If necessary, perhaps the discussion concerning the meaning and purpose of "aql" can be continued here, so as to not totally derail the other thread.
> If you will refer to my first post regarding this topic...I clearly defined the Islamic definition of Aql.
> Aql is cognotive thinking which includes intuition. The act of thought is the Aql we're talking about
qiyam,
I'm trying to distill the discussion going on here so I can better understand what is being said.
So, is "aql" to be defined as "the act of thought"?
The issue at hand is whether emotion or aql is the underlying force which defines our action and our humanity? And whether the one or the other is the path which must be taken to know the Supreme?
The nature of "Aql"
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Contradiction strikes again.
Mr. Qiyam is now saying:
“---most do not know how to use their aql”
“God gave humans the ability to understand everything...doesn't mean everyone wants to seek out that knowledge to understand. This is the difference.”
So now it is not a divine privilege given only to the Syedna. Qiyam can now use his opinion of the "Aql" and decide who can interpret the Quran(?)
Mr. Qiyam is now saying:
“---most do not know how to use their aql”
“God gave humans the ability to understand everything...doesn't mean everyone wants to seek out that knowledge to understand. This is the difference.”
So now it is not a divine privilege given only to the Syedna. Qiyam can now use his opinion of the "Aql" and decide who can interpret the Quran(?)
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Godbless,
It is only a contradiction..if you quote snippets of what I wrote.
"God gave humans the ability to understand everything...doesn't mean everyone wants to seek out that knowledge to understand. This is the difference.”
--Most don't use their aql..and so are hindered by their ownselves in seeking to understand.
"So now it is not a divine privilege given only to the Syedna. Qiyam can now use his opinion of the "Aql" and decide who can interpret the Quran(?)"
---I am not sure how you connected to two to begin with. Interpreting the Quran is not a divine privilege as you intend. Allah excels some over others in understanding knowledge..including the Quran. The future Imam is taught by the current Imam the fullest aspects of knowledge...including the tawil of the Quran. Just as Maulana Ali was taught by the Prophet. So to is the future Dai taught by the current Dai the knowledge base to the fullest extent. This is a lot harder than you think. Think about a college exam...and how one must train for it for months at a time. College courses are elementary when it comes to just understanding the concepts of higher ilm of Islam.
It is only a contradiction..if you quote snippets of what I wrote.
"God gave humans the ability to understand everything...doesn't mean everyone wants to seek out that knowledge to understand. This is the difference.”
--Most don't use their aql..and so are hindered by their ownselves in seeking to understand.
"So now it is not a divine privilege given only to the Syedna. Qiyam can now use his opinion of the "Aql" and decide who can interpret the Quran(?)"
---I am not sure how you connected to two to begin with. Interpreting the Quran is not a divine privilege as you intend. Allah excels some over others in understanding knowledge..including the Quran. The future Imam is taught by the current Imam the fullest aspects of knowledge...including the tawil of the Quran. Just as Maulana Ali was taught by the Prophet. So to is the future Dai taught by the current Dai the knowledge base to the fullest extent. This is a lot harder than you think. Think about a college exam...and how one must train for it for months at a time. College courses are elementary when it comes to just understanding the concepts of higher ilm of Islam.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Qiyam,
Excellent analogy, though it refutes your very belief.
"Think about a college exam...and how one must train for it for months at a time. "
Everyone does, not just the Chancellor. Knowledge is not "future Imam is taught by the current Imam ", but to be shared by all, as in a college.
"College courses are elementary when it comes to just understanding the concepts of higher ilm of Islam."
I agree, and the knoweldge should be relayed to all(as in a college), instead of just the "future Imam"...right ?
I thing you are finally getting the point without realizing it. Knowledge is to be shared, especially Ilm, not to be passed on. It creates the very problem that we are discussing; mindless recitations, Qadam Bosi's, mataams-on-demand, etc.
It is not Ilm.....
Excellent analogy, though it refutes your very belief.
"Think about a college exam...and how one must train for it for months at a time. "
Everyone does, not just the Chancellor. Knowledge is not "future Imam is taught by the current Imam ", but to be shared by all, as in a college.
"College courses are elementary when it comes to just understanding the concepts of higher ilm of Islam."
I agree, and the knoweldge should be relayed to all(as in a college), instead of just the "future Imam"...right ?
I thing you are finally getting the point without realizing it. Knowledge is to be shared, especially Ilm, not to be passed on. It creates the very problem that we are discussing; mindless recitations, Qadam Bosi's, mataams-on-demand, etc.
It is not Ilm.....
Re: The nature of "Aql"
serendipity: I can only say that Ismaili tradition partakes of GNOSTICISM in its understanding of Aql. To KNOW (gnosis) without being able to put that into words is the very heart of the life-changing experience. Aql has been equated with the "Philosopher's Stone", the power of Transmutation. It is the root of all the SIDDHI powers in Eastern systems -- supernatural abilities which are UNDERSTOOD, although not capable of being EXPLAINED! Western mystic Jacob Boehme calls it "Magic", and says it is a Universal principle: "Everything is accomplished by it. It is of the essence of THOUGHT, tinctured by LOVE."
Ismaili tradition perhaps, but definitely not the current Bohra implementation. The epistemology of the Muslim philosopher was discursive, whereas the 'Arif on the other hand firmly upheld knowledge by presence (ilmul hudhuri). The Bohra "sabaq" way of channelling so-called knowledge fits neither category. As for "Love", we'll see plenty of that in Tanzania's game reserve.
"Mutilate not even a rabid dog." -- Ali quoting the Prophet in the former's last will.
Ismaili tradition perhaps, but definitely not the current Bohra implementation. The epistemology of the Muslim philosopher was discursive, whereas the 'Arif on the other hand firmly upheld knowledge by presence (ilmul hudhuri). The Bohra "sabaq" way of channelling so-called knowledge fits neither category. As for "Love", we'll see plenty of that in Tanzania's game reserve.
"Mutilate not even a rabid dog." -- Ali quoting the Prophet in the former's last will.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Godbless
"Excellent analogy, though it refutes your very belief."
---You got the idea...but you didn't get the point. Analogies are for our assistance...not for actuality. Allah in the Quran describes certain in a method a common reader would understand...for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. Thus we don't take the analogy directly as proof...but as a means to understand. However, this is what many sunni and oriental scholars have taken as a method to support their ideas.
"Everyone does, not just the Chancellor. Knowledge is not "future Imam is taught by the current Imam ", but to be shared by all, as in a college."
---This is partially true. Knowledge is shared...it is the person who must be able to comprehend that knowledge to go any further.
"I agree, and the knoweldge should be relayed to all(as in a college), instead of just the "future Imam"...right ?"
---Again your assuming everyone has the same ability to comprehend this knowledge. I mentioned we all have the same physical ability...it is use of that ability that makes the difference. Majority of people have the ability to start to run a marathon...but it is the conditioning of the person before hand that allows them to finish. This is true for the attainment of knowledge. How can one understand the true purpose of salat...if he/she doesn't perform it.
"Knowledge is to be shared, especially Ilm, not to be passed on. It creates the very problem that we are discussing; mindless recitations, Qadam Bosi's, mataams-on-demand, etc."
---Knowledge is always shared...but you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. So thus your "everything for everyone" can not possibly happen. Only a small percentile of the US population get into college..after the first year...half of those drop out. If it your theory of learning doesn't work in college with secular knowledge...why would it with religious knowledge.
On the other point...mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! Maybe you should figure out the purpose of the things you call "mindless" before talking as though you have a clue.
"Excellent analogy, though it refutes your very belief."
---You got the idea...but you didn't get the point. Analogies are for our assistance...not for actuality. Allah in the Quran describes certain in a method a common reader would understand...for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. Thus we don't take the analogy directly as proof...but as a means to understand. However, this is what many sunni and oriental scholars have taken as a method to support their ideas.
"Everyone does, not just the Chancellor. Knowledge is not "future Imam is taught by the current Imam ", but to be shared by all, as in a college."
---This is partially true. Knowledge is shared...it is the person who must be able to comprehend that knowledge to go any further.
"I agree, and the knoweldge should be relayed to all(as in a college), instead of just the "future Imam"...right ?"
---Again your assuming everyone has the same ability to comprehend this knowledge. I mentioned we all have the same physical ability...it is use of that ability that makes the difference. Majority of people have the ability to start to run a marathon...but it is the conditioning of the person before hand that allows them to finish. This is true for the attainment of knowledge. How can one understand the true purpose of salat...if he/she doesn't perform it.
"Knowledge is to be shared, especially Ilm, not to be passed on. It creates the very problem that we are discussing; mindless recitations, Qadam Bosi's, mataams-on-demand, etc."
---Knowledge is always shared...but you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. So thus your "everything for everyone" can not possibly happen. Only a small percentile of the US population get into college..after the first year...half of those drop out. If it your theory of learning doesn't work in college with secular knowledge...why would it with religious knowledge.
On the other point...mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! Maybe you should figure out the purpose of the things you call "mindless" before talking as though you have a clue.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Slightly offtopic for this conversation here but wotthehell. Just yesterday I was having a conversation with a former fundie Christian now turned atheist into how he became went all the way to the other side. A bit of it involved the use of reason. This guy was totally into Christianity, and he attended atheist meetings in the hope of showing atheists the error of their ways.
So one day an atheist posed a question to him regarding his contention that the concept of 'God' did not make much sense. And posed a few questions, which he wasn't able to answer. So he went back to his church and the minister there told him, "A lot of people don't understand geometry, does that mean geometry doesn't exist?". Armed with newfound piece of knowledge, he went supercharged back to the next meeting, and confronted the atheist. He told his part of the argument, and then the atheist guy, cool as ice, comes back with, "Agreed, but would you condemn someone to eternal torture for not understang geometry?" And it was then that he said the first chink in his theistic armor showed up.
Personally, this is the part of Islam/Christianity/Judaism I have major problems with. God is supposed to be ever loving, ever compassionate and ever forgiving, but he doesn't seem to mind throwing you to eternal torture for minor transgressions. He is supposed to be the Father, what kind of a parent would throw their child into hellfire for ever.
-N
So one day an atheist posed a question to him regarding his contention that the concept of 'God' did not make much sense. And posed a few questions, which he wasn't able to answer. So he went back to his church and the minister there told him, "A lot of people don't understand geometry, does that mean geometry doesn't exist?". Armed with newfound piece of knowledge, he went supercharged back to the next meeting, and confronted the atheist. He told his part of the argument, and then the atheist guy, cool as ice, comes back with, "Agreed, but would you condemn someone to eternal torture for not understang geometry?" And it was then that he said the first chink in his theistic armor showed up.
Personally, this is the part of Islam/Christianity/Judaism I have major problems with. God is supposed to be ever loving, ever compassionate and ever forgiving, but he doesn't seem to mind throwing you to eternal torture for minor transgressions. He is supposed to be the Father, what kind of a parent would throw their child into hellfire for ever.
-N
Re: The nature of "Aql"
> God is supposed to be ever loving, ever compassionate and ever forgiving, but he doesn't seem to mind throwing you to eternal torture for minor transgressions. He is supposed to be the Father, what kind of a parent would throw their child into hellfire for ever.
So, I agree, and this bothers me as well (at least with regards to atheists and unbelievers), mainly because I feel that so much of why a given person believes in their particular faith tends to be an accident of upbringing. Can't speak for Christianity, but I have read dissertations on the Qur'an that claim Hell is more akin to the Christian purgatory, and not in fact a permanent fate. I'm pretty sure that this is not the majority Muslim view, and it's interesting to see people using the Qur'an to back it up. If I can figure out where I saw this essay is, I'll post it...
Also, my Jewish friends tell me that Judaism has no hell.
And - what exactly are these "minor transgressions" for which the Qur'an consigns people to hell?
Salaam
So, I agree, and this bothers me as well (at least with regards to atheists and unbelievers), mainly because I feel that so much of why a given person believes in their particular faith tends to be an accident of upbringing. Can't speak for Christianity, but I have read dissertations on the Qur'an that claim Hell is more akin to the Christian purgatory, and not in fact a permanent fate. I'm pretty sure that this is not the majority Muslim view, and it's interesting to see people using the Qur'an to back it up. If I can figure out where I saw this essay is, I'll post it...
Also, my Jewish friends tell me that Judaism has no hell.
And - what exactly are these "minor transgressions" for which the Qur'an consigns people to hell?
Salaam
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Well, what an argument. God says repent and I will forgive all your sins. Sin again, ask for forgiveness and I will forgive again. Keep doing the same thing but make sure that before you die, you have been forgiven.
God has shown everything that is right and wrong. What do we do then.. keep doing what is wrong for as long as we live, do nothing that God tells us to, inspite of that God makes sure that we get to enjoy this life (well quite a few of us ungrateful ones do), he makes sure that at least our mothers go to work so that we may climb the ladder of evolution, he tells us about all the wonderful things waiting for us in heaven if we follow the path, and what do we do in return, reject him just because he says that he will punish us if we do wrong.
We want a God that will not punish us no matter what we do.
Too bad, rejecting God just because he is going to punish us is not going salvage us.
God has shown everything that is right and wrong. What do we do then.. keep doing what is wrong for as long as we live, do nothing that God tells us to, inspite of that God makes sure that we get to enjoy this life (well quite a few of us ungrateful ones do), he makes sure that at least our mothers go to work so that we may climb the ladder of evolution, he tells us about all the wonderful things waiting for us in heaven if we follow the path, and what do we do in return, reject him just because he says that he will punish us if we do wrong.
We want a God that will not punish us no matter what we do.
Too bad, rejecting God just because he is going to punish us is not going salvage us.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
So Anajmi, if I live my life like I want to without a care for what Quran says and repent just before dying, you are saying everything will be hunky dory?
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Qiyam,
"for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. "
- This is simply a cop out. We are not catering to idiots here, and they exist in every community and belief. So let's leave them out of this equation (understanding that you need the extreme to attempt to prove your point).
"---This is partially true. Knowledge is shared...it is the person who must be able to comprehend that knowledge to go any further."
- conversely, the person comprehending that knowledge must be able to communicate that knowledge to those who are not idiots.
" you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. "
- yet another cop out. You are assuming that this source has the correct knowledge and that everyone else is an idiot.
"mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! "
Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer. (please refer to the mindless recitation comment)
"for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. "
- This is simply a cop out. We are not catering to idiots here, and they exist in every community and belief. So let's leave them out of this equation (understanding that you need the extreme to attempt to prove your point).
"---This is partially true. Knowledge is shared...it is the person who must be able to comprehend that knowledge to go any further."
- conversely, the person comprehending that knowledge must be able to communicate that knowledge to those who are not idiots.
" you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. "
- yet another cop out. You are assuming that this source has the correct knowledge and that everyone else is an idiot.
"mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! "
Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer. (please refer to the mindless recitation comment)
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Minor transgressions like
Not praying
Not fasting on a Day of Ramadan without excuse
Sex before marriage
Drinking
Making statues and pictures
Men wearing silk and gold
Eating pork
etc.
None of the above activities harm anyone. I do not see any reason why these, among other activities, should be prohibited.
Not praying
Not fasting on a Day of Ramadan without excuse
Sex before marriage
Drinking
Making statues and pictures
Men wearing silk and gold
Eating pork
etc.
None of the above activities harm anyone. I do not see any reason why these, among other activities, should be prohibited.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
nausicaa,
I think you're over-exaggerating your case. None of the activities you have listed are an instant hell-sentence. In fact, there is a hadith in which the Prophet is approached by a man who laments to him that he is an irredeemable sinner, and proceeds to narrate to him a series of gross sexual crimes that he has committed, on the order of rape, necrophilia, etc. For each one, the Prophet asks him whether his crime is greater than God, and finally the man realizes that nothing he does is beyond redemption.
There is another hadith in which God tells the Prophet he has forgiven an adultress her crime for giving a drink to a thirsty dog.
Whether or not you think any of these things are right or wrong, the point is that Islam is not a fire and brimstone religion, and does not expect the individual to be perfect by any means.
As for the "crimes" you have listed, I agree that many of them are harmless on a person to person level. Islam, however, is very much a creed addressing the individual's relationship to society, and therefore many of the rules, such as no drinking, exist to promote accord between individuals. Others, such as not fasting, are only "crimes" if you are a Muslim, and then only because as a Muslim you have taken a covenant which you are willfully breaking. This is no different than if you had made a promise to a person rather than God and went back on that.
Islam recognizes that it is possible to do wrong without being immoral and evil. Even the Prophet (though he was sinless) committed actions for which he was reprimanded by God...
I think you're over-exaggerating your case. None of the activities you have listed are an instant hell-sentence. In fact, there is a hadith in which the Prophet is approached by a man who laments to him that he is an irredeemable sinner, and proceeds to narrate to him a series of gross sexual crimes that he has committed, on the order of rape, necrophilia, etc. For each one, the Prophet asks him whether his crime is greater than God, and finally the man realizes that nothing he does is beyond redemption.
There is another hadith in which God tells the Prophet he has forgiven an adultress her crime for giving a drink to a thirsty dog.
Whether or not you think any of these things are right or wrong, the point is that Islam is not a fire and brimstone religion, and does not expect the individual to be perfect by any means.
As for the "crimes" you have listed, I agree that many of them are harmless on a person to person level. Islam, however, is very much a creed addressing the individual's relationship to society, and therefore many of the rules, such as no drinking, exist to promote accord between individuals. Others, such as not fasting, are only "crimes" if you are a Muslim, and then only because as a Muslim you have taken a covenant which you are willfully breaking. This is no different than if you had made a promise to a person rather than God and went back on that.
Islam recognizes that it is possible to do wrong without being immoral and evil. Even the Prophet (though he was sinless) committed actions for which he was reprimanded by God...
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Khairan,
If anything, your examples show God, or his minions at least, being fairly capricious while applying punishments. This does not inspire a lot of confidence in me. From your own example, a guy committing heinous sexual crimes was forgiven whereas Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death for writing a few words in a work of fiction.
The examples I picked to show you were picked from a list of 70 'major sins' according to Islam. It was quite funny to see something like wearing silk is in the same category as murdering another human.
-N
If anything, your examples show God, or his minions at least, being fairly capricious while applying punishments. This does not inspire a lot of confidence in me. From your own example, a guy committing heinous sexual crimes was forgiven whereas Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death for writing a few words in a work of fiction.
The examples I picked to show you were picked from a list of 70 'major sins' according to Islam. It was quite funny to see something like wearing silk is in the same category as murdering another human.
-N
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Godbless,
"for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. "
- This is simply a cop out. We are not catering to idiots here, and they exist in every community and belief. So let's leave them out of this equation (understanding that you need the extreme to attempt to prove your point).
--No I was not applying my statements for idiots...there are major islamic scholars that believe what I wrote (namely wahabi). Secondly, that form of example is used in most of the major fiqhs (except shia) that allow qiyas (analogy) as a legimate from of fiqh. Remember Hanafis, based on analogy believe the Quran was created.
"..conversely, the person comprehending that knowledge must be able to communicate that knowledge to those who are not idiots."
---as you quote me below I stated that the person who has the knowledge must pass in a manner that another person can understand it. This doesn't mean the persons are idiots as you stated. It maybe just a manner of put complex concepts in simple words that a laymen can understand...this doesn't make the laymen an idiot.
" you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. "
"yet another cop out. You are assuming that this source has the correct knowledge and that everyone else is an idiot."
---regarding your response...no it is not a copt out...but the standard method of teaching throughout the world. Do have a clue of what your talking?
I wrote: "mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! "
Your response:"Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer. (please refer to the mindless recitation comment)"
---This response shows your lack of either respect or knowledge of both Islam and the Quran. 98% of the muslims in this world read the Quran daily...and 90% don't speak arabic. By the way, the other 8% who do speak arabic...don't claim to totally understand what they read either. We all must be idiots too...as you refer to them and you must be the only wise one among them.
"for example Allah says He sees and hears everything. Well from this some muslims have come to the conclusion that Allah has eyes and ears. "
- This is simply a cop out. We are not catering to idiots here, and they exist in every community and belief. So let's leave them out of this equation (understanding that you need the extreme to attempt to prove your point).
--No I was not applying my statements for idiots...there are major islamic scholars that believe what I wrote (namely wahabi). Secondly, that form of example is used in most of the major fiqhs (except shia) that allow qiyas (analogy) as a legimate from of fiqh. Remember Hanafis, based on analogy believe the Quran was created.
"..conversely, the person comprehending that knowledge must be able to communicate that knowledge to those who are not idiots."
---as you quote me below I stated that the person who has the knowledge must pass in a manner that another person can understand it. This doesn't mean the persons are idiots as you stated. It maybe just a manner of put complex concepts in simple words that a laymen can understand...this doesn't make the laymen an idiot.
" you must get it from a source that knows correct knowledge and can pass it to you in a method you can understand. "
"yet another cop out. You are assuming that this source has the correct knowledge and that everyone else is an idiot."
---regarding your response...no it is not a copt out...but the standard method of teaching throughout the world. Do have a clue of what your talking?
I wrote: "mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! "
Your response:"Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer. (please refer to the mindless recitation comment)"
---This response shows your lack of either respect or knowledge of both Islam and the Quran. 98% of the muslims in this world read the Quran daily...and 90% don't speak arabic. By the way, the other 8% who do speak arabic...don't claim to totally understand what they read either. We all must be idiots too...as you refer to them and you must be the only wise one among them.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
"mindless recitation! Wow, you've nerve. Does that include the Quran too! "
Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer.
I agree 100%!
38/29 "(It is) a Book We have revealed to you abounding in good that they may ponder over its verses, and that those endowed with understanding may be mindful."
Yes, it does. Unless you are reading it to get further meaning from it that you didn't previously understand. You could of course swing your head back and forth and recite it in it's entirety daily if you prefer.
I agree 100%!
38/29 "(It is) a Book We have revealed to you abounding in good that they may ponder over its verses, and that those endowed with understanding may be mindful."
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Muslim,
Actually did you even read what you agreed to verses the ayat you quoted.
The book has verses for you to ponder...and those with knowledge to be mindful of.
Those with knowledge know what the verses mean and should be cogniscent of them. The general public should ponder them...not actually knowing there meaning. In a verse, Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know.
According to what you agreed to (via comments of Godbless) laymen don't need to go to those with knowledge...but learn on your own...USING YOUR OWN LOGIC.
Actually did you even read what you agreed to verses the ayat you quoted.
The book has verses for you to ponder...and those with knowledge to be mindful of.
Those with knowledge know what the verses mean and should be cogniscent of them. The general public should ponder them...not actually knowing there meaning. In a verse, Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know.
According to what you agreed to (via comments of Godbless) laymen don't need to go to those with knowledge...but learn on your own...USING YOUR OWN LOGIC.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Qiyam,
What you have stated is your OWN OPINION. The Qur'an CLEARLY tells the reader to PONDER over its verses which are in CLEAR ARABIC. You are an advocate of MINDLESS RECITATION as propagated by a sick old man who SHOOTS elephants for pleasure!
What you have stated is your OWN OPINION. The Qur'an CLEARLY tells the reader to PONDER over its verses which are in CLEAR ARABIC. You are an advocate of MINDLESS RECITATION as propagated by a sick old man who SHOOTS elephants for pleasure!
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Muslim,
Please don't post half truths. You know very well Allah tells the muslim reading the Quran to seek knowledge from those who know if they don't understand. 85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading. The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic..verses the one's who does...for the mere fact that they are reading the words of Allah.
Please don't post half truths. You know very well Allah tells the muslim reading the Quran to seek knowledge from those who know if they don't understand. 85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading. The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic..verses the one's who does...for the mere fact that they are reading the words of Allah.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Nausicaa,
that is correct, but see Allah is not going to be fooled by the likes of you. When death comes, we won't even know, that is the reason why the time when you are alive, you need to be asking for forgiveness and repenting for your sins. (well, you can try to fool Allah by repenting without actually meaning to repent)
that is correct, but see Allah is not going to be fooled by the likes of you. When death comes, we won't even know, that is the reason why the time when you are alive, you need to be asking for forgiveness and repenting for your sins. (well, you can try to fool Allah by repenting without actually meaning to repent)
Re: The nature of "Aql"
nausicaa,
the minor transgressions that you mention above, why do you even consider them minor transgressions? why consider them as transgressions at all?
the minor transgressions that you mention above, why do you even consider them minor transgressions? why consider them as transgressions at all?
Re: The nature of "Aql"
You know very well Allah tells the muslim reading the Quran to seek knowledge from those who know if they don't understand.
The key words are as you put it, "if they don't understand." After all it was the Prophet that brought us the Quran. This does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it encourage mindless recitation.
85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading.
You don't have to speak fluent Arabic to learn the meaning of the Quran. And if the majority did engage in mindless recitation without learning any meaning, that wouldn't make it right!
The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic..verses the one's who does...for the mere fact that they are reading the words of Allah.
The non-Arab has a harder task in reading and understanding the Arabic Quran and therefore the reward is in doing it is greater. Again, this does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it mean that all non-Arab readers should engage in mindless recitation!
Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do.
The key words are as you put it, "if they don't understand." After all it was the Prophet that brought us the Quran. This does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it encourage mindless recitation.
85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading.
You don't have to speak fluent Arabic to learn the meaning of the Quran. And if the majority did engage in mindless recitation without learning any meaning, that wouldn't make it right!
The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic..verses the one's who does...for the mere fact that they are reading the words of Allah.
The non-Arab has a harder task in reading and understanding the Arabic Quran and therefore the reward is in doing it is greater. Again, this does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it mean that all non-Arab readers should engage in mindless recitation!
Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do.
-
humble_servant_us
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:01 am
Re: The nature of "Aql"
peace be upon u all......
well long time back i had posted a mail to the mumineen list but it was rejected saying that "bohras do not encourage reading Quran with traslation"..here's something to sum it up.....
Holy Qur'an is my name.
I am a book in elegant prints,
To know my name, here are some hints.
Rich in cover and nicely bound.
In hearts of Muslims I am rarely found.
High on a shelf, I am kept
Forgotten there, I am left.
With respect I do get lots of kiss,
But my main point... is what they always miss.
In a melodious voice they recite me,
Neglecting the message inside me.
At times I am used for phoney swear,
My true use is very very rare.
A miracle I am.... that can change the world,
All one has to do is understand my word.
I have wisdom, I have treasure,
So much so..... There is no measure.
I'm your saviour, I'm your guide,
But who's there to follow the bide.
Right from wrong is my fame,
HOLY QU'RAN IS MY NAME.
hs
well long time back i had posted a mail to the mumineen list but it was rejected saying that "bohras do not encourage reading Quran with traslation"..here's something to sum it up.....
Holy Qur'an is my name.
I am a book in elegant prints,
To know my name, here are some hints.
Rich in cover and nicely bound.
In hearts of Muslims I am rarely found.
High on a shelf, I am kept
Forgotten there, I am left.
With respect I do get lots of kiss,
But my main point... is what they always miss.
In a melodious voice they recite me,
Neglecting the message inside me.
At times I am used for phoney swear,
My true use is very very rare.
A miracle I am.... that can change the world,
All one has to do is understand my word.
I have wisdom, I have treasure,
So much so..... There is no measure.
I'm your saviour, I'm your guide,
But who's there to follow the bide.
Right from wrong is my fame,
HOLY QU'RAN IS MY NAME.
hs
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Muslim,
"The key words are as you put it, "if they don't understand." After all it was the Prophet that brought us the Quran. This does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it encourage mindless recitation."
---Firstly, I believe Godbless used the term mindless...which he/she deemed on anyone who reads the Quran without understanding what they are reading...which about 85-90% of muslims do. I am sure they are cogniscent that they are reading the Quran...and this is enough for them at the time.
"You don't have to speak fluent Arabic to learn the meaning of the Quran. And if the majority did engage in mindless recitation without learning any meaning, that wouldn't make it right!"
---I beg you pardon...an arab person without college level education will not understand the Quran...so how is one who only knows a few words? I didn't advocate the last part you mentioned. I clearly stated it for the person to seek knowledge...this would include knowledge of the verses of the Quran. My objection was to the method and correlation that Godbless promoted and that everyone can learn at the same levels.
"Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do."
--No..I also did not. Please quote one sentence in which I said so. We should always be seeking knowledge and understanding...but it doesn't invalidate when a muslim recites the Quran daily who doesn't speak arabic.
"The key words are as you put it, "if they don't understand." After all it was the Prophet that brought us the Quran. This does not invalidate in any way the CLEAR MESSAGE of the Quran, nor does it encourage mindless recitation."
---Firstly, I believe Godbless used the term mindless...which he/she deemed on anyone who reads the Quran without understanding what they are reading...which about 85-90% of muslims do. I am sure they are cogniscent that they are reading the Quran...and this is enough for them at the time.
"You don't have to speak fluent Arabic to learn the meaning of the Quran. And if the majority did engage in mindless recitation without learning any meaning, that wouldn't make it right!"
---I beg you pardon...an arab person without college level education will not understand the Quran...so how is one who only knows a few words? I didn't advocate the last part you mentioned. I clearly stated it for the person to seek knowledge...this would include knowledge of the verses of the Quran. My objection was to the method and correlation that Godbless promoted and that everyone can learn at the same levels.
"Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do."
--No..I also did not. Please quote one sentence in which I said so. We should always be seeking knowledge and understanding...but it doesn't invalidate when a muslim recites the Quran daily who doesn't speak arabic.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Qiyam,
Your thinking is so flawed that I do not know where to begin.
Again, your arguments do not reflect reason, just your faith in a human who is appointed by his father, which is a legacy that you and I won't see the "Royal Family" stray from. I am not a betting man, but would you like to bet ? I will take you up on it. Just spare me the BS about knowledge being the criteria. Getting back to the point....knowledge ?
"In a verse, Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know."
But Allah didn't designate "those who know", you did ! More importantly "those who know" indicates that he meant more than one person, but Dai's daddy only appointed one. Can you refer me to another ?
"(via comments of Godbless) laymen don't need to go to those with knowledge...but learn on your own...USING YOUR OWN LOGIC"
My own logic isn't too bad and I trust it. Do you trust yours? Obviously not, then why should I ?
""Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do."--No..I also did not. Please quote one sentence in which I said so. "
1. "The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic.." = mindless recitation
2. "an arab person without college level education will not understand the Quran" = mindless recitation
3. "85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading" = mindless recitation
4. "Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know."
But you say that they don't have to understand Arabic, to read that statement. Is this not the same as saying (in Arabic to someone whos doesn't understand it ...) " Thank you for calling God if you don't understand Arabic press 167 !
.....where to now ? Qiyam, Muslim First, Anajmi, Aga Khan, Osama Bin Laden...!
No wonder Islam is in crisis and in desperate search for an identity.....
Your thinking is so flawed that I do not know where to begin.
Again, your arguments do not reflect reason, just your faith in a human who is appointed by his father, which is a legacy that you and I won't see the "Royal Family" stray from. I am not a betting man, but would you like to bet ? I will take you up on it. Just spare me the BS about knowledge being the criteria. Getting back to the point....knowledge ?
"In a verse, Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know."
But Allah didn't designate "those who know", you did ! More importantly "those who know" indicates that he meant more than one person, but Dai's daddy only appointed one. Can you refer me to another ?
"(via comments of Godbless) laymen don't need to go to those with knowledge...but learn on your own...USING YOUR OWN LOGIC"
My own logic isn't too bad and I trust it. Do you trust yours? Obviously not, then why should I ?
""Let me repeat again.. the Quran does NOT advocate MINDLESS RECITATION, you do."--No..I also did not. Please quote one sentence in which I said so. "
1. "The Prophet has stated that there is 10 times greater rewards for reading the Quran if you don't know arabic.." = mindless recitation
2. "an arab person without college level education will not understand the Quran" = mindless recitation
3. "85%-90% of the muslim don't speak arabic...what do you think they are reading" = mindless recitation
4. "Allah tells the laymen to seek understanding from those who know."
But you say that they don't have to understand Arabic, to read that statement. Is this not the same as saying (in Arabic to someone whos doesn't understand it ...) " Thank you for calling God if you don't understand Arabic press 167 !
.....where to now ? Qiyam, Muslim First, Anajmi, Aga Khan, Osama Bin Laden...!
No wonder Islam is in crisis and in desperate search for an identity.....
Re: The nature of "Aql"
nausicaa,
>If anything, your examples show God, or his minions at least, being fairly capricious while applying punishments.
I will agree that on the "minions" part.
>From your own example, a guy committing heinous sexual crimes was forgiven whereas Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death for writing a few words in a work of fiction.
Again, it was the Prophet who told the man God would forgive his crimes. It was decidedly NOT the Prophet who passed a death sentence on Rushdie. There is another story about the Prophet pardoning a young Jewish servant girl who tried to kill him by poisoning his food. When caught, she explained that she hated him for destroying her clan and exiling them (they betrayed the Muslims to the Quraysh in Medina) -- the Prophet let her go because he said he understood her grievance and could not fault her for it.
> The examples I picked to show you were picked from a list of 70 'major sins' according to Islam. It was quite funny to see something like wearing silk is in the same category as murdering another human.
Again, I agree wholeheartedly. One thing that I have truly come to believe about Islam is that a sin is not the equivalent of a moral failing. Alcohol consumption, for instance, can lead to immoral acts but is not in and of itself immoral. It is forbidden because its potential risks are deemed to outweigh its costs.
I have noticed in conversations with my atheist friends that they cannot, as I do, separate the actions of a religion's followers from the message of the religion itself. Because they do not believe in a Divine Being, and do not accept the existence of His plan or intentions, for them a religion is simply a manifestation of the society at the time. Is this true for you?
I, on the other hand, believe that Islam can exist, even if not a single soul on Earth is practicing it. God defines the Way of Submission, not men.
salaams
>If anything, your examples show God, or his minions at least, being fairly capricious while applying punishments.
I will agree that on the "minions" part.
>From your own example, a guy committing heinous sexual crimes was forgiven whereas Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death for writing a few words in a work of fiction.
Again, it was the Prophet who told the man God would forgive his crimes. It was decidedly NOT the Prophet who passed a death sentence on Rushdie. There is another story about the Prophet pardoning a young Jewish servant girl who tried to kill him by poisoning his food. When caught, she explained that she hated him for destroying her clan and exiling them (they betrayed the Muslims to the Quraysh in Medina) -- the Prophet let her go because he said he understood her grievance and could not fault her for it.
> The examples I picked to show you were picked from a list of 70 'major sins' according to Islam. It was quite funny to see something like wearing silk is in the same category as murdering another human.
Again, I agree wholeheartedly. One thing that I have truly come to believe about Islam is that a sin is not the equivalent of a moral failing. Alcohol consumption, for instance, can lead to immoral acts but is not in and of itself immoral. It is forbidden because its potential risks are deemed to outweigh its costs.
I have noticed in conversations with my atheist friends that they cannot, as I do, separate the actions of a religion's followers from the message of the religion itself. Because they do not believe in a Divine Being, and do not accept the existence of His plan or intentions, for them a religion is simply a manifestation of the society at the time. Is this true for you?
I, on the other hand, believe that Islam can exist, even if not a single soul on Earth is practicing it. God defines the Way of Submission, not men.
salaams
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Anajmi,
How do you know what Allah would do? Are you considering yourself Allah by telling what he HSOULD be doing?
I was putting up the term 'minor' transgressions by how a lot of society would view them. Like when I asked a few muslims whether wearing silk was prohibited they answered in the negative. I don't consider any of them as transgressions at all. In fact, I have indulged in all the activities I mentioned.
-N
How do you know what Allah would do? Are you considering yourself Allah by telling what he HSOULD be doing?
I was putting up the term 'minor' transgressions by how a lot of society would view them. Like when I asked a few muslims whether wearing silk was prohibited they answered in the negative. I don't consider any of them as transgressions at all. In fact, I have indulged in all the activities I mentioned.
-N
Re: The nature of "Aql"
nausicaa,
You are quite foolish to say the least.
You are proud of your sinful life.
I swear by Allah that all your pride will turn to horror and terror on the Day of Judgement.
You are quite foolish to say the least.
You are proud of your sinful life.
I swear by Allah that all your pride will turn to horror and terror on the Day of Judgement.
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Dear Godbless,
Again, please learn a little history before mocking my comments. The verse you reference was meant for the Prophet and Imams...the Imams used many Dais to teach the muminin. Those who know is a reference to the Prophet and Imams. This is why the Dai al'Mutlaq is always teaching the ilm of Ahle Muhammad (the Imams).
And if you note...Allah designated the Prophet to select Ali as his Wasi...so yes Imamate is ordained by Allah. This is basic shiah theology..the first pillar of walayat.
Regarding "mindless recitation"...a term you coined...in every reference you quote of me...I didn't say was mindless recitation..YOU have correlated that!
To recite in arabic is a large feat in itself. As the mumin seeks knowledge...what they recite has more and more meaning. At base level the person knows he/she is reciting the words of Allah (which is tawhid itself). So from the start...it is not mindless recitation. To you it maybe...but than again, your last post indicated you don't understand the first pillar of Islam. So how can you determine if someone is mindless or not? Is this what your LOGIC lead to you?
Again, please learn a little history before mocking my comments. The verse you reference was meant for the Prophet and Imams...the Imams used many Dais to teach the muminin. Those who know is a reference to the Prophet and Imams. This is why the Dai al'Mutlaq is always teaching the ilm of Ahle Muhammad (the Imams).
And if you note...Allah designated the Prophet to select Ali as his Wasi...so yes Imamate is ordained by Allah. This is basic shiah theology..the first pillar of walayat.
Regarding "mindless recitation"...a term you coined...in every reference you quote of me...I didn't say was mindless recitation..YOU have correlated that!
To recite in arabic is a large feat in itself. As the mumin seeks knowledge...what they recite has more and more meaning. At base level the person knows he/she is reciting the words of Allah (which is tawhid itself). So from the start...it is not mindless recitation. To you it maybe...but than again, your last post indicated you don't understand the first pillar of Islam. So how can you determine if someone is mindless or not? Is this what your LOGIC lead to you?
Re: The nature of "Aql"
Qiyam,
"So how can you determine if someone is mindless or not?"
I am not determining whether someone is mindless or not. I am speaking of the act of recitation without understanding, which my logic tells me is mindless recitation.
"So how can you determine if someone is mindless or not?"
I am not determining whether someone is mindless or not. I am speaking of the act of recitation without understanding, which my logic tells me is mindless recitation.