Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Warilla

Qur'an Vs personal morals

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Warilla said:

Well this is a fundamental difference in sects. The basic stances about Allah's justice

1) Allah is all wise and just therefore anything he decrees is just regardless of our own view/interpretation.

2) Allah is all wise and just there fore can not decree anything that is unjust by the standards he has set which we understand.

The Interaction between Ph. Musa and khizr can be used to argue both sides.

I have fall more into the first view. So if anything has evidence I try to put my own views/social programming/prejudice to one side.

God commands only good; but what is truly good does not always coincide with what we, as fallible human beings, perceive as good. Our perceptions are not always accurate.

There is an interesting story which Jalaluddin Rumi tells: An ant was creeping across a Persian carpet in a mosque. The ant complains to God, saying: ‘What is this, these bumps, and strange colors and patterns. What a futile thing to have made.’ But, of course the carpet maker, looking at it from above can see the patterns and the purpose of it, and can see that the whole thing is perfect and good.

Edited by SirajDin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept everything in the Qur'an. The only thing that disrupts my mind slightly is the thought of muta being used by some people to overcome race barriers. Even though muta is not prevalent in our society. This is just a thought. 

I grew up in the west where race has always been a barrier in our society. Now the thought of some people using muta to forget about the problems and scars we have endured in our society without addressing them is a difficult thing to fathom.

Edited by Murtaza1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SirajDin said:

What I find unpleasant in such translations is the anti-traditional spirit; the idea that all commentators/mufassirun, throughout fourteen centuries (many of whom had devoted their whole lives to the study of the subtleties of the Arabic language) simply got it wrong; and we have now discovered that the true meaning of اضربوهنّ is not to 'hit them' but 'to go to bed with them'.  

The problem is with sectarian bias, which is why there are differences in translations.

Take for example this verse:

فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لِذَنبِكَ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ مُتَقَلَّبَكُمْ وَمَثْوَاكُمْ - 47:19

Sahih International translation:
So know, [O Muhammad], that there is no deity except Allah and ask forgiveness for your sin and for the believing men and believing women. And Allah knows of your movement and your resting place.

Shakir translation:
So know that there is no God but Allah, and, ask protection for your fault and for the believing men and the believing women; and Allah knows the place of your returning and the place of your abiding.

 

Here as well:

فَاصْبِرْ إِنَّ وَعْدَ اللَّهِ حَقٌّ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لِذَنبِكَ وَسَبِّحْ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّكَ بِالْعَشِيِّ وَالْإِبْكَارِ - 40:55

Sahih International translation
So be patient, [O Muhammad]. Indeed, the promise of Allah is truth. And ask forgiveness for your sin and exalt [ Allah ] with praise of your Lord in the evening and the morning.
 
Shakir Translation
Therefore be patient; surely the promise of Allah is true; and ask protection for your fault and sing the praise of your Lord in the evening and the morning.

 

Big difference in translations here:

لِّيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِن ذَنبِكَ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكَ وَيَهْدِيَكَ صِرَاطًا مُّسْتَقِيمًا - 48:2

Sahih
That Allah may forgive for you what preceded of your sin and what will follow and complete His favor upon you and guide you to a straight path
 
Shakir
That Allah may forgive your community their past faults and those to follow and complete His favor to you and keep you on a right way,

 

Then it gets inconsistent. Shakir translates وَاسْتَغْفِرْ as forgiveness in other verses, such as this:

12:29 - O Yusuf! turn aside from this; and (O my wife)! ask forgiveness for your fault, surely you are one of the wrong-doers.

24:62 - ... give permission to whom you please of them and ask forgiveness for them from Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

 

So one can definitely not rely on one translation. I tend to cross reference now n then.

If you can understand Urdu, check this debate out between a Quranist and a Mufti specialising in Arabic. Their first topic is related to translations and inconsistency, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jOjBIXje7A

Edited by Jaane Rabb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Warilla said:

I agree but my point is due to my upbringing in the west and society drilling into you it's not acceptable in any circumstance. I will never be at complete ease with the rule but that's the whole point how many of us can overlook our own bias and follow Islam and how many of us try to find excuses and change Islam to suite our society.

As a side note, Jalaluddin Rumi mentions that the "rebellious wife" in this verse symbolises the al-nafs al-ammarah, the rebellious voice of passion and unreason within each of us; the nafs has to be subjected to the intellect/reason. When this nafs rebels, it is a problem that has to be dealt with.

The Qur'an recommends three methods for a disciplining a rebellious nafs (or wife); and each method is adequate for a particular type of soul. Sometimes, admonition is all that is needed. At other times, one should deprive the soul of pleasures; still at other times, one should implement some violence.

People like Rumi, while offering deeper spiritual commentaries on verses such as these, nevertheless did not reject the literal/outward meaning of the verses; and this is something that I admire about their approach to interpretation.   

Edited by SirajDin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

Yes, “hitting” means to hit with something soft—not your own hands. 

To prove what you said we can refer to the verse of tatammum which also uses the same word for hitting. Now will we smack the soil for Tayammum lol 

 

(Do correct me if I’m wrong)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ashvazdanghe 

Brother I noticed your confused imogen to my comment.

Maybe your country (Iran) has not experienced the friction of multiculturalism because it's such a conservative country and liberalism doesn't rise to compete.

In the United Kingdom race riots are common. Even though I don't know when the last race riot happened here because I don’t watch or read the news but racism has always been around.

I do not object to the practice of muta. I was just referring to the thought of people using muta in my society here in the United Kingdom to justify racism. Even though muta is not prevalent in the United Kingdom or maybe some people just don't practice it openly, that's their personal choice. 

I was just saying if people did use muta as a bridge to overcome racial tensions then it would be out context, desrespectful and wrong without addressing the issues and scars that people have experienced from racisim since the 1970's in the United Kingdom. 

As you can tell I am quite different than other Muslims here in the United Kingdom because I talk about muta openly. 

Edited by Murtaza1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Ejaz said:

To prove what you said we can refer to the verse of tatammum which also uses the same word for hitting. Now will we smack the soil for Tayammum lol 

 

(Do correct me if I’m wrong)

So you agree you can strike your wife with same force you strike to Earth with in tayamum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think modern Muslims try to suger coat Islam. 

Remember Khalid bin Waleed killed a group. The Prophet denounced his actiones. Blood money was paid and then he participated in further jihads. 

What's the spin that we put on this to make our selves feel better ?

Edited by Warilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Warilla said:

I think modern Muslims try to suger coat Islam. 

My thoughts exactly. Same applies to offensive jihad, slavery and severe death penalties for homosexual acts, as we have seen in other threads. Things which by contemporary societal standards are seen negatively. But for the longest time have been part of Islamic jurisprudence. 

Sprinkling sugar, spice and all things nice may delude some non-Muslims but wont change centuries of scholarship. Anyone willing to research further will find all these seemingly uncomfortable rulings.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Warilla said:

So you agree you can strike your wife with same force you strike to Earth with in tayamum.

I didnt say I did... I’m a lay person, I don’t know the Islamic thesis in detail on this topic. I simply provided an argument that would support her contention. My heart tells me it’s wrong to strike your wife, or anyone for that matter.

That being said, the typical Muslim would not strike the Earth (or a turbah nauzubillah ) with the same intensity as King Kong strikes the ground :grin:

Have you ever thought about why some young Muslims (just talking in general) are discovering Islam by researching these arguments... why Muslims who haven’t even read the Qur'an are only researching the controversial aspects.. Perhaps it is the “post colonial masters” who are pushing this worldview of Islam.. Or perhaps it is the media?

masalam 

Edited by Ejaz
Turba is more general

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Warilla said:

I think modern Muslims try to suger coat Islam. 

Remember Khalid bin Waleed killed a group. The Prophet denounced his actiones. Blood money was paid and then he participated in further jihads. 

What's the spin that we put on this to make our selves feel better ?

Rest of All Khalid Ibn walleyed so called jihads happend during time of first caliph he was from last persons to Muslim when he understood that Prophet Muhammad (pbu) will have upper hand in future but he mainly helped for stablishing government of first caliph so all of his so called Jihad was void because it didn’t done by order of Prophet (pbu) & Imam Ali (a) 

if we were good at sugar coating Islam know we didn’t suffer from islamophobic groups in western countries 

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

 if we were good at sugar coating Islam know we didn’t suffer from islamophobic groups in western countries 

Some Muslims try but you can't suger coat the truth. The light of Islam always shines through no matter what society wants.

As for Khalid nice spin on the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Warilla said:

As for Khalid nice spin on the issue.

Yes we cannot say for sure how foreign policy would have been conducted under Ameer ul Mumineen (عليه السلام) 

Partly because a bulk of the time he was in office was occuppied with fighting against internal fitnah and civil wars. His forces were too busy against rebels rather than further expanding the territories.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should see Islamic thoughts and teachings in one whole system, any of lows or teachings are one element that is meaningless or incomplete without other elements.
there are some low like slavery and some solution for emergency situations that are not primal solutions
we must see these with other moral Islamic low and we will able to find pure Islamic teachings 

yes, we have slavery in Islam but when ? and in which situations?

we must mention this low in that period of time that slavery was one part of wars, it was a preventive factor that without this factor the opponent has more power, although Islam accepts this factor, but there are  many limitations and criteria, and Islam start a way to decrease this factor,

also, woman issue in Islam has a long story.
unfortunately, we zoom in some low to limit women but forget some other rights for them, and we forget that some laws are not the final way but that law is for some specific situations 

in brief word, we must mention followings to have a more accrued understanding if Islamic teaching :
1-Islam is one irreducible system, not isolated rules
2-Islam as the most perfect religion has the  plan for any situations
3-some rules are not primal and ultimate but for some occasion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...