, but it has alternative meanings too. Zina: Zay-Ya-Nun = to mount, the mounting upon a thing, to commit fornication / adultery, fornicator / adulterer. (For further information please refer to Similary,the english word adultary : adultery "voluntary violation of the marriage bed," c.1300, avoutrie, from O.Fr. avoutrie, aoulterie, noun of condition from avoutre/aoutre, from L. adulterare "to corrupt" (see adulteration). Modern spelling, with the re-inserted -d-, is from early 15c. (see ad-). Classified as single adultery (with an unmarried person) and double adultery (with a married person). O.E. word was æwbryce "breach of law(ful marriage.  
 
This has been my position all along. Zina, as being discussed in 24:3, among other things, is about having sex that is not in compliance with Deen Islam, whether that sex act be fornication, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, or pedophilia.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
I forgot the last sentance:  
 
This has been my position all along. Zina, as being discussed in 24:3, is about sex outside of Deen Islam sanctioned marriage, whether it be fornication, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, or pedophilia. Allah has made marriage for the lawful expression of sexuality. Zina, then, would be violation of Deen Islam sanctioned marriage.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
no sex is not discussed in 24:3 at all, and zina doesn't mean homosexuality.

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
no sex is not discussed in 24:3 at all, and zina doesn't mean homosexuality. Adding meanings? is zina used in Quran for homos? why you jump over questioins and how you explain 100 stripes on zinai?

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 04 July 2011Report Abuse
I astonish, you again jump over line "alternative meaning to fonication,acultery",overlooked the alternative meaning and add homos to the maning of zina. first you say it is sextual relationship before marriage, now you say its homosex not matter if he married or not. I think you dont read it, i ask, what is alternative meaning pointed at upstairs?

Comments by: Junaid2 On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
You said;
 
For example, Al-Quran does not give details for sujood/prostration as a ritual (as defined traditionally) in Al-Quran, because the word doesn’t mean physical prostrating.  
 
My friend, I completely agree to your statement, and perhaps I believe in it more than you do. What I mean to say is that we are on the same wavelength as far as the concept of SALAAT, RUKU and SUJOOD is concerned. However, we do have a difference of opinion regarding few other quranic terms.  
 
Anyway, lets keep aside the difference of opinion and the debate for a while.  
Just tell me one thing;  
Why do you think the term SALAAT was wrongly translated?  
Was it an unintentional mistake?  
If yes then why none of the translators could figure it out?  
OR  
Was it done purposely?  
If yes then what was the purpose?

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***You said; For example, Al-Quran does not give details for sujood/prostration as a ritual (as defined traditionally) in Al-Quran, because the word doesn’t mean physical prostrating. What I mean to say is that we are on the same wavelength as far as the concept of SALAAT, RUKU and SUJOOD is concerned.***  
 
Good deal.  
 
***My friend, I completely agree to your statement, and perhaps I believe in it more than you do***  
 
That’s not likely.  
 
***However, we do have a difference of opinion regarding few other quranic terms.***  
 
I gave you the following terms to be defined by you, why have you ignored my request? You cannot continue to ask me questions for clarification and then not reciprocate, it’s simply rude and arrogant. Please honor my request, thanks.  
 
Please, via Al-Quran, define the following words in 24:3 for me so that I can know EXACTLY what YOU MEAN they mean. Do not bounce questions back at me, thanks. Please use English and transliteration no Arabic as I cannot read that as well. No long drawn analysis, just the definition per Quran, thanks. For example, does zanee mean adulterer or fornicator or neither? Which?  
 
Alzzanee  
 
yankihu  
 
illa  
 
zaniyatan  
 
mushrikatan  
 
almu/mineena  
 
***Anyway, lets keep aside the difference of opinion and the debate for a while.  
Just tell me one thing; Why do you think the term SALAAT was wrongly translated?  
Was it an unintentional mistake? If yes then why none of the translators could figure it out?  
OR Was it done purposely? If yes then what was the purpose?***  
 
LOL! You say one moment---“ lets keep aside the difference of opinion” and then instantly turn around and ask me for an opinion?! Listen, you nor I nor anyone else for that matter, may ever the motivation as to why salaa has been so abused by the translators. What’s more…WHO CARES!. It is folly to pursue conjecture. Our task is to get these terms correct so that we may have taqwa and gain Paradise and not the Fire. This we can do and it won’t be conjecture but Qranic fact.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
***no sex is not discussed in 24:3 at all, and zina doesn't mean homosexuality. .and zina doesn't mean homosexuality. Adding meanings? is zina used in Quran for homos? why you jump over questioins and how you explain 100 stripes on zinai?***  
 
Oh, I see. Here’s a scenario for you. A man is married with 3 children for many years and then one day he meets a another man who is a homosexual, who, he finds attractive. Not long after meeting, these two men enter into a sexual affair. Now here are my questions to you.  
 
1.Is homosexuality, at all, an expression of sexuality? Yes or no?  
 
2. The homosexual, is he guilty of fornication/zina? Yes or no?  
 
3. The married man, is he guilty of homosexuality as well? Yes or no?  
 
4. The married man, is he guilty of adultery/zina? Yes or no?  
 
5. Can homosexuals, lawfully marry in Deen Islam? Yes or no?  
 
***first you say it is sextual relationship before marriage, now you say its homosex not matter if he married or not. I think you dont read it, i ask, what is alternative meaning pointed at upstairs?***  
 
Please don’t distort my words. I made it absolutely clear to anyone with 3 active brain cells that zina covers both extramarital and premarital sex. Zina, in fact, covers ANY sexual expression that is not in compliance with marriage as sanctioned under Deen Islam.  
 
What’s astonishing is, well, never mind.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Junaid2 On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
You said;
 
Please, via Al-Quran, define the following words in 24:3 for me so that I can know EXACTLY what YOU MEAN they mean. Do not bounce questions back at me, thanks. Please use English and transliteration no Arabic as I cannot read that as well. No long drawn analysis, just the definition per Quran, thanks. For example, does zanee mean adulterer or fornicator or neither? Which?  
 
Please give me a day and I'll get back to you with my understanding regarding (24:03). Hope you are OK with that?  
 
You also said;
 
Listen, you nor I nor anyone else for that matter, may ever the motivation as to why salaa has been so abused by the translators. What’s more…WHO CARES!. It is folly to pursue conjecture.  
 
Sorry mate but I would disagree with you here. This question is very important because it will help both of us to reach a conclusion later on. I believe there always is a motive behind everything. Without knowing the motive we can never reach to a conclusion regarding incorrectness of a term and without knowing the root-cause, we cannot resolve the issue. (By "resolving issue" I mean translating the word "salaat" correctly and convincing others to accept it).  
 
Even if you think it's useless, I would still request you to please do some brainstorming and come up with some the answers;  
Why this term was misinterpreted and by whom?  
How was the society when people had a clear understanding regarding the true meaning of "Salaat"?  
What was the impact on the society on the whole, when the meaning of this word changed?  
Why masses were kept ignorant throughout the history and by whom?  
Who were the beneficiaries of all this?  
 
Please consider it as my humble request and do share your understanding in this regard.

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
If Zina also mean homo penduphile sex, and same man tell you he commit zina, you tell me did he homosex or penduphile sex? Why you add meaning to zina which is not in Quran, in what dictionary you read zina mean homosex or penduphilsex? I dont ever hear married man have sleep with another man is guilty of zina, but i heard he cheated.englsih have word for penduphile and homo, but you think there is not word in arabic for that? what is word for homo penduphile in arabic .you think a unmarried homo must marry another homo to not do zina?Where in Quran is zina define as homo penduphile? If zina also mean homo penduphile, you mean 24/3 say that a homo always marry a mushrik and a pendu phile always marry a mushrik?  
 
In your definition of zina covering many meanings like homo,penduphile,premarital extramarital sex, 24/3 is in fect saying " The adulterer/homo/penduphile cannot marry with any but an adulteress/homo/penduphile or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer/homo/penduphile or an idolater; and it is haram to believers. I again astonish.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***Please give me a day and I'll get back to you with my understanding regarding (24:03). Hope you are OK with that?***  
 
Good deal.  
 
DHULQARNAIN: Listen, you nor I nor anyone else for that matter, may ever the motivation as to why salaa has been so abused by the translators. What’s more…WHO CARES!. It is folly to pursue conjecture.  
 
***Sorry mate but I would disagree with you here. This question is very important because it will help both of us to reach a conclusion later on. I believe there always is a motive behind everything. Without knowing the motive we can never reach to a conclusion regarding incorrectness of a term and without knowing the root-cause, we cannot resolve the issue. (By "resolving issue" I mean translating the word "salaat" correctly and convincing others to accept it).***  
 
We have translated salaa correctly. There is no convincing anyone of anything. Each individual must examine the evidence presented and act in accord with it...or not. Attempting to find out why some Quranic terms were mistranslated will not help in coming to an understanding of what the term means, one iota. There are entirely separate issues. So stop with pursuing conjecture and pursue Quran.  
 
10:36 And most of them do not follow but conjecture; surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth; surely Allah is cognizant of what they do.  
 
***What was the impact on the society on the whole, when the meaning of this word changed?***  
 
The evidence of this is all around us on all levels. No mystery here.  
 
***Please consider it as my humble request and do share your understanding in this regard.***  
 
This is nothing to consider. Your request is distraction and conjecture. I have no time for either, and, frankly, neither do you. Rather than wasting your time and my time with this request, you could have been focusing on what we can know---the definitions of the terms I asked you to define. This is why I said that, it appears to me, you are running away from our original discussion. You want to focus on why salaa was mistranslated rather than simply putting your efforts/energies into our immediate discussion. Look, we’ve already wasted two or three postings a piece on this distraction. Has our knowledge of Al-Quran been increased as a result of this? Mine hasn’t.  
 
With respect,  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Djulqarnain" Look, we’ve already wasted two or three postings a piece on this distraction. Has our knowledge of Al-Quran been increased as a result of this? Mine hasn’t. " My answar, your hasnt because you think homo is penduphile zani, same.you doesnt replay to question and give meaning to Quran from own pocket.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
Your reply is an absolute incomprehensible ramble to me. I know English is not your mother so know that I am not making fun of you, but I want to understand you.  
 
Here’s the definition from The Dictionary of The Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 236.  
 
ZANA: to commit adultery or fornication.  
 
Zina then, by definition, is indissolubly linked with the institution of marriage (as defined by Deen Islam), that is, either being in a marriage or out of one.  
 
Let’s get back to this:  
 
A man is married with 3 children for many years and then one day he meets a another man who is a homosexual, who, he finds attractive. Not long after meeting, these two men enter into a sexual affair.  
 
Now here are my questions to you:  
 
Just answer the following questions with either a yes or no, and then we can, hopefully, proceed.  
 
1. Is homosexuality, at all, an expression of sexuality? Yes or no?  
 
2. The homosexual, is he guilty of fornication/zina? Yes or no?  
 
3. The married man, is he guilty of homosexuality as well? Yes or no?  
 
4. The married man, is he guilty of adultery/zina? Yes or no?  
 
5. Can homosexuals, lawfully marry in Deen Islam? Yes or no?  
No rambling, just yes or no. Can you handle that? Here’s to hoping so.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
1. Is homosexuality, at all, an expression of sexuality? Yes or no?  
 
YES IN ENGLISH, I NEVER READ HOMOSEXUALITY IN QURAN.  
 
2. The homosexual, is he guilty of fornication/zina? Yes or no?  
 
NOT READ IN QURAN, CAN YOU SHOW FROM QURAN WHERE IS IT WRITTEN?  
 
3. The married man, is he guilty of homosexuality as well? Yes or no?  
 
I NEVER READ IT IN QURAN, SHOW ME. BUT IN MY OPINION THIS IS CHEATING  
 
4. The married man, is he guilty of adultery/zina? Yes or no?  
 
NOT READ IN QURAN,WHERE WRITTEN? I PERSONALLY SAY HE IS CHEATING,I NEVER SAY ZINAI HOMO  
 
5. Can homosexuals, lawfully marry in Deen Islam? Yes or no?  
 
NEVER READ ANYTHING ABOUT HOMO MARRIGE, PLEASE SHOW ?  
 
No rambling, just yes or no. Can you handle that? Here’s to hoping so.  
 
OYE YOU GO BACK AND ANSWAR MY QUESTIONS YOU JUMP OVER, I INTERESTED IN WHAT QURAN SAY ,NOT WHAT YOU THINK ZINA IS. I ASTOSHINSH

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
i not finish , if you say Zina is homo penduphile sex additional to premarital extramarital sex, then you are giving this meaning to 24:3  
 
The adulterer/homo/penduphile cannot marry with any but an adulteress/homo/penduphile or an idolatress, and the adulteress, none can marry with her but an adulterer/homo/penduphile or an idolater; and it is haram to believers.  
you must show from Quran your meanings.

Comments by: Junaid2 On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
I am unable to understand the reason why you are not interested to know who distorted the meaning of Salaat and why. Apparently your stance is simple that Salaat has been translated wrongly by every known scholar in the past and now we have translated it correctly, therefore we don't need to know how and why it was misinterpreted. If someone asks the detail, just tell him that all the dictionaries are wrong.  
 
WELL!!!  
 
OK fine, as you wish, but then let me share my understanding in this regard;  
 
A concept of justice, equality and accountability among mankind, which advocates invariable access of natural resources for every human being was not acceptable to elites who wanted to rule as autocrats. They used all the available means which includes services provided by Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians to distort the meaning of Al-Kitaab and promote ignorance among the masses. Quran was interpreted for the first time in Persian language during the same era and later on tafseer was written by Tabari, who also wrote the fist official history of Islam. We can find no written record of History or tafseer prior to Tabari's era. These scholars mixed the concepts taken from hadith (Mostly by Bukhari and Muslim) with Quranic interpretation, changing the meanings of various Quranic terms. Please note that the dictionaries were compiled afterwards. Salaat was one of those words and it was converted to Namaz which itself is a persian word. Later on this word NAMAZ was translated to English as Ritual Prayer. The concept of Salaat, Saum and hajj were changed into meaningless rituals and deen was converted to religion, which was further divided into various sects.  
It doesn't matter whether you call it conjecture or whatever, but I was really curious about why it all happened and I have spent some time to do all this research. As a result of this research, I can tell you that Salaat was not the only word which was mistranslated, rather Saum, Hajj, Zina, Fohash, Mushrik and many other words were mistranslated too. The purpose behind all these conspiracies was to convince people to accept hadith and sharia as a part of Muslim faith and pave way for monarchy, allowing autocrats to rule the masses.  
 
Anyway, I was looking at the discussion going on between you and Yellow Cow and I noticed that you are translating homo sexuality as ZINA. (please correct me if I am wrong).  
 
If you are saying that homosexual relationship i.e. relation between two men or relationship between two women is also ZINA then please allow me to use the meaning of ZINA as Homosexuality in (24:03);
 
 
A homosexual (ZANI) will marry none other but ZAANIA (Lesbian) and/or a MUSHRIKA (Idolater) and a ZAANIA (Lesbian) will marry none other than a ZANI (Homosexual) and/or a MUSHRIK (Idolater).  
 
A homosexual man can only marry a lesbian woman or a woman who do Idol-worship?  
To me it doesn't make any sense at all.  
 
You also said in one of your post above that Rape is also ZINA. Let me tell you that in Urdu, Rape or "forced sex" is called (Zina-bil-jabr) and normal sexual activity is called (Zina-bil-raza). I was wondering why no distinction is there in Quran for forced sex and normal sex. Most importantly the punishment for ZINA (according to you) is 100 lashes. It gives me an impression that the punishment for both rapist and adulterer is 100 lashes. Rape which is a horrible crime and which destroys a life of the victim by all means but the punishment is 100 lashes only???  
Now that sounds a but ridiculous.  
 
BTW: I was also looking at the word فَٱجْلِدُو۟ا which has been translated as lashes in (24:02). I was wondering how the word جْلِدُو۟ became "lashes" when its meaning has been derived from root جَ-لْ-دَ which means skin or protective covering. On the other hand, there is a proper word used in Quran for lash or whip and that is سَوْطَ which can be seen in the following verse;  
فَصَبَّ عَلَيْهِمْ رَبُّكَ سَوْطَ عَذَابٍ (89:13  
 
Lets see how the word rapist fits into (24:03);
 
 
A ZAANI (Rapist) will marry none other than an adulteress or an idol-worshiper and an adulteress will marry none other than a rapist.  
 
Rapist getting punishment of 100 lashes and then a rapist marrying a lesbian or adulteress !!!!  
It again makes no sense to me at all.  
 
ZAANI means adulterer, Zaani means Homosexual, Zani means rapist, ZAANIA means Adulteress, ZAANIA means Lesbain, and ZAANIA means ..... (can a woman be a rapist too?)  
Well I think there is a lot of confusion all around.  
 
Who will get me out of this confusion???

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
good obserwation shree Junaid, i in pain for long time. Shree Dhulqarnain, Also the penduphile is only getting 100 lashes because he is zani too. Rapists, penduphiles, adulterers everyone is zani and everyone have one same punishment , no diferentiation between volentarily sex and criminal sex. And then you say Allah said this? your own understanding is lagging behind, and you give alien meanings to Quran from your parsonal understanding of zina, and say this is from Allah. and in end you say Quran only will define words. I can be your tichar of teqhnicality and prooff by showing you words in Arabiq language and their use, but i astonish, so i want first to learn how you think when you cant see so big mistakes and say it is from Allah and we have to talk to him about it ?

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Juniad,  
 
*** Who will get me out of this confusion??? ***  
 
If you listen and THINK you won’t be confused.  
 
***JUNAID: Anyway, I was looking at the discussion going on between you and Yellow Cow and I noticed that you are translating homo sexuality as ZINA. (please correct me if I am wrong). If you are saying that homosexual relationship i.e. relation between two men or relationship between two women is also ZINA then please allow me to use the meaning of ZINA as Homosexuality in (24:03); A homosexual (ZANI) will marry none other but ZAANIA (Lesbian) and/or a MUSHRIKA (Idolater) and a ZAANIA (Lesbian) will marry none other than a ZANI (Homosexual) and/or a MUSHRIK (Idolater). A homosexual man can only marry a lesbian woman or a woman who do Idol-worship? To me it doesn't make any sense at all.***  
 
What you and Yellow Cow still refuse to accept is this one simple reality. Zana (adultery or fornication), whether male or female, is referring to a sexual violation of the marriage institution as established in Deen Al-Islam. Allah, even for the zana and mushrik, has determined that marriage be between a male and a female, as 24:3 indicates. There is no recognition of homosexual marriage in Deen Al-Islam, yet, homosexuals still indulge in the behavior of zana.  
 
Here are three translations of 17:32, which is the correct one? I say the Sahih Int. is the correct one, but it really doesn’t matter. Which do you choose?  
 
Muhammad Ali 17:32 And go not nigh to fornication: surely it is a fahasha. And evil is the way.  
 
Yusuf Ali 17:32 Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a fahasha and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).  
 
Sahih International 17:32 And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an fahasha and is evil as a way  
 
17:32. Wala taqraboo alzzina innahu kana fahishatan wasaa sabeelan  
 
You see, zana, as a behavior, covers both adultery and fornication and, it is act of fahish, making it haram to do.  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord only makes haram fahish, such of them as are apparent and such as are concealed…  
 
Zana is fahish; fahish is haram; zana is haram. The homosexual commits both adultery and fornication, hence, their behavior is zana. Consider the following ayats:  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
 
So again, I ask you and Yellow Cow this—is homosexual sex…lawful in the Deen Al-Islam? Yes or no? If not, then, it comes under the heading of zana.  
 
As I said above, Allah, does not even recognize homosexual marriage, but He does recognize zana and fahish. So youR attempt to put homosexual into ayat 24:3 cannot possible work, nonetheless, both heterosexuals and homosexuals can, have been, and will continue to be…guilty of zana (unlawful sex).  
 
I never posted anything about RAPE. You are…confused. But I will say this. Rape is forced sex and therefore a heinous criminal act, however, adultery and fornication are consensual. Perhaps 5:33 may provide you with answer about the punishment for a rapist, to wit.  
 
5:33 The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes/fasada, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.  
 
Eagerly waiting your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 
 
 
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 05 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
1. Is homosexuality, at all, an expression of sexuality? Yes or no?  
 
***Yellow Cow: YES IN ENGLISH, I NEVER READ HOMOSEXUALITY IN QURAN.***  
Well, guess what, it’s the same in Al-Quran. I guess you’ve never seen these ayats then. Is that what you’re telling me?  
 
7:80-81And Lut when he said to his people (qawm):: What! do you commit an indecency (fahish) which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males(rijala) in lust(shaha) besides females (al-nisa)?; nay you are an extravagant people.  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
 
2. The homosexual, is he guilty of fornication/zina?  
 
***Yellow Cow: NOT READ IN QURAN, CAN YOU SHOW FROM QURAN WHERE IS IT WRITTEN?***  
 
7:80-81And Lut when he said to his people (qawm):: What! do you commit an indecency (fahish) which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males(rijala) in lust(shaha) besides females (al-nisa)?; nay you are an extravagant people.  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
 
3. The married man, is he guilty of homosexuality as well? Yes or no?  
 
***Yellow Cow: I NEVER READ IT IN QURAN, SHOW ME. BUT IN MY OPINION THIS IS CHEATING***  
 
So, is his cheating sexual in nature? If so, then, it’s zana.  
 
7:80-81And Lut when he said to his people (qawm):: What! do you commit an indecency (fahish) which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males(rijala) in lust(shaha) besides females (al-nisa)?; nay you are an extravagant people.  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
 
4. The married man, is he guilty of adultery/zina? Yes or no?  
 
***Yellow Cow: NOT READ IN QURAN,WHERE WRITTEN? I PERSONALLY SAY HE IS CHEATING,I NEVER SAY ZINAI HOMO***  
 
Is his cheating sexual in nature? If so, then, it’s zana. Stop playing games.  
 
5. Can homosexuals, lawfully marry in Deen Islam? Yes or no?  
 
***Yellow Cow: NEVER READ ANYTHING ABOUT HOMO MARRIGE, PLEASE SHOW ?***  
 
That’s because there is no homosexual marriage recognized in Deen Al-Islam, but the fahish behavior of zana is recognized by Deen Al-Islam.  
 
7:80-81And Lut when he said to his people (qawm):: What! do you commit an indecency (fahish) which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males(rijala) in lust(shaha) besides females (al-nisa)?; nay you are an extravagant people.  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
If homosexuals could marry, then Lot would not have had to ask the question that he did of the men, now would he?  
 
Stop playing games.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: moazzam On 05 July 2011
Dear Junaid, Brother Yallow cow, Dulqarnain! Salam  
I have gone through this thread which reflects very important and interesting discussion, all of you are very articulate learned gentle men.  
Mr Junaid and Yellow cow are standing at very strong footing, based on the latest sense of the Quranic terminologies, such as Zina, Fuhash, Salat, Jalda, Miata,shirk etc etc.  
Brother Dulqarnain also seems at right position on the basis of orthodox translations/ interpretations of the same terminologies ( as per his claim,he is not so good in arabic language).  
I sure you all can't come at same wave length or in line to each other at any issue till you not compromise at the true sense of the relevant quranic terminologies at any matter under discussion.  
As Quran explain itself, please try to comprehend the quranic terminologies with the help of quran+ lexicon+ ratal+ tasreef+ relevent context+ core message of Quran.BET OF LUCK ALLAH BLESS YOU ALL.

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Namaste Shree Moazzam, you right, this discussion wont go anywhere. Dhulqarnain is not answering questions and give Quran own meaning, he doesnt give root of zina fahsha, he doest explain but say its homo penduphilie sex. he also ignore post of alnisa from 49.11. Shree Junaid, i asking you to leave him because he dont want listen, only waste time. spend time on them who want to learn, not them who think they have learn it all through translators and their interpetions through hadithistic explaainations.  
 
One exempel  
 
Shree Junaid Said "  
***JUNAID: Anyway, I was looking at the discussion going on between you and Yellow Cow and I noticed that you are translating homo sexuality as ZINA. (please correct me if I am wrong). If you are saying that homosexual relationship i.e. relation between two men or relationship between two women is also ZINA then please allow me to use the meaning of ZINA as Homosexuality in (24:03); A homosexual (ZANI) will marry none other but ZAANIA (Lesbian) and/or a MUSHRIKA (Idolater) and a ZAANIA (Lesbian) will marry none other than a ZANI (Homosexual) and/or a MUSHRIK (Idolater). A homosexual man can only marry a lesbian woman or a woman who do Idol-worship? To me it doesn't make any sense at all.***""  
 
To this Dhulqarnain replay : What you and Yellow Cow still refuse to accept is this one simple reality. Zana (adultery or fornication), whether male or female, is referring to a sexual violation of the marriage institution as established in Deen Al-Islam. Allah, even for the zana and mushrik, has determined that marriage be between a male and a female, as 24:3 indicates. There is no recognition of homosexual marriage in Deen Al-Islam, yet, homosexuals still indulge in the behavior of zana.  
 
This is not an answer, this is forcing same thing on again and he refuse see the point. Fist he say zina also mean homo pendu phile, now he refuse to answer and reflect on the meaning he give, which is not fitting in translation at all. So dont waste time he is not listen an he is happy with what is in his head. Look how he overlooked totally nargis post about al nisa and qoum, and use alnissa qoum as expleination on homo sexual story of loot. that is cheating. Why you not answering this important post ? why you didnt answar i know.  
 
 
11of sura 49 ,  
 
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لا يَسْخَرْ قَومٌ مِنْ قَوْمٍ عَسَى أَنْ يَكُونُوا خَيْرًا مِنْهُمْ وَلا نِسَاءٌ مِنْ نِسَاءٍ عَسَى أَنْ يَكُنَّ خَيْرًا مِنْهُنَّ  
 
This verse has always been misinterpreted without any exception . how can word " قوم " be translated as a male .  
In this verse the word قوم " “ means a strong nation , in this verse word قوم " “ is from ق و م which has the meaning of being strong قوام " " حاکم " the one who has some footing . the meaning of " نساء " is self explanatory i.e. people who have no footing and proverb used here for " نساء "is " ھن " although here in this verse " نساء " means people who have no footing as opposed to people who are called " قوم " .  
 
QAUM is a mixture of both males and females, still the PRONOUN ضمیر used is that of Male – MASCULINE. So, a masculine pronoun can include a group of both males and females and the use of respective pronouon will be governed by the form and nature of the Noun that has been used in the beginning of the sentence. (QAUM - Masculine)  
 
Likewise, NISAA is again a QAUM, though a weaker one, consisting of both males and females. Still a FEMININE PRONOUN can be used for this society of mixed people. Why? Because the NOUN used here is taken, under the rules, as feminine (NISAA).  
 
For all of you who may still be searching, I have one small hint from Allama Pervaiz’ Tabweeb ul Quran. Kindly check page No.1048, and go downwards under Chapter عورت –  
 
6 th line. It reads as under :-  
 
جیسے نسائکم - تمیاری بیویاں – مجازی معنوں میں یہ لفظ قوم کے اس طبقہ کے لئے آیا ہے جو جوہر مردانگی سے عاری ہو ---  
 
Though the Scholar calls it MAJAZI MA’ANI, but the fact remains that he was well aware of this meaning and could use it with confidence and authority.  
 
whats the singular of "Nisaa" ? whats "A WOMAN " ?  
 
Traditional translation 49:11:-  
 
“Let not some men (Qoum) among you laugh at others”  
“Nor let some women (Nisa) laugh at others”  
 
It is clear that Qoum and Nisa are antonyms. Now let’s take a look at another translation :  
 
“No group of people should indulge in mocking/ridiculing another people”  
“nor group of women should indulge mocking/ridiculing other women”  
 
If we look at the first section, the word “people” constitutes of men and women, so there is no need to create a second section specifically related to “women”  
 
“Yaskhar” the “masculine singular imperfect verb” has been used once, for both parties i.e. it has been used for “Qoam” and for “Nisa”  
 
If Qoum and Nisa are antonyms, then we firstly need to understand what Qoum is in order to establish the meaning of “Nisa”  
 
Qoum is from the root: Qaf – Waw – Miim = stand still or firm, rose/stand up, managed/conducted/ordered/regulated/superintended, established, made it straight/right, maintain/erect/observe/perform, set up, people/community/company, abode, stature/dignity/rank. aqama - to keep a thing or an affair in a right state.  
 
From the above, we can clearly see that “Qoum” is positive, with high rank, which is in a right state.  
 
To understand what Nisa is, we do need to have a “refresher” and go back to basics in order to understand what the conditions are of nouns in relation to gender.  
 
As we are well aware, there are two forms of gender in Arabic; masculine and feminine – there is no neuter. Effectively this means each noun must be either masculine (true or figurative) or feminine (true or figurative). There are certain figurative nouns that are deemed feminine as standard – i.e. human body parts (hand, eye), natural entities such as wind, geographical names such as towns, countries and so on.  
 
If Nisa is the antonym of Qoum, then it is suggestive that Nisa is negative, with low rank, in a bad state. If Qoum is a country / nation / a people in a good state, of high stature and rank, then clearly Nisa is a weaker nation / people.

Comments by: Junaid2 On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Dhulqarnain;  
 
Apparently you are trying to debate on your own terms and not addressing the issues on merit.  
May I say that this is not fair at all?  
A clear example is that you have not given any comment on translation of (24:03) replacing ZANI with Homosexual men / Women, rather you completely ignored it. You have diverted the topic towards marriage between homosexuals which is totally irrelevant, since no one is talking about marriage between two men.  
Please read my translation which clearly says "a Homosexual man can marry none other than a lesbian woman" and its not talking about marriage between two men or two women.  
 
You yourself quoted two contradictory statements here;
 
 
17:32 And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an fahasha and is evil as a way  
 
AND  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.
 
 
One verse says illegal sexual intercourse between man and woman is FAHSHA and the other says Homosexuality is FAHSHA. Why a contradiction?  
 
Whats your point brother?  
First you translated Homosexuality as ZINA and then you translated the same homosexuality as FAHSHA.  
What exactly this word Homosexuality stands for? Is it ZINA or FAHSHA? (Please make a decision first).  
If homosexuality is FAHSHA, then what term would you use to explain Exotic dancing and other such acts, where women and men dance to entertain public and they do it without cloths?  
On the other hand, if Homosexuality is ZINA, then how would you fit this term in (24:03)?  
 
Also you have not provided any reference from Quran which gives us a method of getting married according to Deen Al-Islam.  
 
And now you came up with another totally new statement that RAPE is Fasaad Fil Ard and not sexual intercourse;  
 
إِنَّمَا جَزَٰٓؤُ۟ا ٱلَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وۥَيَسْعَوْنَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ  
فَسَادًا أَن يُقَتَّلُوٓ۟ا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوٓ۟ا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُم مِّنْ  
خِلَٰفٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْ۟ا مِنَ ٱلْأَرْضِ ذَٰلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْىٌ فِى ٱلدُّنْيَا  
وَلَهُمْ فِى ٱلْءَاخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ  
 
What is extortion, corruption, fraud, mass-murder and planning conspiracies against the society, if Fasaad-fil-ard is RAPE???  
AND  
"to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides,"  
What does this exactly mean?  
How do we cut off someone's hands and feet from alternate sides? Could you please explain it? What is this "alternate sides" and why?
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 
I have asked you another very important question right in the beginning;  
 
If the traditional interpreters could wrongly translate SALAAH, then don't you think other words could also be translated incorrectly???  
You simply ignored the question and your answer was totally irrelevant. Please check your answer;
 
 
This is your gross misperception. What I do understand is that not every ayat is translated inaccurately.  
 
You see? My question was about wrongly translated Quranic terms and I never talked about aayaats.  
 
I think I raised this question in the very beginning, therefore you must answer it, before we proceed further.  
Let me ask it once again;  
What I have understood from your posts, you have a disagreement with only a single word that is "Salaat", otherwise you are in complete harmony with traditional translators. You believe that everything has been translated perfectly, except just one word "Salaat".  
I am really wondering why just one word is wrong and why all the rest are correct?  
OR  
Am I wrong?  
OK If I am, then please point it out.  
If you really think there are other words too, which have been interpreted wrongly by traditional translators, then please point out few. (at least three or four if possible).  
 
AND;  
I would really appreciate that Instead of writing a lengthy paragraph in reply to this post, you just share few of those words which you think are wrongly interpreted.
 

Comments by: Nargis On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Junaid
 
 
***JUNAID: Anyway, I was looking at the discussion going on between you and Yellow Cow and I noticed that you are translating homo sexuality as ZINA. (Please correct me if I am wrong). If you are saying that homosexual relationship i.e. relation between two men or relationship between two women is also ZINA then please allow me to use the meaning of ZINA as Homosexuality in  
 
(24:03); A homosexual (ZANI) will marry none other but ZAANIA (Lesbian) and/or a MUSHRIKA (Idolater) and a ZAANIA (Lesbian) will marry none other than a ZANI (Homosexual) and/or a MUSHRIK (Idolater). A homosexual man can only marry a lesbian woman or a woman who do Idol-worship? To me it doesn't make any sense at all. ***"“Junaid
 
 
I would like to see how this is defended, dear Dhulqarnain, when you gave zina the meaning of homosexuality and pedophilia. Likewise the word Fahsha means the same?  
 
7:30  
 
But there will be two parties among people. Some of them will live upright according to the Divine Laws of Guidance while others will ally with Satan’s as their friends. They take their religious leadership as their masters instead of God, and think that they are rightly guided.  
 
Here you can see for yourself, two paths, but who is guided?  
 
• Those who respond to Allah's laws (this includes EVERYTHING, not just those who do not have sex outside of marriage)  
 
• Those that follow Satan - and do not follow Allah's commands (not just fornication)
 
 
But  
 
7:33  
Say, “My Lord forbids ONLY (INNAMA ): Indecent shameful deeds, open or secret, actions that hurt the ’self’ and drag down the individual and collective human potential, unjust aggression, associating others with God (Shirk) for which He has sent down no Authority, and that you say things about God that do not know.”  
 
Here the word INNAMA (ONLY) is used, i.e. if Fahsha is “fornication”, then this would mean that only fornication is forbidden. In other words, God has only forbidden sex and drugs, but one can follow any other rules - one can’t have sex outside wedlock, but one can do everything else.  
 
Please reflect on the word INNAMA.  
 
Sorry I didn’t see what the ROOT of the word Zina and Fahsha was in Omar Mannan guy’s dictionary? How did he translate Hajj, Salaat and Soum as?  
 
Like Brother Moazzam said: As Quran explain itself, please try to comprehend the Quraniq terminologies with the help of Quran+ lexicon+ ratal+ tasreef+ relevant context+ core message of Quran.
 
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
MOAZZAM  
 
***Mr Junaid and Yellow cow are standing at very strong footing, based on the latest sense of the Quranic terminologies, such as Zina, Fuhash, Salat, Jalda, Miata,shirk etc etc.***  
 
You used the phrase “latest sense”.  
 
Now, the term “sense”, as you are using it, means: “A feeling that something is the case.”  
 
http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&site=webhp&q=sense&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=81cUTq_aOIT20gHBt5WeDg&sqi=2&ved=0CBUQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c4c796b09a129ab4&biw=1280&bih=547  
 
So, my question to you is this, do you have a “sense” that you and the others are correct in your positions, that is, you are not completely certain if you are correct or not, or do you know for a certainty that you and the others are correct in your positions, making the term “sense” non-applicable? Remember now, Allah did not send a Book of “sense/conjecture/supposition”, but of ilm/knowledge/certainty/fact, and our task it to articulate the facts—not have "senses" of them. Please answer yes you are certain or no you are not certain, thanks.  
 
I’m certain that you and the others will also claim that the following ayats are “orthodox”, thus, they are not translated properly and cannot be as stated, but here goes anyway.  
 
17:36 And follow not that of which thou hast no knowledge. Surely the hearing and the sight and the heart, of all of these it will be asked  
 
53:28 And they have no knowledge of it; they do not follow anything but conjecture, and surely conjecture does not avail against the truth at all.  
 
Do you and all of those here really believe that every single ayat has been mistranslated? Is this your position?  
 
*** Brother Dulqarnain also seems at right position on the basis of orthodox translations/ interpretations of the same terminologies ( as per his claim,he is not so good in arabic language). ***  
 
Allah, as I’m certain you must know, has not made learning the “Arabic language” a requirement to understand His Quran and thus be guided by it. I’m certain that you and the others will also claim that the following ayat is “orthodox”, thus, is not translated properly and cannot be as stated, but here goes anyway.  
 
14:4 And We sent no messenger but with the language of his people, so that he might explain to them clearly. Then Allah leaves in error whom He pleases and He guides whom He pleases. And He is the Mighty, the Wise.  
 
I’m English speaking, hence, according to ayat 14:4, the Messenger, that is, the Message, must come in my language in order for me to take advantage of its guidance. Now, I no problem with the reality that I must understand the Arabic terms in Al-Quran, but that is not the same thing as having to learn the Arabic language. Do you grasp this?  
 
One more matter. As far as the Quran is concerned, do you think the following terms are clearly defined/detailed in it? If so, would you please put the ayat next to each one so I can see their definitions, thanks.  
 
1. Fornication  
 
2. Adultery  
 
3. Marriage  
 
4. Male human being  
 
5. Female human being  
 
6. Lawful  
 
7. Unlawful  
 
Please reply to this post.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum, Junaid,  
 
***Apparently you are trying to debate on your own terms and not addressing the issues on merit. May I say that this is not fair at all?***  
 
On the contrary, you are speaking of yourself, not me.  
 
***You yourself quoted two contradictory statements here; One verse says illegal sexual intercourse between man and woman is FAHSHA and the other says Homosexuality is FAHSHA. Why a contradiction?***  
 
17:32 And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an fahasha and is evil as a way.  
AND  
 
27:54-55 And Lot, when he said to his people (qawm): Do you commit fahish deeds, while you see? Will you come to men (rijala) lustfully (shaha) rather than the women (al-nisa)? Nay, you are a people who act ignorantly.  
 
There is no contradiction, what are you talking about?! Allah, has simply detailed two types of SEXUAL FAHISH MISBEHAVIORS (one dealing with heterosexuals and the other dealing with homosexuals) both of which come under the heading of zana. Zana, remember, stands in contradiction of marriage as defined by Deen Al-Islam.  
 
***A clear example is that you have not given any comment on translation of (24:03) replacing ZANI with Homosexual men / Women, rather you completely ignored it. You have diverted the topic towards marriage between homosexuals which is totally irrelevant, since no one is talking about marriage between two men. Please read my translation which clearly says "a Homosexual man can marry none other than a lesbian woman" and its not talking about marriage between two men or two women.***  
 
I didn’t ignore anything. You, simply, out of hand, reject that Deen Al-Islam does not recognize marriage between homosexuals, thus, there is are no grounds to use 24:3 in regard to marriage with homosexuals. 17:32, however, does take into account the SEXUAL FAHISH MISBEHAVIOR of homosexuals and defines it as unlawful (zana is unlawful sex, period!). It is unlawful, because Allah has established marriage between male and female as the only lawful expression of the human sexual urge between two heterosexuals. Anything outside of that is now zana, unlawful expression of sexual urges.  
 
***You have diverted the topic towards marriage between homosexuals which is totally irrelevant, since no one is talking about marriage between two men.***  
 
Oh, I see, marriage is completely irrelevant to zana. Is this really your position? LOL!! How does one respond to such a stupid statement as that?? Zana, as I’ve said now some two thousands times now, is the expression of human sexuality outside of the prescribed institution of marriage as defined in Deen Al-Islam. Homosexuals cannot marry in Deen Al-Islam, however, they do continue engage in unlawful sex-zana (sex not being married) nonetheless, yeah? Heterosexuals who are not married and engage in sex are doing zana as well, yeah? Both homosexuals and heterosexuals engage in sex outside of the institution of marriage making their BEHAVIOR zana, fahish, and haram, period.  
 
***And now you came up with another totally new statement that RAPE is Fasaad Fil Ard and not sexual intercourse;***  
 
I never said rape IS fasada! Stop distorting my statements! Show some intergrity, will you. I offered you that ayat for your consideration/analysis.  
 
***What is extortion, corruption, fraud, mass-murder and planning conspiracies against the society, if Fasaad-fil-ard is RAPE???***  
 
FA-SEEN-DAL: to become evil; vicious; foul; violence; spoils or commits violence. Dictionary of The Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pgs. 426-427  
 
Does this term sound like it could cover things such as rape, mass-murder, and conspiracies?  
 
***AND "to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides," What does this exactly mean?  
How do we cut off someone's hands and feet from alternate sides? Could you please explain it? What is this "alternate sides" and why? ***  
 
Look, I’m not here to spoon feed you about every ayat. If you don’t know then stop posting for awhile, do some study, and find out what they mean. Right now, I don’t know what they mean as I have not studied this ayat.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Remember now, Allah did not send a Book of “sense/conjecture/supposition”, but of ilm/knowledge/certainty/fact, and our task it to articulate the facts Dhulqarnain  
 
this is true, Alkitab doesnt have conjecture supposition, but YOUR mind have, that is why you gave alien meaning to Zina and Fahsha. If you are certain in what you know, why dont you answar question ? Do you see the meaning you gives to Zina (homo penduphile lesbian) mess up the translation? Answar Junaid plis. you doesnt have to learn the arabiq language, but you must know the arabiq langaue used in AlQuran, you must know its words. Where is written, if you dont know arabiq then make your own words in english and say it is from Quran? One simple question i know even you who jump over questions is able to answar, that is: WHAT IS ZULQARNAIN MEANING? WHAT IS THIS WORDS OR NAMES MEANING?

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Okke dont answar Junaid, you can self translate 24.3 with the meaning homosexual penduphile to zani and zania in this aya plis. Let see how you use this words you gave meaning to as zani/zina/zania in this aya 24.3. dhannewaad

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaamun Alaikum Nargis, Junaid, Moazzam, Yellow Cow,  
 
***I would like to see how this is defended, dear Dhulqarnain, when you gave zina the meaning of homosexuality and pedophilia. Likewise the word Fahsha means the same?***  
 
BEHAVIOR: the way in which one ACTS OR CONDUCTS ONESELF ESP. TOWARDS OTHERS: the way in which an animal or person acts in response to a particular situation or stimulus:  
 
http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&pq=define%20sense&xhr=t&q=define+behavior&cp=11&pf=p&sclient=psy&site=webhp&source=hp&aq=0&aqi=&aql=&oq=define+beha&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c4c796b09a129ab4&biw=1280&bih=547  
 
1. Is sexual expression a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
2. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
3. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
4. Is fahsha a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
5. Is fahsha, in part or in whole, addressing sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
6. If these things are behaviors, are they haram to do? Yes or No.  
 
Please answer with a simple yes or no. No more bs. Thanks.  
 
Looking forward to your reply.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
 
1. Is sexual expression a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
2. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
3. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
4. Is fahsha a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
5. Is fahsha, in part or in whole, addressing sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
6. If these things are behaviors, are they haram to do? Yes or No.  
 
Zana and Fahsha as behavior written as haraam, yes  
homosexuality penduphili adultery is not zana or fahsha,not written as haraam.  
 
Now you answar questions or just leave it, you continue give quran your own meaning, no point discussing with becasue quran said people like this eyes ears senses are closed. your this kind of human. why not answar Junaid and nargis on their post? because you closed your eyes and ears and tell lie about Quran, give own meanings.

Comments by: Junaid2 On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Salaam Sister Nargis;  
 
Your statement has given me a new direction to ponder.  
I am reading the verses (7:30) and (7:33) again and again to understand the real meaning of ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ with reference to فَرِيقًا هَدَىٰ وَفَرِيقًا حَقَّ  
 
You said;
 
Here you can see for yourself, two paths, but who is guided?  
• Those who respond to Allah's laws (this includes EVERYTHING, not just those who do not have sex outside of marriage)  
• Those that follow Satan - and do not follow Allah's commands (not just fornication)
 
 
Lets see what (7:33) says, regarding ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ  
 
قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّىَ ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَٱلْإِثْمَ  
وَٱلْبَغْىَ بِغَيْرِ ٱلْحَقِّ وَأَن تُشْرِكُو۟ا بِٱللَّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِۦ  
سُلْطَٰنًا وَأَن تَقُولُو۟ا عَلَى ٱللَّهِ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ  
 
ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ has been further elaborated as مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ  
This means ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ can be apparent as well as secret or hidden.  
Lets think for a while, that how can indecency be secret?  
And then the term has been linked with وَٱلْإِثْمَ وَٱلْبَغْىَ بِغَيْرِ ٱلْحَقِّ  
This is an important point which revolves around the concept of degeneration and aggression on collectively. It means actions which causes damages to the community or society on the whole, dragging down the collective human potential to a lower level.  
Now lets ponder that what kind of secret act بَطَنَ can cause degradation of human potential on collective level?  
 
as well as وَأَن تُشْرِكُو۟ا بِٱللَّهِ which has been explained further in a sense مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِۦ سُلْطَٰنًا  
 
An act causing damage, collectively and on a bigger scale is now linked with another concept of not to commit shirk because no one has been given the authority. It means no human has been authorized to take decisions on behalf of the society, while the decisions regarding governance should be made collectively and with consensus.  
Everyone should submit to one authority which has been defined as the political philosophy, the charter of humanity, the constitution of state in Quran. This philosophy, this charter, this constitution is unique in itself and there is no other way to peace and harmony except following it completely and collectively.
 
 
According to what I have understood so far, performing acts or deeds which exclusively negates the quranic values are ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ whereas any human attempt to add contents and dilute the magnificent charter of humanity, the great political philosophy or the constitution of a unique state is ZINA and it has been linked with SHIRK. Please see the concept which has been stated as تُشْرِكُو۟ا بِٱللَّهِ which means submitting to human authorities other than ALLAH, in an attempt to cause hindrance in running the affairs of Islamic state. Please note that مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِۦ سُلْطَٰنًا is a clear indication that no one has been given such an authority to represent the state.  
 
The more I am concentrating on the verse, the message is getting more clearer. A sense of clarity and magnificence of Quran which is much higher than what our traditional scholars have converted it into.  
 
Let's analyze Adultery and indecency. These are entirely personal acts which are harmful, only to individuals who indulge into these. What kind of impact could adultery or indecency have on society, community or humanity on the whole? Think about it.  
 
Look at the western secular societies where there is no restriction whatsoever on adultery or homosexuality and where women are free to wear whatever clothes they feel like. Compare these societies with the eastern, religious and specially so called "Muslim" societies where adultery and indecency are considered as punishable crimes, and where women are forced to keep even their faces covered behind a veil.  
Which societies out of these two, are better in terms of collective growth and development?  
Which societies out of these two, care more for Rights and betterment of Humanity?  
Which of these two societies advocates gender equality, respect and freedom of woman?  
Which of these two societies meet the criteria of advanced and civilized nations?  
 
A thorough analysis will give us a clear picture that our previous generations, our ancestors were totally ignorant and our so called "Religious Scholars" have reduced the magnitude, the greatness and magnificence of quranic ideology and converted into a book which talks about slaves, concubines, sleeping with different categories of women, eating, washing, amputation, flogging and most importantly killing. According to our traditional scholars, everything ends up with killing. Kill him, for this, kill them for that etc. and look at the gender inequality and the concept of discrimination they have promoted.  
 
As a matter of fact, I feel ashamed of being a part of such a society where people claim to be the carriers of Quran yet they are determined to undermine the foundation, reducing the magnificence, the greatness of this message and they are defending their acts so stubbornly.  
 
Having said that, I would like to conclude my participation in this particular debate and on this particular topic, since I have nothing to add further.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
Thank you for standing up and giving those answers.  
Junaid, there's no running away now, man.  
 
Nargis, Junaid, and Moazzam, please respond as Yellow Cow has done so I can see your positions, as well as, to see if you agree with Yellow Cow.  
 
Things will narrow down now.  
 
No dodging, running away, editorials etc. Just yes or no.  
 
Looking forward to your replies.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Yellow-cow On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
you funny, you welcome. If you understood, you would see not them who running away, but it is you. you didnt answar even one question but forced zina new meanings. if you read the thread you will see they say same thing to you before i answar. they say zina cant be adultery homosex or penduphili, and same with fahshah. It is you who give this meanings to this word, and didnt replay back on how this meanings not giving sense to th translation. Read again and you will see they answar before you asking, but you not getting it in your head. Dhannewad

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
Yellow Cow,  
 
Well, I'm glad that you find me amusing. :)  
 
Anyway, I want Nargis, Moazzam, and Junaid, to answer as you did. This will put everyone, clearly, on the record. That is the power of yes and no questions; it compels one to take a clear and definite position; no baloney.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Nargis On 06 July 2011Report Abuse
:)  
 
Dear Dhulqarnain, I've pointed out that Zina and Fahshah IS NOT adultery. If you read my questions you will see our objection throughout the debate is that the orthodox translation is incorrect, they translate Fahsha and Zina as adultery,fornication. (and we reject all the traditional translations, we study the Quran through the Quran and its own language/grammar, style, rattal, tasreef, and NOT through translators or interpretors products based on hadith tales)-  
 
Yes I agree with yellow cow :)

Comments by: UmeAimon On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
oooo finally the cat is out of the bag!!!  
I knew it, I knew it .. and may I add I knew it, eventualyy it would go there :D  
 
opps and now the specially dedicated ID will come groaning what I say is never understood by anyone, soory for increasing your workload, but i just couldnt resist ;)  
 
so please go on dear people and dont mind my post....

Comments by: Nargis On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
We knew it knew it knew it knew it all along too , welcome to the I knew it club, dear :P

Comments by: UmeAimon On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
Ummm yuppp I did all along ;) BUT some may not know it all eventually... watch this and try to exblainn bleezzz...  
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LA5xhXk_4U&feature=related

Comments by: Nargis On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
I was talking about Zina and Fahsha not being adultery in the Quran (but in hadith and tafseer), :-O .-O

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
:)  
 
***Dear Dhulqarnain, I've pointed out that Zina and Fahshah IS NOT adultery. If you read my questions you will see our objection throughout the debate is that the orthodox translation is incorrect, they translate Fahsha and Zina as adultery,fornication. (and we reject all the traditional translations, we study the Quran through the Quran and its own language/grammar, style, rattal, tasreef, and NOT through translators or interpretors products based on hadith tales)- ***  
 
I see what you’re saying zana it is not, but what I want from you is the definition and ayat of what you clearly and definitely say that IT IS. I don’t want to wade through yours or the others rambles in an attempt to ferret out exactly what you mean. Trying to see what you mean through “reading your questions” is not definitive of anything. This is not how I do things. I very much want to understand your thinking and positions, but I need to be certain of them and right now I’m not (too much supposition, flowery discoursing, questions which get passed of as answers), except, that you agree with Yellow Cow’s answers. That is clear and definitive for me. It’s time to stop playing and go on the record clearly/definitively.  
 
I’ll tell you a quick story. I did ritual prayer for 25 without a break. I fasted every Ramadan and did the extra 10 day and payed zakaa, yet, after reading Aidid Safar’s book and his discussion on Salaa, I stopped all of it—within days. Why?, because he was definitive and clear. He made the case! This is what I expected from you and Aastana Blog, not ramblings. I want you to make the case!  
 
Towards this end then, would, please answer the following 7 terms which I asked of Moazzam. He has yet to respond.. I was hoping Junaid, and Yellow Cow would have addressed them as well. Perhaps you will, for the sake of increase in guidance, answer the following:  
 
Please give me the Quranic term , definition, and ayat of the following. I’m not asking for an explanation of these things, just the Quranic term , definition, and ayat which supports your claim. Thank you.  
 
1. Fornication  
 
2. Adultery  
 
3. Marriage  
 
4. Male human being  
 
5. Female human being  
 
6. Lawful  
 
7. Unlawful  
 
***NARGIS: Yes I agree with yellow cow :)***  
 
Thank you, Narge.  
 
1. Is sexual expression a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
2. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
3. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
4. Is fahsha a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
5. Is fahsha, in part or in whole, addressing sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
6. If these things are behaviors, are they haram to do? Yes or No.  
 
Zana and Fahsha as behavior written as haraam, yes  
homosexuality penduphili adultery is not zana or fahsha,not written as haraam.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: Nargis On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
 
I very much want to understand your thinking and positions,  
 
FAHSHAH
 
 
 
 
To understand Zina we must examine “Fahsha”.  
 
ف ح ش  
FAHSHAH  
 
 
Fa-Ha-Shin = became excessive/immoderate/enormous/exorbitant/overmuch/beyond measure, foul/bad/evil/unseemly/indecency/abominable, lewd/gross/obscene, committing excess which is forbidden, transgress the bounds/limits, avaricious, adultery/fornication.(project root list)  
 
“7:20  
 
Then Satan deceived them in order to reveal their imperfections and fallibility to them....”  
 
That is, Satan misled them so that their (human) errors became visible.  
 
“7:22  
 
فدلاهما بغرور فلما ذاقا الشجرة بدت لهما سواتهما وطفقا يخصفان عليهما من ورق الجنة وناداهما ربهما الم انهكما عن تلكما الشجرة واقل لكما ان الشيطان لكما عدو مبين  
 
So by deceit Satan brought about their downfall. They tasted of the tree of discord and started to divide into branches. Soon their imperfections became obvious and they tried to conceal them in vain with superficial courtesy. Then came a Reminder from their Lord, “Did I not forbid you that tree and tell you that Satan is your open enemy?”  
 
Here the words waraqi aljannati” are mentioned... what is it referring to? Is Warqai Al-Jannah the green leaves from Paradise as mullahs argue, or is it the message of Allah that leads to Jannah; namely, Allah's commands? No, I do not think this is reference to the “green leaves” from Paradise.  
 
-When they realised they had made mistakes, they prayed for forgiveness (to reform)  
 
7:23 They said, “Our Lord! We have wronged ourselves. Unless You forgive us and have Mercy on us, we will certainly be lost.”  
 
To reform, they have waraqi al jannah which will guide them and they will have LIBAS AL TAQWAH:  
 
يا بني ادم قد انزلنا عليكم لباسا يواري سواتكم وريشا ولباس التقوي ذلك خير ذلك من ايات الله لعلهم يذكرون  
 
O Children of Adam! We have provided you with garments to cover your bodies as well as to adorn you. The best garment for you to wear, in addition, is good conduct. (Your character decorates you inside out.) These are the verses of God that they must take to heart.”  
 
It is not a question of attire, but a "libaas" that embraces and develops the person to new heights. It is a “Libas” which through warq al jannah helps one to achieve taqwah and become muttaqi.  
 
(Dear brother Jawaid, You can believe that this is really green leaves from paradise as they hid behind, because they were naked and needed new clothes.  
But I do not think it's about clothes just because the word libas is used. Here, “libas al taqwah” means to prevent crime to flourish in society and the individual... we are reminded of this through warq al jannah (Allah's words, the decree).  
 
let us continue .7:27  
 
يا بني ادم لا يفتننكم الشيطان كما اخرج ابويكم من الجنة ينزع عنهما لباسهما ليريهما سواتهما انه يراكم هو وقبيله من حيث لا ترونهم انا جعلنا الشياطين اولياء للذين لا يؤمنون  
 
O Children of Adam! Let not your selfish desire deceive you as it deceived your ancestors, caused them to lose their Paradise, and exposed their imperfections. A host of selfish and rebellious desires lurk within you. You can’t even see them but these Satans see you and befriend those who do not believe.  
 
Satan misled them and they lost libas al taqwah; they lost paradise (which can only be attained with warq al-jannah – Allah’s decrees), and their imperfections were overexposed.  
 
But this is a bit special: 7:28  
 
واذا فعلوا فاحشة قالوا وجدنا عليها اباءنا والله امرنا بها قل ان الله لا يامر بالفحشاء اتقولون علي الله ما لا تعلمون  
 
(As an example) when people commit an indecency they say, “We found our forefathers doing it and God has enjoined it upon us.” (Made it natural for us). Say (O Prophet), “God never enjoins indecency. Do you attribute to God that of which you have no knowledge?”  
 
Here it is said that the “ancestors” were committing “Fahshah”, and they claimed this to be from God.  
 
For arguments sake, let’s say “Fahsha” means sex outside of marriage... have you ever heard people argue that prostitution and indecency is something that has been practiced for centuries by their ancestors? In addition, there are not many who claim this is from God.  
 
Hindus and Jews, for example, are not allowed to have sex outside of marriage either.  
 
People have tried to emphasise that their ancestors have done it and so it is natural for them. What have the prophets taught time and time again? The prophets have said that second-rate, man-made rules / laws should not be embraced / followed.  
 
The perverse, mullahs / rabies preach that “Fahshah” is all about sex, beer, adultery and therefore believe that for humans these are the worst or the only crime / sins one can commit .  
 
But the Koran and Allah's words were not revealed to teach man not to have sex out of wedlock because the consequence is 100 lashes. The Quran was sent to us for much more than a limited category of guidance. The Quran was sent to introduce human rights and the socio-economic system that contains all permanent values.  
 
In 7:28 Allah says -: “God never enjoins indecency(Fahsha). Do you attribute to God that of which you have no knowledge?”  
 
i.e. Allah does not decree orders of that nature... if such orders are not from Allah, what are Allah’s orders ? If “fahshah” is sex out of wedlock, then the order would be, “do not have sex out of wedlock”. It is written that it is not from God, then what is from God ? The opposite of Fahshah is from God.  
 
As a response those who claim fahsha to be Allahs order, Allah says what he commands  
 
قل امر ربي بالقسط واقيموا وجوهكم عند كل مسجد  
وادعوه مخلصين له الدين كما بداكم تعودون  
 
7:29 Say (O Messenger), “My Lord enjoins justice and moderation and to stand devoted to Him alone in complete obedience. Call unto Him, sincere in your Faith in Him alone. He it is Who brought you into being in the first place, and to Him you will return.” (And this is how you can regain your lost Paradise in both worlds.)  
 
If Fahshah were to mean sex out of wedlock, Allah would have said: “No I have not ordered to have sex out of wedlock. I have even said that he who has sex outside of marriage should be beaten so the entire population can see it.  
 
However, this is not what Allah has said, he states something completely different!  
 
• That he is “JUST” – he provides commands of justice, whoever is to follow his laws and commands should do so to the full.  
 
• To follow him (and not fahshah) to follow all laws made by him.  
 
• To invite to his Deen, with Sincerity.  
 
• If an individual is a Muslim to begin with, but is misled by Satan, obviously he will walk away from Allah’s teachings. However, he will return to the correct path he once followed.  
 
Allah explains what is forbidden for us and then provides an order such for it, such as “do not commit “Fahshah” and then the order will come as “stand devoted to him alone in complete obedience”.  
 
7:30  
 
But there will be two parties among people. Some of them will live upright according to the Divine Laws of Guidance while others will ally with Satans as their friends. They take their religious leadership as their masters instead of God, and think that they are rightly guided.  
 
Here you can see for yourself, two paths, but who is guided?  
 
• Those who respond to Allah's laws (this includes EVERYTHING, not just those who do not have sex outside of marriage)  
 
• Those who follow Satan - and do not follow Allah's commands (not just fornication)  
 
So far, one can see that the whole doctrine is to follow Allah's commands / words. This will give us libas al taqwah.  
 
Those who follow Satan, they commit “Fahshah” (ALL that is outside the Quran). The following of man-made rules which are claimed to be “Islamic” is referred to as “Fahsah”. Warq al jannah is what precludes people from crime / bad actions, and Satan seizes “Libas Al Taqwah.
 
 
I did ritual prayer for 25 without a break.  
 
oops, 25 not 5 :-O? Thank God you didn't do 50 prayers, because the truth is, S Moses did convince S Mohammed to ask Allah to reduce the prayers from 50 to 5. :P :P

Comments by: Nargis2 On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
 
 
Now that you can see, or it is visible, or it is not concealed anymore, that Fahsha is (ALL that is outside the Quran). The following of man-made rules which are claimed to be “Islamic”/ mandatory etc, is referred to as “Fahsah”. Lets see Beauty, is it the beauty defined by pervert mullahs who have limited everything to female shemale he male relations and marriage hoax, or is it something deeper...  
 
What is ZEENAT (Beauty)?  
 
7:30-31  
 
يا بني ادم خذوا زينتكم عند كل مسجد وكلوا واشربوا ولا تسرفوا انه لا يحب المسرفين  
قل من حرم زينة الله التي اخرج لعباده والطيبات من الرزق قل هي للذين امنوا في الحياة الدنيا خالصة يوم القيامة كذلك نفصل الايات لقوم يعلمون  
 
O Children of Adam! Subservience and obedience to the Divine Commands ensures for you adornment and nice things in life. So enjoy God’s Bounties, but do not commit excesses. God does not love the wasters.  
 
Say, “Who has forbidden the beauty and nice things God has brought forth for His servants, and the pure clean things of your choice?” Say, “Such things are for those in this world who believe in the Divine Laws. And on the Day of Resurrection they will be exclusively for those who attained Conviction.” We thus explain Our Laws for those who make good use of what they learn”.  
 
If these Ayats were about pretty, expensive clothes and jewellery, then this is only for a certain type of people, namely the rich. But Allah's word is for all; his commands are for everyone to comply. Therefore Zeenat of mankind are the divine commands / Ehkaam.  
 
Here you can see what fahsha is:  
 
قل انما حرم ربي الفواحش ما ظهر منها وما بطن والاثم والبغي بغير الحق وان تشركوا بالله ما لم ينزل به سلطانا وان تقولوا علي الله ما لا تعلمون  
 
7:33  
 
Say, “My Lord forbids ONLY (INNAMA ): Indecent shameful deeds, open or secret, actions that hurt the ’self’ and drag down the individual and collective human potential, unjust aggression, associating others with God (Shirk) for which He has sent down no Authority, and that you say things about God that do not know.”  
 
Here the word INNAMA (ONLY) is used, i.e. if fahsha is “fornication”, then this would mean that only fornication is forbidden. In other words, God has only forbidden sex and drugs, but one can follow any other rules - one can’t have sex outside wedlock, but one can do everything else.

 REPORT ABOUT ABUSING COMMENTSCancell
 YOUR REMARKS 
MemberID : Password: >> Forgot Id/Password
Comments by: Nargis2 On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
1. Fornication  
 
I dont know  
 
2. Adultery  
 
Dont know  
 
3. Marriage  
 
dont know what aya it is spesifically mentioned in for marriage  
 
4. Male human being  
 
Dont know where man is mentioned  
 
5. Female human being  
 
dont know, it cant be alnisa because thats plural  
 
6. Lawful  
 
i tink its halaal  
 
7. Unlawful  
 
haraam  
 
correct me if im wrong.  
 
but i always wonderes how the Quran address  
 
1) Those who change the message of Al kitab itself, or twist it words ? What are they called?  
 
2) What are those who try to establish a system beside Allahs system called?  
 
3) What are those who have a law beside the Quran called?  
 
4) What are the weak segment of society called, low casts or handicapped or those who simply cant take care of them self as a result of any hindrance in life?  
 
5) What are those who can help this weak segment of society called?  
 
6) What are those who are weak in mind called?  
 
7) What is a CONTRACT called in the Quran=  
 
8) HOW ,what method did the Quran give to the stronger segment of society in relation to dealings with those who cant take care of themselves,? WHAT did the Quran call the agreement between the two of these groups?  
 
9) What is the purpose of lawful food and what's the harm of unlawful food in the Quran?  
 
10) Why is LAHM AL khanzeer and not khnazeer haraam ?  
 
11) What did the Quran say, what to do when the weaker segment are involved in BLOODSHED?  
 
12) What is menstruation called in the Quran, and what is it called in Arabic?  
 

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
Nargis and Yellow Cow,  
 
YELLOW COW AND NARGIS RESPONSE:  
 
YES ANSWERS  
 
1. Is sexual expression a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
2. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
4. Is fahsha a behavior? Yes or No.  
 
yes  
 
6. Zana and Fahsha as behavior written as are haraam,  
 
NO ANSWERS  
 
3. Is zana, in part or in whole, addressing a sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
5. Is fahsha, in part or in whole, addressing sexual behavior? Yes or No.  
 
no  
 
Yellow Cow and Nargis, both of you agree zana and fahsha are behaviors Likewise, both of you reject that these terms/behaviors, either in part or whole, have anything to do with sexual expression. Your positions raise these very pertinent must answer questions:  
 
1. If zana has nothing to do, either in part or whole, with sexual expression, what then, exactly, makes these behaviors--zana and fasha, haram? In other words, what do these behaviors, zana and fasha, cover? For example, do the cover drug abuse, lying, manslaughter, abortion, stealing, bearing false witness, what?  
 
2. If unlawful expression of sex isn’t the reason for the lashes, then what behavior, exactly, was committed to warrant corporeal punishment for zana?  
 
The above two questions do not require any lengthy ramble or questions as replies. Just the facts.  
 
Five yes or no, questions. Please answer, thanks.  
 
1. You both answered that fahsha and and sexual expression are behaviors. So, as such, can human sexual expression, EVER be classified as fahsha?  
 
Yes or no.  
 
2. Quranically speaking, are humans allowed to express sexuality without being married?  
 
Yes or no  
 
3. Are married human beings allowed to express sexuality with another individual with whom they are not married?  
 
Yes or no?  
 
4. Are there any Quranic rules governing the sexual expression between human beings?  
 
Yes or no.  
 
5. Are human beings allowed to express sexuality in anyway they deem desirable?  
 
Yes or no.  
 
Looking forward to your replies.  
 
Dhulqarnain-  
 

Comments by: dawood On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
Dear Br. Dhulqarnain, SA: It is intriguing to note that when going gets tough some special characters appear with special IDs. These special IDs start to pick up the peripheral issues and the basic question(s) is/are sidetracked. Stay the course, you may get some reasonable responses.

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
I have answered to the questions and gave a detailed explanation about Fahsah and zina in my above posts. If they are ignored and overlooked, then there is no point in further discussion, I’m not here to convince anyone, this forum is for those who want to learn and not those who already know it all and want to force old traditional orthodox translations. We reject all the old translations and we have gone through them. We will go from here and further.  
 
If the point was to talk to those who don’t want to listen or debate but overlook your answers, we didn’t have to create a blog but rather looked for Shia Sunni Christians Jewish forums.  
 
 
You have the right to disagree; we already disagreed to the old translations and interpretations. I wrote about AL-Nisa and 49:11 in relation to 4 wives, but no response. I wrote about Fahsha and Zina and what it is, and there is no response.  
 
Maybe I have overlooked it, Dawood, and you see where anyone posted anything in response to my post of 49:11? Or how the 24:3 make sense when Zina and Zania is translated as homosexuality and pedophilia?  
 
so Junaid is right, the arguments are there, if someone really want to know, they can scroll up and read. Other people have new questions, Zina and Fahsha have been discussed many times

Comments by: Nargis-Badshah-Salamat On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
the posts about Zina and Fahsha is from this blog posted earlier in similar discussions , Mubashir syed provided the link, I just copy pasted it.

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
Nargis,  
 
Nargis,  
 
In our off blog correspondence (and here on aastan somewhere, per your claim), you, to my great surprise, emphatically stated that Allah, in His Quran, gave no legislation regulating the sexual behavior of human beings, hence, fahsah and zina cannot have anything to do with sexual behavior. This is something you claim which you have no doubt about and is a Quranic fact.  
 
This position, whether you realize it or not, states that human beings can enter into any sexual behavior they choose, because Allah has not ruled on it. Human beings, according to your position, can now have, without guilt or reservation, sex before marriage, if married, sex with others to whom they are not married, with children, with the same sex, and the beasts.  
 
What moral code then, does one turn to determine the rightness or wrongness of sexual behavior? According to you there can be none, because now it is up to each person to decide the rightness or wrongness of their sexual behavior, because Allah hasn’t ruled on it. This is known as...situational ethics.  
 
I cannot uunderstand your standing by this knowin the tremendous toll unlawfuul sex takes on society.  
 
Lastly…  
 
When you, me, or anyone says that Allah HAS or HASN’T done something/stated something, we take on a great great weight. Let’s look at the traditional/orthodox translation of ayats 7:33 and 2:168-169  
 
7:33 Say: My Lord has only madeHARAM fahshah, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and THAT YOU SAY AGAINT ALLAH WHAT YOU DO NOT KNOW.  
 
2:168-169 O men! eat the lawful and good things out of what is in the earth, and do not follow the footsteps of the Shaitan; surely he is your open enemy. He (shaitan) ONLY COMMANDS/AMRA you evil/munkar and indecency/fahshah, and that YOU MAY SPEAK AGAINST ALLAH WHAT YOU DO NOT KNOW.  
 
These ayats make it perfectly clear that it is haram to say anything of Allah which you do not know for a certainty, and, if you do, that shaitan is now commanding you.  
 
I truly hope you know what you are doing, because to be wrong is to mislead yourself and others...a great great weight.  
 
I’ll ask you again...are you absolutely certain that Allah HAS NOT, CLEARLY, RULED on the human sexual behavior? Yes...No…I don’t know?  
 
If your answer is "yes" that Allah has not ruled on human sexual behavior, then I will not pursue this particular argument, 24:3, as it would be abundantly clear to me that you, Junaid, Yellow Cow, and Moazzam are all of like mind on this issue. If, however, your answer is "no" or "I don't know", then further discussion can continue.  
 
Dhulqarnain-

Comments by: DHULQARNAIN On 07 July 2011Report Abuse
Narge,  
 
***but i always wonderes how the Quran address***  
 
I'll bite.  
 
1) Those who change the message of Al kitab itself, or twist it words ? What are they called?  
 
2) What are those who try to establish a system beside Allahs system called?  
 
3) What are those who have a law beside the Quran called?  
 
1,2, 3 are called al-mushrikeen. 6:106  
 
4) What are the weak segment of society called, low casts or handicapped or those who simply cant take care of them self as a result of any hindrance in life?  
 
4:75 DZA’UFA/al-mus’tad’fina: those who are in a state of weakness.  
 
6) What are those who are weak in mind called?  
 
4:5 SAFIHA: foolish; weak in understanding  
 
7) What is a CONTRACT called in the Quran=  
 
5:1 AQADA  
 
9) What is the purpose of lawful food and what's the harm of unlawful food in the Quran?  
 
5:5 All food is lawful. It is the condition of food which can be unlawful. 5:3  
 
10) Why is LAHM AL khanzeer and not khnazeer haraam ?  
 
Khanzeer is a compound word consisting of Khinz “meaning bad” and ara meaing “I see”. Khaniza means—" I see as bad”. Khaniza has nothing to do with an actual pig.  
 
12) What is menstruation called in the Quran, and what is it called in Arabic?  
 
HADZAT: Al-mahidi 65:4; 2:222  
 
Will get back to you on the following:  
 
5) What are those who can help this weak segment of society called?  
 
8) HOW ,what method did the Quran give to the stronger segment of society in relation to dealings with those who cant take care of themselves,? WHAT did the Quran call the agreement between the two of these groups?  
 
11) What did the Quran say, what to do when the weaker segment are involved in BLOODSHED?  
 
 

»«
OTHER QUESTIONS ON
BELIEFS
Thank you very much for your hardworking on QURAN.... Sir kindly let me know about NAMAZ-E-JANAZA is this proved from Quran or not? if not so what should we do when we die.. plz tell me in detail. Question by: Adnan Khan On 16/01/2010
 
Dear Dr. Qamar Zaman, Please explain the meaning of Islam, Muslim and Momin according to quran and your research. Thanks Question by: Naeem Subhani On 23/01/2010
 
how can we define that quran is the book of allah Question by: laiq ahmed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 01/03/2010
 
what is the meaning of Islam n Muslim? Question by: Hafiz Abdullah From PAKISTAN (RAWALPINDI) On 03/03/2010
 
Dear Mr. Aurangzaib Bhai: what is the concept of "PAAKI & NA-PAAKI" in our "DEEN" ? Kindly explain. and what is your SHORTEST/BRIEFED reply when someone taunts/asks you regarding performing NAMAZ, HAJ, keeping ROZA and giving ZAKAT? Question by: Adnan Khan On 15/03/2010
 
Dear Aurangzaib. Please explain about the 99 Names of Allah. What is the reality and what Quran says. furthermore pople also claim to prove Rasool S.A.W. names (quantity i don't exactly remember) from Quran. Question by: Adnan Yousuf Zai On 17/03/2010
 
Dear Mr. Aurangzaib: Please explain about the 99 Names of Allah, do such names exist in Quran? Question by: Adnan Khan On 17/03/2010
 
Asslam-o-Alikum.. Mujhe Pata hai mera sawal us level mien buhat chota hai jis level per app research kar rahe hain magar please 4 Cheezen in detail batain 1) Nazr-o-Niaz 2) Dargah 3) Huzoor (S.W.T.) Bashar Ya Noor 4) Huzoor (S.W.T.) ka Elm-e-Gaib Question by: Umair_Hamidani From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 26/03/2010
 
Respected dr. Qamar zaman kindly give a detailed concept about the life ,if any, after death with Quanic references especially, and had we spent a life before this present life. Question by: dr shahid From PAKISTAN On 26/03/2010
 
Dear Dr. Qamar Zaman sb. please define the life after death from quran, regarding punishment, reward. Question by: Dr. Samreen Mohsin From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 27/03/2010
 
Question is open to the forum Does Islam shun or celebrate life?? Question by: MohYam On 31/03/2010
 
Dear aurangzaib sahib regards,the almost entire dean has been misinterprated and being followed by mass (so called muslims).In the light of Dr Qamars Quraanic research ,the most of europe seems nearly muslim states ware as muslims otherwise ,is it? Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 09/04/2010
 
sir, According to Quran, i heard that God is beyond man's thinkings and could not be limitized or shaped and also not imaginated(equel to nothing).If someone accepts existance of God then he is wrong. Question by: mac.cruise On 17/04/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman,i want to ask you that at the time of imams how could such a large number of muslims be decived by tellin that the quranic word salat means the ritulistic namaz.sir i am so curious to know plz answer my question Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 30/04/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman i wolul like to ask you whether you have written other books besides the bokks given at your site.if yes plz tell me the names of a few more books.may God bless you.Ameen Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 03/05/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman my question is only for you i would like to ask you about GHUSAL after ejaculation in islam.is it necessary?what quran says about this? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 04/05/2010
 
dear mr qamar zaman or aurangzeb i have heard from mullahs that a non-muslim i.e a hindu or christian or any ,will never ever enter the jannah i.e the heaven no matter how much beneficial for humanityh he is.what quran says? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 10/05/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman or aurangzeb i have read in quran that muslims are not allowed to have a friendship with christian or jews i do not know the verse.plz elaborate can we have frienship with chritians or jews or non muslims? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 10/05/2010
 
my brother aurangzeb is eating parsad from hindus halal in islam. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 10/05/2010
 
dear aurangzeb you said parsad is not haram.but what about the verse of the quran where allah says that blood and pig and any thing upon which the nane of sth other than allah is taken is haram.so parsad should be haram.isn't it?plz elaborate Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 11/05/2010
 
brother auranzaib or qamar zaman is shaking hand with a non mahram halal Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 12/05/2010
 
a person told me that salat is the same ritual namaz and quoted versr from the quran which tell three times namaz i will give you reference only cause the lack of space (11:114) and(17:78).plz expalin it is very confusing brother aurangzaib. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 13/05/2010
 
dear dr qamar what is "TAWAAF".tell me about the hadiths which says:The "TAWAAF" will be continue untill the qayamat.is this a forged Hadith?plz elaborate Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 14/05/2010
 
dear aurangzaib, plz let me know about "ISTIKHARA".is it islamic?i have seen many people offering istikhara prayer Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 17/05/2010
 
dear aurangzaib i have heard that the "prophet Ibraham" was thrown into fire by "Namrood".and he was protected by Allah in the fire.is this mentioned in quran.isnt it a miracle and i think Allah does not do miracles.plz elaborat.thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 18/05/2010
 
My understanding so far that Quran is free from myth, miracles, fantasies, superstitions, dogmas.etc.. So what is the Concept of Jannat & Dozakh… Question by: Danish roomi On 18/05/2010
 
Salam.. mojuda QURAN kya wohi QURAN hai jo AP S.A.W.W ne murattab krwaya???agr han to phir wo asal quran dunya me kahin mojud hai.?? or agar nahin to phir hum is QURAN pr kese etbar kren jese ahadis sahih nahi to wese QURAN b SAHIH Nahi. Question by: UMAR HUSSAIN On 18/05/2010
 
dear aurangzaib a person argud with me that we should not use our mind in islam because we say that allah is merciful but look in the jungle one animal kills another ruthlessly leavind its offsprings alone.is it not cruelity.plz give me answer Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 20/05/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib, i acting for women in dramas and films or coming on televiion in news ,shows etc allowed in ilam.plz explain in the light of quran Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 20/05/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib, pal let me know whether asking the parents of bride for "Jahaz" i .e dowry allowed in islam.give a satisfying answer in the light of the glorious quran Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/05/2010
 
Jnab Aurangzaib sb / Dr.Qamar sb. Is it zina with wife to go to her for enjoyment and not for child. Question by: alam1162@gmail.com From INDIA (DELHI) On 27/05/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib i have heard from mullas that on the day of judgement the prophet wii do "SHAFA'At" for us.and qoute a verse from the ayatul kursi e.g "ila biznihi"is it right will prophet do SHAFA"AT For us.i think it is wrong plz explain Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 28/05/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib some people have misconception that God is not good becuse if he knew that a person was going to the hell then why he created him.plz give a satiusfactory answer from your islamic mind Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 29/05/2010
 
what Quran says about "DAJJAL"?... Question by: Dr. Samreen Mohsin From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 01/06/2010
 
dear aurangzaib or dr qamar tell me how to argue with a person who says that growing beard is a fundamental part of slam and your islam is incopmplete without it.plz give me some arguments sothat i can answer such blind people.God bless you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 02/06/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib or qamar zaman the muslims preach there religion throughtout the world and so do the muskims of saudi arabia.but no non-muslim is allowed to preach his religion in saudi arabia.is it not unfair? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 03/06/2010
 
Dr Sahab when we are looking for everything in Quran than how can we say that CARNIVOROUS ANIMALS like cat,lion,dog and other animals like horse etc are Haram in Islam as we dont find any verse which says that these are haram? Question by: Nadeem_Akhtar From PAKISTAN On 03/06/2010
 
Dr sahab u say tht sex 4 enjoyment is permited whereas G.A Pervez says under 4:24(al.quran) while explaning words MOHSENEN AND GHAIR MUSAFEHEN that it is not permited and it can be done only when baby is needed.plzz explain Question by: Nadeem_Akhtar From PAKISTAN On 03/06/2010
 
sir plz tell me why islam allows a muslim man to marry a ehle kitab woman and does not permit a muslim woman to marry a ehle kitab. why there is such boundation over a muslim lady?thnx Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 04/06/2010
 
brother auragzaib is not the worship of idols shirk.when you argue with people that hindus too will enter the jannah they quote a verse from the quran that allah never forgives shirk as idol worship is a shirk so hindus can never enter the jannah Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 05/06/2010
 
dear mr aurangzaib is the profession of a lawyer permissible in islam.beacuse i have heard many people that it is haram and the income of a lawyer is haram.plz explain Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 08/06/2010
 
salaam Dr. sahib, Quran means reading/recitation, so the hadith followers argue that it is just for reading. how to give them a justified answer. and why is Quran translated as reading when it is for implementing? Question by: shireen On 09/06/2010
 
Salam Aurangzeb Bhai, would u please explain the mystery of kaba for me, why it is for us ect.......... Question by: Nadeem_Akhtar From PAKISTAN On 11/06/2010
 
dear brother auragzaib quran says pray for the MAGHFIRAT of your parents .what does it mean? if my parents have done something against quran how can allah forgive because of my pray.plz let me know about this Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 11/06/2010
 
dear aurangzaib is there any mention of shroud for the deceased in the quran?is it neccessary?plz explain.God bless you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 13/06/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib plz tell me about some arabic lughats that are standard and suitable for me caz you know my level.and whats about al mawrid arabic-english dictionary?God bless you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 14/06/2010
 
dear aurangzaib or qamar zaman if it was not the wife of the prophet zachariah that was barren but was his nation than whats your opinion about the verse(21-89-90) which says WA ISLAHAN LAKA ZAOJA and we cured his wife. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 16/06/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib is sayng "ALLAH O AKBAR" right according to quran? God bless you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 17/06/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib some people dedicate goat to their dead parents.or when they are in some trouble or ill they decide to dedicate a goat etc to dedicate.i think it is not right but i am not that confident plz give this confidence.explain Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 20/06/2010
 
dear qamar zaman or aurangzaib a muslim is one that lives in peace.if someone abuses ones sister or moher or wife it is quite unbearable.what should a muslim do in this situation?should he fight with such a person?plz elaborate Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 22/06/2010
 
dr qamar zaman sahab regards in one of your answers in blog you have mentioned that if any none muslam is doing a good deed he will be rewared in life after death and you have quoted a verse of quran, but i want to ask about it. Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 25/06/2010
 
dear brother aurangzaib or qamar zaman i want to learn about the fact about karbala i know that it is a false story but i want the reality from you.thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/06/2010
 
dear aurangzaib or qamar zaman kindly let me know about "NAZR E BAD"?thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 27/06/2010
 
the quran has been devided into RAKOO'AT and PARAS.is this division right Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 03/07/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman is the hell eternal despite of the mercy of God Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 06/07/2010
 
Aslamoalikum Dr. Qamar I have to ask you a question about life after death Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 11/07/2010
 
Dr Qamar and Aurangzeb Bhai, there is a verse in Quran 8:63 and 49:10,3:102 my question is about these verses, let me explain my question. Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 11/07/2010
 
is burying the dead in grave neccessary ?hindus burn their dead is it right? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 11/07/2010
 
Dear Docter Qamer-uz-Zaman, A.A 1. Please explain in what sence Quran is the word of GOD? Question by: pervez On 11/07/2010
 
Dear Docter Qamer, In your opinion how for Iqbal"s philosophy of Khoodi is in cnfirmity with quranic teachings. Question by: pervez On 11/07/2010
 
i have heard that the prophet uzair was given death for 100 year by allah and then he was arosen.is it not a miracle?is it real plz expalin Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 13/07/2010
 
salaam Dr. Sahib, plz explain 5:101 and 102. what kind of question would those be that would turn people into disbelievers? Question by: shireen On 16/07/2010
 
Aslamolalikum Dr Qamar: I want to ask a question about Economical System, I am explaing it below. Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 16/07/2010
 
Dr. Qamar there are verses in Quran whose usual translation give the whole pictures of Human development but it is imposible to believe on these verses 1400 years ago,therefore plz give the exact translations of all those verses. Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 16/07/2010
 
Assal O Allaikum Paidaish Masih main Aap Ne yahya Ka Zikar kia (Salasa Alleel) 3 Raat hey Aap Ne is ka mafhoom Kaha Se lia he Aur Dorr-e-Zulmat ye kaha se lia he.( Aamrati ) Jis se murad Aurat K hain Aap Ne is se Muraad Qaum kaha se lia? Question by: babarsharif34@yahoo.com On 17/07/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman i have seen mullah to quote (2:102) to prove black magic .i think this verse it too mistranslated.plz explian? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 19/07/2010
 
is masturbation haram according to the following verse (23:5-7).i have seen mullah quoting this verse to prove masturbation haram.is it true? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 24/07/2010
 
dr zakir naik interpretes the verse (21:30) as the prediction of BIG BANG THEORY.i ask dr qamar whether this interpretation is true?plz tell does the above verse really tells about the BIG BANG THEORY? thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/07/2010
 
dear dr qamar zaman i argued with a person that quran is complete way of life(ZABITA E HAYAT).he told me if quran is complete than which sort of system it seems to establish.i will tell the rest part of question in comments becuse of the lak of sps Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 01/08/2010
 
dear aurangzaib or dr qamar is the clonning of human being allowed in islam? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 07/08/2010
 
Why God did not sent women as Prophet to guide humanity? Any one may like to answere. Question by: pervez On 07/08/2010
 
dea aurangzaib can we say merry christmas to a christian? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 08/08/2010
 
Dear Doctor Qamer sahib, A.A Allah is beyond human understanding but it is subject of Quran, why not life after death? Question by: pervez On 10/08/2010
 
IF QURAN IS BEYOND TIME AND SPACE WHY IT WAS REVEALED IN 23 YEARS? Question by: pervez On 10/08/2010
 
In accordance with QURANIC teachings is there any relationship of natural calamities like floods ,earthquakes etc with human deeds? Question by: pervez On 10/08/2010
 
dear aurangzaib does the Quran merely means RECITATION? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 12/08/2010
 
Please review" wahdatul waajood " in the light of Quran? Question by: pervez On 13/08/2010
 
dear aurangzaiib is the verse (2:222-223) about MENSTRUATION?i think it is about something else not menstruation.plz tell me what it means Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 15/08/2010
 
dear auragzaib Mullahs say how we will distribute The "WAR BOOTY" among the" MUJAHIDIN" if we do not believe in hadith books.how the prophet distributed the war booty, the quran does not tell.How should i answer such blind mullahs.Thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 17/08/2010
 
God has taken the responsibility of Quran for its protection, why not of other divine books if the message was the same and it was beyond time and space? Question by: pervez On 19/08/2010
 
dear auragzaib does ABUBAKAR mean the father of vigin(BAKIRA KA BAAP) or something else.plz tell me is calling him abubakar right.i think there is something wrong?Isn't it? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 19/08/2010
 
dear aurangzaib does the verse " And the Thunder and other Malaika strive to glorify Him by carrying out there duties in awe of him (13:13) show that Malaika are the forces of nature?or it is mistranslated.?this is the translation of allama pervez Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 19/08/2010
 
dear aurangzaib can you plz tell me about the history of Firqa ahl e hadith i mean its emergence ,history etc. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 21/08/2010
 
Dear aurangzaib Does islam allows to kill or punish people like Salman Rushdi?i think islam can not allow.am i right? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 22/08/2010
 
did moses really killed a man by hitting him according to surah qasas? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 23/08/2010
 
Dr Qamar sahib has reffered to a book Tafhim Ul Quran book 2 last line page 80 in the link below http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?SID=40&QID=453 I want to ask which book is it?who has writen this? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/08/2010
 
It is said that Abu Bakar launched Jihad against a group of people that refused to give ZAKAT.Is it right? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/08/2010
 
GOD IS ONE BUT WHY AT TIMES HE USES THE WORD WE, (NAHNO,PLURAL) INSTEAD OF I, (SINGULAR) WHEN HE ADDRESSES HUMAN-BEINGS IN HIS BOOK? Question by: pervez On 26/08/2010
 
WHAT IS THE CONCEPT OF INTEREST (SOOD) IN ACCORDANCE WITH QURAN? Question by: pervez On 26/08/2010
 
salaam Dr. Sahib, 1. what is the purpose of saying pbuh for prophets/messengers. does it give them peace after they are dead? 2. why especially for Muhammed and not for other prophets/messengers? Question by: shireen On 27/08/2010
 
Out of fourteen major religions of the world, is Islam the best religion to follow ? It can be noted that out of 6.5 billion world population only 1.4 billion are Muslims; among whom only about 24% are practicing Muslim. Question by: bqayyum From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 27/08/2010
 
Dear Docter Qamer, PLEASE THROUGH SOME LIGHT ON HUMAN NATURE, IN THE LIGHT OF QURAN ? Question by: pervez On 28/08/2010
 
In the quran Allah says that the body of Pharo will be preserved (10:92).Today it is said that Faroah's body was dscovered during excavations in 1898 .Is it the body of pharoa or this verse is mistranslated? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 28/08/2010
 
What is the significance of genotype and phenotype of a persons upbringing in the light of Quran? Question by: pervez On 02/09/2010
 
Dear aurangzaib the Lexicographer's of arabic were also IRANIS like Raghib,Ibne faris etc.And there is no lexicon writen in the age of prophet.is it possible that these IMAMS may also have done some corruption like the IMAMS of ahadith? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 05/09/2010
 
Dear Docter Qamer , Please give references of Quranic verses which guarantees individuals life after death? I request humbly for Docter Sahibs personal answer. Question by: pervez On 08/09/2010
 
Salam Qamar Sb, my question is that if we search gradually development of islam according to Muhammad's mind, then ultimately we concludes that Muhammad borrowed as Sikh pioneer Nanak did, is it true? please reply comprehensively? Question by: amnesty4all On 11/09/2010
 
Dear Docter Sahib , kindly explain verse no 81/19 sura taqweer ayat no 19. Question by: pervez On 12/09/2010
 
Dear aurangzaib or dr qamar can you plz prove KASHAF and ILHAM fake from Quran? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 13/09/2010
 
Dear Dr Sahib and brother aurangzaib can you plz tell me that what was the teaching method of prophet muhammad he was a mualim (teacher) so how he explained the KITAB and HIKMAH? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 14/09/2010
 
Dear Dr Qamar and aurangzaib i ave a question regarding the translation of verse(5:103).i will explain my question below in comments due to the lack of space. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 17/09/2010
 
KINDLY EXPLAIN IN DETAIL , AYAT NO 5-6 OF SURA AL-MOMINOON? Question by: pervez On 19/09/2010
 
Please explain verse 33 of sura noor? Question by: pervez On 19/09/2010
 
Please translate verse 223/2. traditional translation is, Question by: pervez On 21/09/2010
 
Dear brother aurangzaib i want to ask you was prophet muhammad given WAHI outside the quran?is there any verse in the quran which says that Prophet Muhammad was not given WAHI outside the quran?Thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 21/09/2010
 
Please explain Ayat no 34 of sura al-nisa. Question by: pervez On 22/09/2010
 
what the Quran says about the theory of evolution?Does the quran suport it? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 23/09/2010
 
Dear Dr Sahib and brother Aurangzaib kindly expalin what SUNNAT is according to the Quran? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 27/09/2010
 
Please explain concept of Praying in Islam? Please do not not mix it with Namaz. Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 29/09/2010
 
Please briefly describe economic values Quran desires to be followed in a welfare state? Question by: pervez On 30/09/2010
 
Please briefly describe political values Quran desires to be followed in an Islamic state? Question by: pervez On 30/09/2010
 
What should be the salient features of the defense of an Islamic state in the present scenario in the light of Quranic values ? Mubashir Syed to please include your views on keeping weapons of mass destruction. Question by: pervez On 01/10/2010
 
Historically speaking, a Muslim soldier fights courageously, world knows that, question is why? Question by: pervez On 01/10/2010
 
Please explain origin and meaning of word Allah in Arabic language? Question by: pervez On 09/10/2010
 
Please discuss evolution in the light of" Kun fayakoon" Question by: pervez On 10/10/2010
 
What is God's interest in our well being when he is omnipotent. Please answer this stupid question? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 11/10/2010
 
Where is Muslim world found today in view of new definition of , Muslim, momin etc and does there exist Muslim Umma in these modern times? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 11/10/2010
 
salam dr shab janab sey arz hey k hum english nai jantey,hum kesey quran samaj saktey hain hamarey jeasey kafi loog hain jo ser urdo jantey hain hamara bhe huk hey k deen sumjhain. aghar deen main ibadat nai hey to (maksad e hayyat)kiya hey Question by: iqbalasghar From PAKISTAN (SARA E ALAMGIR) On 14/10/2010
 
salam, janab dr sahab jawab aap sey manga thaa jawab koi or deeta hey kiya ye theek hey ye bhi ho sakta hey k jawab deney walla meri tara k student ho brae mehbani khood jawab dain shukria Question by: iqbalasghar From PAKISTAN (SARA E ALAMGIR) On 18/10/2010
 
PLEASE REVIEW SIGNIFICANCE OF" MAIHER" IN MUSLIM MARRIAGE LAW IN THE LIGHT OF QURAN? Question by: pervez On 21/10/2010
 
sr. mere sawal kajawab nahi mila jin aurat ka shohar marr jae woh 4 mahina 10 din ki eddat kion karti he? haqqoqunnissa parh leney k bad phi sawal mera yahi he ? Question by: babarsharif34@yahoo.com On 21/10/2010
 
Please explain "QAYAMAT" in detail? Will it come when the whole universe will be destroyed and ALLAH will disclose NAMA-I-AIMAL of every individual and his fate for paradise or hell will be decided? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 22/10/2010
 
Gay's, homosexuals claim they are born like that....What do our Astanamembers have to say about it ? Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 22/10/2010
 
Salaamun 'Alaikum, After careful research and study on some 'key' Quranic concepts, I realize that we are to ESTABLISH DEEN in our lives REGARDLESS of the Secularists and their man-made laws. What are your thoughts on this viewpoint? Question by: Damon From UNITED STATES (PITTSBURGH) On 23/10/2010
 
does the concept of hoor exist in christianity?plz help me know it.i need it very much Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 26/10/2010
 
Sir, AAP KI KITAB HAQIQAT MALAIKA PARHHI AIK SAWAL THA. ALLAH NE HAMAIN MALAIKA PAR IMAN LANE KO KAHA HE. AGAR AAP NE JO TAREEF KI MALIKA KI TO US PAR IMAN KA KIA TALOQ BANTA HE. Question by: babarsharif34@yahoo.com On 05/11/2010
 
Some Aastana peer watch the Video on the link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaCWVXNByTc) and comment on its religious aspect Shariq Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 05/11/2010
 
Have you read Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 07/11/2010
 
We have discussions about life after death and how disruptive it was to imagine that there is no life after death. Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 08/11/2010
 
Is "wahy" part of "sunnat Allah"? If so, how does it works in relation to the laws of nature? Can it be proven? I have another question too (answer one,get one free)please explain 2:78, what it means& whts with the slaves, free, women, etc? Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 10/11/2010
 
MERRY EIDMAS AND HAPPY OLD YEARS,SORRY I MEAN CHRISTMAS MUBARIK . Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 16/11/2010
 
Dear Doctor Qamer ,Muslims believe Prophet Muhammad is "Khatim-un-nabeen" Kindly support this faith with reason? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 19/11/2010
 
Have a look at this : http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 21/11/2010
 
IS QURAN A SIMPLE BOOK TO UNDERSTSND? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 23/11/2010
 
Someone please explain the "dream" concept of Prophet Yusuf? What do the Quran say about dreams,are they true or just thoughts? Im waiting,help:- O Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 24/11/2010
 
Dear Dr Qamar Zaman Please translate verse 2:219 correctly. "And they ask what they should give.Say what is surplus".Does the arabic word "AFU" means surplus? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 27/11/2010
 
Salaam. Is the Quran saying anything about Aliens ,monsters from other planets etc :P?? Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 30/11/2010
 
There is an ongoing discussion on “Ourbeacon” regarding the phrase “Allah-hu-Akbar”. I believe the subject matter to be extremely profound, something which members of Aastana would appreciate reading. Question by: William From UNITED KINGDOM On 30/11/2010
 
Is there any word in the Quraan for BELIEFor BELIEVE? Is Islam an ideology(A comprehensive and coherent set of basic beliefs about political, economic, social and cultural affairs that is held in common by a sizable group of people within a society)? Question by: Hafiz Abdullah From PAKISTAN (RAWALPINDI) On 01/12/2010
 
What are the meanings of EIMAN n MOMIN in 49: 14-15? Question by: Hafiz Abdullah From PAKISTAN (RAWALPINDI) On 01/12/2010
 
Dear Dr Qamar Zaman do you believe that people can still get WAHI from Allah,and become Nabi?Do you not believe that Muhammad was the last who received direct knowledge from God?Why do you say Muhammad is appointing authority of other prophets? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 02/12/2010
 
I have created a branch of the Aastana blog called "Linguistic & grammatical Exposition of the Quran" on Facebook and hope all of you join. nahi to..argg Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 04/12/2010
 
Dear All: Please go through my comments. Question by: Adnan Muhammad Khan From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 04/12/2010
 
PLEASE EXPLAIN AYAT NO 7 OF SURA 33 ( AL AHZAB) Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 06/12/2010
 
Does Quran gives the concept of Nationhood or Countries as they exist today. If yes then what should be the mode and form of Government. Shariq Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 07/12/2010
 
Dear Dr Qamarzaman: Plz enlighten us about the verse14/48 keeping in view the context of the subject from 42-52.Also the verses 11/107-108,with respect to the context 11/103-108.Thanks Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 15/12/2010
 
How many men and women claimed Prophet hood after Muhammad and did anyone of them made any significant achievement or influenced humanity positively? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 18/12/2010
 
Dear All, what is Ahmed Huluci's Ellah ( idoelogy ) of Islam ? Question by: Mubashir Syed From INDIA (HYDERABAD) On 20/12/2010
 
Plz explain 38:27, how can one become kafir if he think differently about the universe. Also explain 29:44,"signs in the heaven and earth for those who BELIEVE"? Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 24/12/2010
 
Dear Dr Qamar Zaman or brother Aurangzaib a person told me if God can communicate with Moses,Jesus and Muhammad.So why can he not communicate with anybody else today?Please answer my question.Thank you very much Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 25/12/2010
 
Why do people try to prove the Qur'an through science? We find science in other books than the Quran, why are not they labeled as "divine"? Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 26/12/2010
 
I wonder how and why the Human Beings have assumed the status of the best life spices on Earth (or Universe). The term "ASHRAF-UL-MAKHLUQAT" was also coined unilaterally without considering the significance of Mankind in the Universe. Shariq Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 27/12/2010
 
Please watch , a good video on zakat http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vtmZNziH6U&feature=player_embedded#! Question by: alam1162@gmail.com From INDIA (DELHI) On 29/12/2010
 
PLEASE DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN SCIENCE AND DIVINITY ? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 30/12/2010
 
AL-KITAB + LAWS OF NATURE, is divine guidance as Moazzem says, Why humanity was plunged in to religious wars??? SCIENTISTS NEVER FIGHT IF THEY ARE PROVED WRONG. Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 31/12/2010
 
Muslims invented 5 pillows of Islam. Why learning Arabic is not mandatory in Islam?? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 31/12/2010
 
Dear Dr. Qamar Zaman: can you explain: [6/105] وَكَذَلِكَ نُصَرِّفُ الْآيَاتِ وَلِيَقُولُواْ دَرَسْتَ وَلِنُبَيِّنَهُ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ Question by: M.N.Khalid From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 01/01/2011
 
Sura Baqra Ayah 223 "Your Women are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth as ye will ......". If Allah had to restrict husbands to wifes only then why was "AZWAJ" not used instead of "NISA". Here NISA means any woman (not necessarily wife). Shariq Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 01/01/2011
 
Aap ke nazar me Tauheen e Risalat koi jurm hai ya nahi? 2- Tauheen e Risalat ke mujrim ko kia saza milni chahye? 3- kia ghair muslimo ko is baat ki ijazat honee chahyee ke wo Rasool e Akram PBUH ki shan me gustakhi kar saken? Question by: UMAR HUSSAIN On 04/01/2011
 
dear dr qamar sahib please translate the verse 4:34.thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 06/01/2011
 
Has Human's beautiful (Animal) instincts and natural desires been checked by Divinity ? Question by: M.N.Khalid From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 08/01/2011
 
Is Sex allowed with Slave Women in Islam? Dr Zakir Naik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UVmSQHquJc&feature=player_embedded#! Question by: mohd.areeb On 08/01/2011
 
Dear Dr Qamar sahib i am not noticing your presence on the blog.You know that without you this blog is nothing.I know you are very busy.But i request you to please give some time to the blog.Thank you very much Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 09/01/2011
 
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/jan2011-daily/10-01-2011/col8.htm Every one is invited to comment on above cited column written by Ansar Abasi, especially. Dr. Sb., Aurangzaib sb., Moazzam Sb., Dr. Shahid and Sister Nargis. Question by: Adnan Muhammad Khan From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 10/01/2011
 
A tribe in Africa who exercise "incest", and believe it to be a divine law. A consequences of such action are injurious to following generations, What are those consequences ? Question by: M.N.Khalid From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 10/01/2011
 
What is good about the "Little Mosque on the Prairie"? Question by: Zubair From UNITED STATES (WASHINGTON) On 11/01/2011
 
Surah Al-Ahzab Ayat No.57 and 61.. for Mr.Adnan and others. Question by: UMAR HUSSAIN On 11/01/2011
 
-Is the Quran changed?If yes,what is changed, how do we know it is changed, and what does it mean when it says no1 can change it?(i have a clue about the last one, but want to share it when i read your answers :-D) Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 25/01/2011
 
How to increase your knowledge? Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 25/01/2011
 
Brother Aurangzaib, I read Q&A of the your blog and found this ref of "Tabqaat-e-Ibn-e-Saad" to Dr. Samreen On23 Sept2010, http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?MID=4&SID=21. If the author of this book is `Abdullah ibn Sa`d Ibn Abi Sarh' Question by: Syeda On 29/01/2011
 
What is free will? What is basic instinct? How does free will separate man from animals? Question by: Junaid From PAKISTAN (KARACHI) On 31/01/2011
 
QURAN GIVES US PERMANENT VALUES BEYOND TIME AND SPACE, WHAT ARE THOSE? LET US ENUMERATE AND DISCUSS THEM ONE BY ONE? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 02/02/2011
 
Salaam Shalom shabba dabba do ,what is the "driving force" in Human beings, and what is the "nafs" thing? Are human beings superior to other creatures ? If yes, why?hhhhmmmm Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 17/02/2011
 
PERSONALITY IS CHANGELESSNESS IN CHANGE. WHAT IS THAT? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 25/02/2011
 
CAN PROPHETS MAKE MISTAKES? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 10/03/2011
 
Salaam to all (and me) ,What giant "fish" (whale/shark-zilla?) ate Prophet Yunus (37:142) Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 12/03/2011
 
Dear Aurangzaib and dr qamar sahib IS ALLAH THE ACTIVE FA'IL (DOER) IN THE UNIVERSE,OR HE HAS SET LAWS WHICH MANTAIN THE ORDER OF THE UNIVERSE?if allah is not the active fa'il will it not make him a far unapproachable God? n is allah a personal God? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 15/03/2011
 
Please review law of DEET. Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 16/03/2011
 
Dear brother aurangzaib plz let me know about the actual story of TOOFAN E NOH (noah flood).i think the so called n2I interpretation is fake.am i right? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 18/03/2011
 
dear brother auragzaib plz let me know about the actual story of toofan e nooh.i think there is sth wrong with the so called n2i interpretation.am i right Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 18/03/2011
 
salaam Dr. Sahib, Does curse effect any one at all according to Quran? Question by: shireen On 22/03/2011
 
What's the point of mental development & how is it beneficial 4 the humanity? Does the Quran explain why we have to expand our capabilities when we are all goin to die anyway? how will Youm qayama have any meaning to me, when I'm not here? Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 22/03/2011
 
Good News As convener of Janat e Pakistan, Dr. AsarulIslam has nominated Mr. Aurangzaib Yousafzai as the adhoc President and “Party Leader” in Rawalpindi/Islamabad What are the Quranic injunctions for a political party ? Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 23/03/2011
 
Congratulations to brother AURANGZAIB!!! Dear Brother Aurangzaib i have come to know that you have been choosen as the president of JANAT E PAKISTAN party.I am very happy and want to congratulate you from the core of my hear!!! Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 24/03/2011
 
Brother Moazzam! Should we join/launch any political party to establish the true Islamic state?? As there are already so many parties working under the same manifesto. Question by: naeem sheikh From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 24/03/2011
 
Can anyone announce manifesto of Jannet-i-Pakistan political party to see how it is different from manifesto of other political parties in Pakistan? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 24/03/2011
 
Will AI surpass Human Intelligence? Question by: Zubair From UNITED STATES (WASHINGTON) On 27/03/2011
 
Brother Aurangzaib ! With out you this blog seems like a picture with out color. eagerly waiting for your comments at mine 29th,march. HOWALLAZEE URSILA RASOOLAHO BIL HUDAA WA DEEN ALHAQQ LIYUZHIRAHO ALLADDIN-E-KULLIH, 6:33, 48:28, , 61:9 . Question by: naeem sheikh From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 30/03/2011
 
Could woman be an IMAM/NABI/RASOOL in a man dominating societies.While keeping in view her physical system, structure, and her psychology,also MALKA SABA.If not then what about in the societies where she has equal rights? Question by: naeem sheikh From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 30/03/2011
 
Moazzam saheb and Aastana Members! Your teachings reflects that there is no any predestined event being played at earth. What about the historical steps been described in Quran about prophet Musa and Yousaf see verses 12/4-5, 28/5-7?? Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 06/04/2011
 
The world has succeeded in creating global village by study of "lohimahfooz" and "Alkitab". Is it wise to struggle for a state having label of "Islamic state" which will create a sect in humanity and will not be acceptable even by Muslim Ummah? Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 13/04/2011
 
1- Agr KHATIM ka matlab validater hae to MUHAMMAD se pehle kaun ye fareeza sr anjam deta tha? (haln keh Quran doosre nabbiun ka to zikr hae validater ka nahen) 2- Aur MUHAMMAD k bad ab kaun validater hae? Question by: Dr. Iqbal On 18/04/2011
 
In 3/81 " aur jb ham ne nabbiun se MISAAQ lya , jinhen ham ne KITAB aur HIKMAT de k jb tumhare pas koi RASOOL ae , us ki jo tumhare pas hae to tum us pe IMAAN le ana aur us ki NUSRAT krna....." wo kaunse NABI the aur RASOOL hen aur IMAN ka matlab? Question by: Dr. Iqbal On 18/04/2011
 
My dearest brother bob,please throw light on following ayats, sura haj ayat 47, almaaruj ayat 4, ayat 17 : 52 , ayat 10 : 45 , ayat 23 : 113. Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 22/04/2011
 
In the present scenario of changing human civilization, Does the institution of family holds permanent value beyond time and space? What guidance we get from Quran. Question by: momin From PAKISTAN On 27/04/2011
 
Dear Dr Qamar Zaman, I wondered if the Quran are making any statements which are not certifiable, or describes mechanisms that our mind cannot understand? If yes, then how are such claims and depictions advantageous? Question by: bob From UNITED KINGDOM On 30/04/2011
 
Dear Members, I want to know about the true story of Toofan e Nooh. Is it different from orthodox story? Wassalam Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 01/05/2011
 
Dear members, please share your valuable thoughts about these questions Question by: bob From UNITED KINGDOM On 03/05/2011
 
IF AASTANA MEMBERS ARE NOT CLEAR AT THE VERY BASIC (IMPORTANT) ISSUE OF HAYAT ADDUNYA and AKHIRAH, HOW WOULD THEY GUIDE THE PEOPLE LIKE ME? PEOPLE LIKE MR MOAZZAM COULD ONLY MISGUIDE,AS I POINTED OUT IN THE BEGINNING.BE AWARE Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 03/05/2011
 
Dear All, does Quran try to convince people about existence of GOD which cant be proved??? Question by: Mubashir Syed From INDIA (HYDERABAD) On 04/05/2011
 
HAZRAT ALLAMA MOAZZAM SAHAB ! Enlighten us about the ALLAH O AKBAR. Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 05/05/2011
 
DearAurangzaib and Aastana members! Could atheist be included in the glad tiding offered to mankind in verse 2/62 . Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 06/05/2011
 
Can the Existence of God, as the Creator, be scientifically proved, irrespective of Quran's verdict that the nature of His existence can't be comprehended? Question by: aurangzaib From PAKISTAN On 12/05/2011
 
Allama moazzam Sahab ! IS POLYGAMY HARAM IN ISLAM AS A SPECIAL CASE ? For more detail read my comments Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 13/05/2011
 
What is alam-i-amer and alam-i-khalq, Question by: pervez On 16/05/2011
 
Dear brother Aurangzaib hope you are doing well.Plz let me now what the word RIBA means.Does it mean the interest of bank.Thank you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 18/05/2011
 
How can an individual act and help in creating an Islamic society because all efforts for this objective ends up in the demand for a theocratic state. What course of action has been laid down in the Quran Bakhtiar Qayyum Question by: bqayyum From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 21/05/2011
 
Dear Members I wnat to know the divine laws which Quran wants to implement on society. Thanks Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 23/05/2011
 
Dr. Zaman and Aastana Team, While your interpretation of the Quran in "Human Rights" terms is quite refreshing what does the Quran say of one who engages majority of his life in vain deeds(movies, games, relaxing ect) while being peaceful(Muslim)? Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 23/05/2011
 
Dear brother Moazzam plz elaborate what is meant by AL YAHOOD and ALNASARA (as character).I request my respected brother Aurangzaib to take part in the discussion also.Jazakallah. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 23/05/2011
 
Salam Not all Muslims or believers get a Jenna in this life as one could b peaceful all their life n develop cancer, bad kids, divorce, car accident injury, ect.. How do u explain when bad things happen to good peaceful people? Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 24/05/2011
 
51:56 وَمَا خَلَقْتُ ٱلْجِنَّ وَٱلْإِنسَ إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُونِ Pls explain the above ayat. wassalam Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 24/05/2011
 
Salam, Dr. Zaman and Students of Quran, what is the point in praying for the sick or praying for anything for that matter if God wills not to intervene in our lives? Yes we must do our part but where's the hope if God will not intervene? Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 25/05/2011
 
If all aspects of life are controlled by the divine laws and Alkitab is also preserved in "Loh-e-Mehfooz", then everything has to pass the test of logic. What then is the logic with Haraam and Halaal according to Quran. Shariq Question by: SS From CANADA (VANCOUVER) On 25/05/2011
 
Dear Dear ones, is there anything called "soul" in the Quran? Explain like im two years old, here i need spoon feeding or feedingbottle. Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 26/05/2011
 
Dear Dr. Qamar, With all the information on this site and similarly others, how is one to digest it all? There has been a battle to rewire your system to think more rationally and when you think you are, you get another wake up call. Years, maybe? Question by: Shirley C From UNITED STATES (PITTSBURGH) On 26/05/2011
 
Dear brother Mubashir regards,i remember once some Mullah raised objection against the interpretation of MARYAM by Dr QZ that Name can not be translated.Then Dr QZ gave the answer.I request you to send me the link plz.God bless you Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 26/05/2011
 
Aslamoalikum Mozam bhai would you please elaborate the terminology Al-Kitab?? Thanks Question by: ali.haideer From PAKISTAN (LARKANA) On 29/05/2011
 
Please Members What is the true story behind Ashaab e Kahaf, mentioned in soora e Kahaf. In orthodox interpretition these people sleeped in a cave for thousand of years, or something like this. Thanks Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 30/05/2011
 
Salam Dear Brothers Where may I find "Adam o Iblees" English translation of Dr. Zamans book? Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 31/05/2011
 
Salam Dear Brothers (Sisters included) and Aastana Administrators, Does the Quran give us a clear reason of WHY we are on planet Earth in human body and what we are here for? Please see comment below. Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 01/06/2011
 
Dear Brothers and Dr. Zaman, I've been beating myself up over this understanding of shirk or believing in a wrong concept of God. Yes I've read your understanding on this issue but there is a verse in Quran which warns those that say God is trinity Question by: Anwar From UNITED STATES On 02/06/2011
 
Kia app log Hadeeth ko nahi manty? kia app koi hawala hadeeth sy nahi detay. Mojzat ka to Hadeeth main bhi Ziker hay kia app mojzat ko nahi manty? Question by: guest From PAKISTAN On 05/06/2011
 
Dear Moazzam. I want to salute you for your hard work. I started learning Quran only 6 months back and I only started looking at AASTANA couple of weeks back. Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 05/06/2011
 
Tahir Ul Qadri Ne Murday Ko Kalima Padaya (urdu video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mfb6QriVh8 Question by: alam1162@gmail.com From INDIA (DELHI) On 14/06/2011
 
Dear Moazzam i have seen your recent post about Allah.I want to know Is Allah God or it means ISLAMIC STATE.Do you believe in a God who is FA'ALON LIMA YUREED.And what makes you not believe in a God who is an active fa'il? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 14/06/2011
 
dear moazzam DOES GOD EXISTS?And if he is not involved in the universe and i say HE IS DEAD.Will it be okay with you. Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 15/06/2011
 
Is the Sunnat of Allah Unchangeable? Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 15/06/2011
 
Dear brother Moazzam who authored the Quran according to you?Allah or Muhammad himself?Please do not go in details.Just tell me Allah or Muhammad that who is the author of the Quran.Best wishes!!! Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 18/06/2011
 
Dear Moazzam What is the meaning of " INNAHOO LAQUALOO RASOOLIN KAREEM " if the text of quran is from almighty Allah Question by: alam1162@gmail.com From INDIA (DELHI) On 19/06/2011
 
Dear Members,One group waiting for youm ul aakhira as life after death, other group said that youm ul aakhira will be happend in this world. Many people died waiting for this in this world. Are these two groups not in the same condition of waiting Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 20/06/2011
 
Dear All, Recently my uncle have a stoke and his right side is completely paralysed. He cant speak nor can comprehend.He is facing very hard days. What do you think, is he facing makafat e amal. Please comment Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 02/07/2011
 
HAS ALLAH, IN HIS QURAN, RULED ON THE EXPRESSION OF HUMAN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR OR IS MAN FREE TO DECIDE ON HIS OWN HOW TO EXPRESS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 08/07/2011
 
IS INCEST, AS A PARTICULAR SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ALLAOWABLE OR NOT ALLOWABLE IN DEEN AL-ISLAM? IF ALLOWABLE, WHY? IF NOT ALLOWABLE, WHY NOT? PLEASE GIVE AYATS. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 09/07/2011
 
DR. QAMAR ZAMAN WROTE: "SO ACTUALLY THERE IS NOTHING TO BE CALLED PREMARITAL SEX". IS THIS ASSERTION, ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN, TRUE?!? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 16/07/2011
 
NARGIS WROTE: THE ZANI IS SOMEONE WHO DISTORTS THE QURANIQ WORD. IS THIS ASSERTION, ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN, TRUE? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 18/07/2011
 
who is allah Question by: hm.zeeshan On 19/07/2011
 
Does aya 57/3 justify/give meaning that Allah is beyond time and space? Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 20/07/2011
 
Is it true that Moses prayed for Aaron and Aaron became prophet. Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 21/07/2011
 
ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN, IS THE UTTERING OF ALLAHU AKBAR, ACCEPTABLE IN THE DEEN OF ALLAH? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 21/07/2011
 
Mummy of Pharon in Egypt is the same pharon who clashes with Moses. ? Is it conforms from Quran? Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 23/07/2011
 
CAN ANYONE ANSWER THIS SIMPLE QUESTION---ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN, WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF--AKBAR? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 23/07/2011
 
Dear brother Moazzam if someone wants to understand the Quran and he is studying it for the first time.How should he study it?How he should attempt to understand a particular episode of the Quran.Thank you very much... Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 29/07/2011
 
Sahibaan, Lanati ka salaam Kia Quran paak main Roh amr Rabbi ke ilawa Rooh amr Allah bhi likha hai? In dono main kia farq hai? Question by: Universal-Lanati From ARMENIA On 30/07/2011
 
Dear Dr.Qamar and members. Please explain 21/53-60. and also 6/76-80 Were those idols made of stones? Didn't they used to worship كَوْكَبًا,الْقَمَرَ,الشَّمْسَ Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 01/08/2011
 
Dear Sir, It is being preached and commonly understood that Quranic guidance is eternal and everlasting for mankind during all eras. Whether any verse of Quran support this version ? if so , please quote reference of said verse . Thanks. Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 02/08/2011
 
Dear Sir, As per verse No.20 of Sura Al-Furqan(25) All , " Mursaleen;s" ate food and walk about in streets........... Why "Mursaleens;s" came to Seyedina Ibrahim ( who had to go towards "Qoum-e-Loot" , 51/32) denied to eat food from Ibrahim ? Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 02/08/2011
 
Dear Member, According to my new understanding I have left namaz,roza,Hajj. etc.Now what should I do according to Quran. How can I become a good Momin wothout these rituals. Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 02/08/2011
 
WAS THE PROPHET WHO WAS GIVEN THE QURAN...THE LAST PROPHET? YES OR NO AND PROVE EITHER POSITION. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 05/08/2011
 
IS AL-QURAN THE LAST/FINAL REVELATION FROM ALLAH? YES OR NO AND PROVE EITHER POSITION. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 05/08/2011
 
Salaamun Alikum Dear Aastana Members Please forgive me if I offends the spirit of aastana as I am going to ask few question which seems critical to me. Question by: mmkhan20 From SAUDI ARABIA (JEDDAH) On 08/08/2011
 
Dear Aurangzaib sb, Please explain the meanings of verse 37 of sura 41 Thanks Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 19/08/2011
 
IS AASTANA BLOG DEVOTED TO PHILOSOPHICAL MATERIALISM AND RELIGIOUS HUMANISM AND NOT AL-ISLAM? I'M BEGINNING TO BELIEVE SO. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 19/08/2011
 
Dear Sir, Please explain the meanings of verse 37 of sura 41 Thanks Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 20/08/2011
 
TRUE OR FALSE? 4:82 Will they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have FOUND IN IT MANY A DISCREPANCY. 10:37 And this the Quran...THERE IS NO DOUBT IN IT, from the Lord of the worlds. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 20/08/2011
 
Dear Moazzam,Dr QZ as you say Quran should be understood according to grammar.I have a question:All the Arabic grammars were written by IRANIS.Is there no possibility they have corrupted it like Ahadith?Thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 22/08/2011
 
43:45 And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before thee: Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped besides the Beneficent? HOW COULD MUHAMMAD HAVE ASKED THE PRIOR MESSENGERS...ANYTHING? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 23/08/2011
 
Dear Zul-Qarnain. (with Two noons). You have repeatedly asserted on this blog that Surah Al-fatehaa is not part of the Al-Kitaab (Al-Quraan). Hereby I am humbly requesting you to produce your proof. (Read more in comments) Question by: Iqbal kay shaheen From NAMIBIA (WALVIS BAY) On 23/08/2011
 
TO ALL WHO IS THE "YOU" MENTIONED IN THE FOLLOWING AYAT? 2:4 And who believe in that which has been revealed to YOU and that which was revealed before YOU and they are sure of the hereafter. Question by: PRIEST BOKMEI From UNITED STATES On 24/08/2011
 
Dear Moazzam and Dr Qamar sahib Is the Phrase ALFE SHAHR MURAKAB E TOUSIFI or MURAKKABE ADADI?And what does it mean?Thanks Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 28/08/2011
 
Dear Dhulqurnain,Why Allah called Himself Al-Momin and Al-salaam in 59/23 Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 30/08/2011
 
Dear Dr. Q.Z sb. A questio as comments below. Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 30/08/2011
 
WHY ARE RACIAL SLURS TOWARD AFRICAN AMERICANS ACCEPTABLE AT AASTANA BLOG? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 31/08/2011
 
CHALLENGE! CHALLENGE! CHALENGE! CAN ANYONE NAME ONE PROPHET, ALONG WITH, AND SINCE THE DEATH OF THE PROPHET REFERRED TO AS MUHAMMAD? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 06/09/2011
 
NARGIS/AASTANA BLOG, PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS CONCERNING AYATS 3:21 AND 33:40 Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 08/09/2011
 
NARGIS, MOAZZAM, WASEEMAMEER, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. GIVE US YOUR EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. NO MORE CONVOLUTED DISCOURSES. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 13/09/2011
 
WASEEMAMEER, WHAT IS THE TRUE MEANING OF 51:56? WHAT IS THE HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DHULQARNAIN AND AASTANA THAT NO WAY CAN THEY GATHER ON ONE PLATFORM? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 15/09/2011
 
Dear Dr.Qamar and members. Please explain the meaning of Moosa and Esa. At what paradigms ابواب they are at, and what meanings they give on those ابواب? Dear Dr.Sahab, your input will be highly appreciated. Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 16/09/2011
 
Is the Quran preaching BELIEVES ? I.E does it state anything in order to achieve unconfirmed belief in its students? 2) does it back up its claims with proofs, 3) HOW? Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 16/09/2011
 
NARGIS and MOAZZAM THERE HAS BEEN ALOT OF TALK ABOUT THE "GRAMMAR" RELATIVE TO AL-QURAN. MY QUESTION IS THIS, ISTHE GRAMMAR 100% ACCURATE? YES: EXPLAIN NO: EXPLAIN Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 17/09/2011
 
QAMAR, MOAZZAM, NARGIS, NAEEM, DOES QAMAR AND AASTANA BLOG BELIEVE THE FOLLOWING ASSERTIONS TO THE TRUTH? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 27/09/2011
 
Mr. Aurangzaib: Who is responsible for detracking me and many others who left Ramazan Fasting, Namaz especially after reading your booklet"tahqeeq namaz o salat"at Aastana? are you not an instable personality as per your shufling record?? Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 27/09/2011
 
NARGIS, MOAZZAM, WAQAR, NAEEM, ET ALL IS WAHY OR EXTRINSIC OR INTRINSIC? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 29/09/2011
 
MOAZZAM, NARGIS, NAEEM, MUBASHIR, WAQAR, YOU PEOPLE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE SERIOUS ABOUT THIS....OR ARE YOU? PLEASE EXPLAIN! Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 30/09/2011
 
PEACE TO ALL, ACCORDING TO AL-QURAN, WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF...A GOD" (I'M NOT REFERRING TO ALLAH, BUT THE TERM GOD IN GENERAL )? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 02/10/2011
 
WHICH TAKES PRIORITY--TASREEF OVER GRAMMAR OR GRAMMAR OVER TASREEF? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION. Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 03/10/2011
 
What is the position of Athiest in Quran? Will Athiesm be practiced/ let exist in the Quranic Society? What difference it will make if oneself is Athiest? Question by: waseemameer From AUSTRALIA (SYDNEY) On 05/10/2011
 
PEACE TO ALL, MOAZZAM ASKS: CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROPHET AND MESSENGER PROPHET, NABI AND NABI RASOOL? Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 07/10/2011
 
what the harm if someone perform rituals. Will Allah ask him why you did rituals. If one perform rituals and other dont then whats the difference they make on society. Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 09/10/2011
 
PEACE TO ALL, DOES AASTANA BLOG REPRESENT: DEEN AL-ISLAM OR... DEISM. DHULQARNAIN- Question by: ARCHILOCUS From UNITED STATES On 15/10/2011
 
Dear Sir, Please explain meanings of 27/42 to 44 Thanx Question by: M Aslam From PAKISTAN (GOJRA) On 30/11/2011
 
Dear sir, Please put some light on the death of Hazrat Hussain according to the history. and Dr sahib, we all are waiting for complete quranic translation Question by: matifsaeed From PAKISTAN (LAHORE) On 30/11/2011
 
PEACE NARGIS AND MOAZZAM. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADDRESS THIS MAJOR CONTRADICTION: TELL US CLEARLY, IS YOUR POSITION STATEMENT "A" OR STATEMENT "B"? DHULQARNAIN- Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 01/12/2011
 
PEACE TO ALL, TO MY QUESTION: DO THE MALAIKA DO WRONG/EVIL? NAEEM SHEIKH ANSWERED: YES, SEE 2:34 IS HE CORRECT? DHULQARNAIN: Question by: DHULQARNAIN From UNITED STATES On 15/12/2011
 
WHY QURANISTS ARE DIVIDED LIKE RELIGIOUS MULLAHS IF THEY CLAIM THE RIGHTEOUS ONES ??? Question by: Mujeeb From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 01/02/2012
 
What do you guys think - Why some children around the world are born with defects like, blindness, handicapped, infected with acute diseases (HIV) etc., Why do they suffer their life for no fault of their own? Why does God do this them? Question by: sameermoopa From INDIA On 05/04/2012
 
Dear Members: Pls share ur thought on:'What is the 'purpose' of our existence?' Quran says 'And I didn't create the jinn and mankind except to do my IBADATH'(51:56). If this is the purpose, what does IBADATH mean here? Why God wants our Ibadath? Question by: sameermoopa From INDIA On 09/04/2012
 
can some one enlighten us about the real concept of SALAWATULLAH ALA NABI.Thanks. Question by: naeem sheikh From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 20/04/2012
 
Assaam,iam Nasir(India)iam understanding salah by your explanation tell me about vazu in surah maaida Question by: ameet From INDIA (ANANTAPUR) On 26/04/2012
 
thank you a better answer that Salath is not namaz so what is reality of namaz how this exist Question by: ameet From INDIA (ANANTAPUR) On 28/04/2012
 
assalam,was Allah speak with insan directly ? Question by: ameet From INDIA (ANANTAPUR) On 04/05/2012
 
agar zina najayij talluq nahi tho najayij talluq ke baare me quran me kya hai? Question by: ameet From INDIA (ANANTAPUR) On 15/05/2012
 
dea members. If someone do misdeeds(do wrong things) than he repent and ask toba, will he still have to suffer his misdeeds in this life. Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 10/06/2012
 
respected qamar sir, what about here after life(Akhirath) in sight of quran? Question by: ameet From INDIA (ANANTAPUR) On 17/06/2012
 
Respected Dr Zaman. I am reading your translation of the Quran with great interest and I thank you for your efforts. I would like to understand the concept of Akhirat in light of the Quran. Salaam. Question by: Riaz From UNITED KINGDOM (LONDON) On 11/08/2012
 
If soam is not traditional "Roza" then why the later part of ayat relating to soam says that the women should complete the count after finishing with their menses? Question by: ansasausam From UNITED STATES (FLUSHING) On 27/10/2012
 
What is Shetan, can shetan affects the desire of Momin? Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 11/12/2012
 
What "the Aastana research forum says about the Atheists ??? Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 13/12/2012
 
What is the true sense of Duaa' mentioned at many places in Quran and been used as an effective tool in almost all religions? Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 13/12/2012
 
salaam Dr sahib.pls explain the meaning of نسخ ? and 2:104? Question by: saidalavi ansari From INDIA (KERALA) On 17/12/2012
 
Salam Dr sahib pls Explain verse 2/106 مَا ننسخ من آية Question by: saidalavi ansari From INDIA (KERALA) On 19/12/2012
 
ABOUT EISA "death/up lifting to heaven" Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 01/04/2013
 
Some body asked about the meaning of سِقَايَةَ الْحَاجِّ وَعِمَارَةَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ . Here it is answer to the question asked. Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 23/04/2013
 
Some body asked that, how does it affect "the understanding of qura'an" as well practical life of people if Eisa borne with OR with out father???????? Question by: moazzam From PAKISTAN (ISLAMABAD) On 25/04/2013
 
Dr sahib salam pls pls pls explain 2:233 والوالدات يرضعن أولادهن.......................... Question by: saidalavi ansari From INDIA (KERALA) On 01/05/2013
 
who is muthllakth المطلَّقات Question by: saidalavi ansari From INDIA (KERALA) On 01/05/2013
 
Hijab Jilbaab/ by Moazzam Islam Question by: Nargis From BARBADOS (KIO BATAO?) On 18/06/2013
 
Respected Dr, Qamar Zaman sb some one says mostly the trad trans is what is written in Quran but what U r bringing is new verbal meanings of Words,why should we choose those words as Quran is Mubin and it explains itself.e.g what U describe of halal. Question by: shaista From PAKISTAN (LAHORE) On 08/12/2013
 
Kindly send Dr. Qamar Zaman's US phone number to me at AsarSyed@gmail.com Question by: Asarulislam From UNITED STATES (LOS ANGELES) On 12/06/2014
 
I wrote many times in the form on the site, but no one answers. So, I have a translation of the book "THE TRUTH ABOUT SALAT. Dr. Qamar Zaman" to Russian. Do you want to put it on the site? Question by: onlyquran01 From RUSSIAN FEDERATION (RUSSIA) On 04/07/2014
 
Respected Aastana team, please could you kindly point me to the surah and ayat number of the two ayats referenced on page 9 & 10 of Sarchashma Hidayat sirf Al Quran? Thanks in advance for your assistance. Question by: Riaz From UNITED KINGDOM (LONDON) On 27/12/2014
 
Aoa, dear aastana members can you kindly translate surah ikhlaas exposing its main theme Question by: Abdul Hadi Saqib From PAKISTAN (LAHORE) On 14/03/2015
 
مسلمانوں کی نمازوں کے زرتشتی ماخظ Dowanload Question by: Adnan From PAKISTAN On 17/04/2015
 
i have asked two questions please Dr Q z sab post my 2nd question in this blog too. if it is not possible to post it here. then please reply to me via email. as i am really confused about the soum. why ghulam ahmed perwez sab couldn't explain? Question by: kanju swat From UNITED KINGDOM (LONDON) On 11/11/2015
 
aap jo quran ki wazahat karte hein 'kia aap khuda(god) per yaqeen(belief) rakhte hein? oor han(yes)! to aap ka aqeda(belief) kia hai? Question by: sufyanarif From PAKISTAN On 21/12/2015
 
Blog Home Question Explorer Member's Area Mission & Vision Join AASTANABLOG
© 2006-2010 Aastana e Research and Understanding Quran. All Rights Reserved
www.aastana.com