Megathread The Islam Megathread

wibisana

still newbie
How come that, if Islam is THE way of life, of organizing society, economy, and whatnot...... so many countries basing (in a significant way) their society on Islam perform so much worse (on metrics such as economy, scientific innovation, etc) than the "degenerate" & "dysfunctional" liberal democracies?
Actually being poor in Islam have way advantages than being rich. Richness/wealth etc is just something that god loaned to us to be use/manage and distributed, just for example, orphans, extreem poor people etc is the rich responsibility, if you have money and didnt do zakat, infaq sodaqoh (charity), you will get in hell for sure. Being poor release your obligation of managing those richess

My point is you took islam, the main goal is not the world/earth/lifetime but the Akhirat/afterlife. So what you mentioned above (wealth, tech, etc) arent really motivation to practice Islam.
 

WT

#for the watch
This was already asked by dr_shadow and discussed in general.

But since it came up again in the other thread i'll ask again.



How come that, if Islam is THE way of life, of organizing society, economy, and whatnot...... so many countries basing (in a significant way) their society on Islam perform so much worse (on metrics such as economy, scientific innovation, etc) than the "degenerate" & "dysfunctional" liberal democracies?


With the only Islamic countries that have good economic results (but still not comparable in scientific achievements for example, among other things) being those that have insane amounts of the world's most important resource.
Because the Muslims today are a disunited mess. One person's version of Islam is different to someone else's.

The idea is that had we followed and implemented the original teachings of Muhammad then maybe we would have been okay - but we haven't.

I truly believe we are more backwards and more fundamentalist today than the Islam was in the Prophets time
 

dergeist

Well-Known Member
so many countries basing (in a significant way) their society on Islam perform so much worse (on metrics such as economy, scientific innovation, etc) than the "degenerate" & "dysfunctional" liberal democracies?

Probably because they don't follow the actual model (especially economically), the classical model birthed the golden age. They would need to break away from the all mighty dollar, and we know what happens if you do or try that. Also the Africans need to break away from France. Look at what they did to Timbuktu, a place which was the center of learning while Europe was "worshipping" the Pope.

A brief on Timbuktu


Traditionally, muslims were polymaths and some were specialists. The two traditions were taught together side by side, because the universe and what it contains is considered an ayah (a sign) of God. Muslims scientists used to research things and try to understand their nature and causal relationships. It wasn't like Pope said it = divine decree.

This (what you're seeing now) is quite cyclical, tbh, a certain school of zealots rose up and won the Caliph (Abbasid one over) and he started persecuting the scientists/scholars (Hanefi school adherents because they weren't and aren't anthromorphs) in the end they (the zealots) were busy arguing about petty things and Baghdad got sacked. Chaos came about until the Ottoman empire (another Hanefi school adherents) rose and restored order. Then came descendants of the zealot school of thought again and did the same (established SA) and Iran came into existence around the similar time. If the cycle continues like before we will see another golden age arise, hoepfully in our lifetimes. Especially, if the muslims embrace their scholastic tradition. Admittedly, I hold the view WW3 taking place in our lifetimes, so there's that.

You of all people should know nothing (creation in current form) lasts forever, look at what the Roman Empire was and what it (Italy) is today. Look at what Ancient Greece was and look at Greece today, look at the Persian Empire and Mauryan Empire. The current empire will also fall as the West is in a phase of decadence, imo, who rises to replace it is what interests me.
 
Last edited:

wibisana

still newbie
Islam has never been "backward" for the record... :doge
This claim is just stupid lel.
Let say we ignore backward shit that ISIS or Taliban done. And say they are not muslim

How can you defend backward law like hand amputation for aleged theft? What happen if you cut wrong person? Not like that you can attach it again perfectly
 

New Folder

Well-Known Member
This claim is just stupid lel.
Let say we ignore backward shit that ISIS or Taliban done. And say they are not muslim

How can you defend backward law like hand amputation for aleged theft? What happen if you cut wrong person? Not like that you can attach it again perfectly
let's start with the obvious, as we don't agree with those people. For me, Islam comes from the Prophet and his Household.
we disagree with our sunnis brothers in various things (Granted when I say Sunni-brothers here, I don't refer to trash like ISIS and what have you)


Now, for your question, there is no hand amputation. There are around 40+ conditions to be met, for all of them to be met is almost impossible to happen. Even if they were to happen, the hand in its entirety doesn't get chopped off, but the fingers from the right hand
since God said

وَأَنَّ ٱلْمَسَـٰجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا۟ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ أَحَدًۭا ١٨
"The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him."

and since the hands are needed for prayers and worship المساجد, they are not to be chopped off.

and IIRC, I have even read that only the fingertips that are to be chopped off (unless repeated assault of theft).
again, that's assuming all 40+ conditions are met...

----

even then, let's take the Miss Freedom & democracy (U.S) for example. Don't they like prison people for 40+ - 50+ years ?
I would argue losing some fingers/a hand is better than losing 40-50 years of your life...

unless you think they somehow can give him/her those years back. Why isn't that backward? :doge
 

wibisana

still newbie
let's start with the obvious, as we don't agree with those people. For me, Islam comes from the Prophet and his Household.
we disagree with our sunnis brothers in various things (Granted when I say Sunni-brothers here, I don't refer to trash like ISIS and what have you)


Now, for your question, there is no hand amputation. There are around 40+ conditions to be met, for all of them to be met is almost impossible to happen. Even if they were to happen, the hand in its entirety doesn't get chopped off, but the fingers from the right hand
since God said

وَأَنَّ ٱلْمَسَـٰجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا۟ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ أَحَدًۭا ١٨
"The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him."

and since the hands are needed for prayers and worship المساجد, they are not to be chopped off.

and IIRC, I have even read that only the fingertips that are to be chopped off (unless repeated assault of theft).
again, that's assuming all 40+ conditions are met...

----

even then, let's take the Miss Freedom & democracy (U.S) for example. Don't they like prison people for 40+ - 50+ years ?
I would argue losing some fingers/a hand is better than losing 40-50 years of your life...

unless you think they somehow can give him/her those years back. Why isn't that backward? :doge
وَٱلسَّارِقُ وَٱلسَّارِقَةُ فَٱقْطَعُوٓا۟ أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَآءًۢ بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَـٰلًا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
As for male and female thieves, cut off their hands for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.1
QS: 5:38

It is hand not finger

Way to be dishonest

Also im no expert in US law. But Afaik there is no 30-40 yrs for theft. What you might be refering is 3rd strike law. Theft usually have around 1-3 yrs punishment but if you repeat any crime 3 times in LA and some other state the criminal will get way harsher penalty (typically life in prisons), and this apply if previous crime have violent crime

The thing is, US didnt pretend this law come from govt and they can repeal it and yeah there is some movement to aboslish this unfair 3rd stike law. While if you strictly follow sharia and believe this law come from god you can ended up punishing wrongly accused person who you cant return their condition.

And dont say things like this never happened

She is only one among many that get executed for defending herself from constant abuse from her employer
 

New Folder

Well-Known Member
وَٱلسَّارِقُ وَٱلسَّارِقَةُ فَٱقْطَعُوٓا۟ أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَآءًۢ بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَـٰلًا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
As for male and female thieves, cut off their hands for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.1
QS: 5:38

It is hand not finger

Way to be dishonest
:amuse

5 ـ محمّد بن مسعود العيّاشي في ( تفسيره ) عن زرقان صاحب ابن أبي داود ، عن ابن أبي داود أنه رجع من عند المعتصم وهو مغتم ،
فقلت له في ذلك ـ إلى أن قال : ـ فقال : إن سارقا أقر على نفسه بالسرقة وسأل الخليفة تطهيره باقامة الحد عليه ، فجمع لذلك الفقهاء في مجلسه وقد أحضر محمد بن علي ( عليه السلام ) فسألنا عن القطع في أي موضع يجب أن يقطع ، فقلت : من الكرسوع لقول الله في التيمم : ( فإمسحوا بوجوهكم وأيديكم ) (1) واتفق معي على ذلك قوم ، وقال آخرون : بل يجب القطع من المرفق ، قال : وما الدليل على ذلك ؟ قال : لأن الله قال : ( وأيديكم إلى المرافق ) (2) ، قال : فالتفت إلى محمد بن علي ( عليه السلام ) فقال : ما تقول في هذا يا أبا جعفر ؟ قال : قد تكلم القوم فيه يا أمير المؤمنين ، قال : دعني مما تكلموا به ، أي شيء عندك ؟ قال : اعفني عن هذا يا أمير المؤمنين ، قال : أقسمت عليك بالله لما أخبرت بما عندك فيه ، فقال : أما إذ أقسمت علي بالله إني أقول : إنهم أخطأوا فيه السنة ، فان القطع يجب أن يكون من مفصل اصول الأصابع فيترك الكف ، قال : لم ؟ قال : لقول رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) : السجود على سبعة أعضاء : الوجه ، واليدين ، والركبتين ، والرجلين ، فاذا قطعت يده من الكرسوع أو المرفق لم يبق له يد يسجد عليها ، وقال الله تبارك وتعالى : ( وأن المساجد لله ) (3) ـ يعني به : هذه الأعضاء السبعة التي يسجد عليها ـ ( فلا تدعوا مع الله أحدا ) وما كان لله لم يقطع ، قال : فأعجب المعتصم ذلك فأمر بقطع يد السارق من مفصل الأصابع دون الكف . . الحديث .
[ 34691 ] 6 ـ وعن أبي محمد ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن إبراهيم بن عبد الحميد ، عن عامة أصحابه ، يرفعه إلى أمير المؤمنين ( عليه السلام ) أنه كان ( إذا قطع السارق ترك الابهام ) (1) والراحة ، فقيل له : يا أمير المؤمنين

تركت عليه يده ؟ قال : فقال لهم : فان تاب فبأي شيء يتوضأ ؟ لأن الله يقول : ( والسارق والسارقة فاقطعوا أيديهما ـ إلى قوله : ـ فمن تاب من بعد ظلمه وأصلح فان الله غفور رحيم ) (2) .


you are looking in a wrong way to how things actually work... :zaru

in this story, regarding the thief and cutting his hand, there is a disagreement on where the chopping should start. The first party, said it should start from the ankle since God said:

فَٱمْسَحُوا۟ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم
"then purify yourselves with clean earth by wiping your faces and hands"

the second party said it should be from the elbow since God Said:

فَٱغْسِلُوا۟ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْمَرَافِقِ
" wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows"


then Imam Mmuhaman bin Ali said what I already told you beforehand

وَأَنَّ ٱلْمَسَـٰجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا۟ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ أَحَدًۭا ١٨
"The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him."

since the worshipper needs his hand in the prayer.

you are looking at this ignorantly without taking into consideration that the thief could be Muslim and he must prayer regardless.
his, the punishment takes into consideration those things, otherwise, how would he do his prayer? :zaru


(note: there are more details in the aforementioned passage, I just picked those ones without the details, since the main point
and also I suck at translation. It's there for you if you want to translate it, however...)


Also im no expert in US law. But Afaik there is no 30-40 yrs for theft. What you might be refering is 3rd strike law. Theft usually have around 1-3 yrs punishment but if you repeat any crime 3 times in LA and some other state the criminal will get way harsher penalty (typically life in prisons), and this apply if previous crime have violent crime
The thing is, US didnt pretend this law come from govt and they can repeal it and yeah there is some movement to aboslish this unfair 3rd stike law. While if you strictly follow sharia and believe this law come from god you can ended up punishing wrongly accused person who you cant return their condition.

the list goes on. Meanwhile, as I said, Islam gives a huge amount of conditions to be met for such action to be taken in the first place. :zaru


She is only one among many that get executed for defending herself from constant abuse from her employer
for one my country & I don't really follow the same sect. :hm
and I am not sure what does murder have to do with theft... :ahmm

and I don't really know the details here so can't say much about what the government found out or thought about the case. :mlpshrug
 
Last edited:

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
Aren't there multiple Quran verses that say that "this book has been revealed to you in clear language" or other words to that effect?

Shouldn't that mean that God is never intentionally obscure? That the surface meaning of a verse is usually the intended meaning?

Of course, sometimes we may need to extend the spirit of a verse beyond the literal meaning. For example, when God forbids alcohol it presumably also means that Muslims are not allowed to use methamphetamine, even though meth wasn't invented in the Prophet's time.

But to say that a verse "really" means the exact opposite of the surface meaning seems like a stretch.
 

wibisana

still newbie
the list goes on. Meanwhile, as I said, Islam gives a huge amount of conditions to be met for such action to be taken in the first place. :zaru
Do you ignore the part of them being repeated offender? I am not gonna pretend the law is just, but u simply ignore it met same amount or bigger conditions since the perp actually have to do the theft so many times


ـ محمّد بن مسعود العيّاشي في ( تفسيره ) عن زرقان صاحب ابن أبي داود ، عن ابن أبي داود أنه رجع من عند المعتصم وهو مغتم ،
فقلت له في ذلك ـ إلى أن قال : ـ فقال : إن سارقا أقر على نفسه بالسرقة وسأل الخليفة تطهيره باقامة الحد عليه ، فجمع لذلك الفقهاء في مجلسه وقد أحضر محمد بن علي ( عليه السلام ) فسألنا عن القطع في أي موضع يجب أن يقطع ، فقلت : من الكرسوع لقول الله في التيمم : ( فإمسحوا بوجوهكم وأيديكم ) (1) واتفق معي على ذلك قوم ، وقال آخرون : بل يجب القطع من المرفق ، قال : وما الدليل على ذلك ؟ قال : لأن الله قال : ( وأيديكم إلى المرافق ) (2) ، قال : فالتفت إلى محمد بن علي ( عليه السلام ) فقال : ما تقول في هذا يا أبا جعفر ؟ قال : قد تكلم القوم فيه يا أمير المؤمنين ، قال : دعني مما تكلموا به ، أي شيء عندك ؟ قال : اعفني عن هذا يا أمير المؤمنين ، قال : أقسمت عليك بالله لما أخبرت بما عندك فيه ، فقال : أما إذ أقسمت علي بالله إني أقول : إنهم أخطأوا فيه السنة ، فان القطع يجب أن يكون من مفصل اصول الأصابع فيترك الكف ، قال : لم ؟ قال : لقول رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) : السجود على سبعة أعضاء : الوجه ، واليدين ، والركبتين ، والرجلين ، فاذا قطعت يده من الكرسوع أو المرفق لم يبق له يد يسجد عليها ، وقال الله تبارك وتعالى : ( وأن المساجد لله ) (3) ـ يعني به : هذه الأعضاء السبعة التي يسجد عليها ـ ( فلا تدعوا مع الله أحدا ) وما كان لله لم يقطع ، قال : فأعجب المعتصم ذلك فأمر بقطع يد السارق من مفصل الأصابع دون الكف . . الحديث .
[ 34691 ] 6 ـ وعن أبي محمد ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن إبراهيم بن عبد الحميد ، عن عامة أصحابه ، يرفعه إلى أمير المؤمنين ( عليه السلام ) أنه كان ( إذا قطع السارق ترك الابهام ) (1) والراحة ، فقيل له : يا أمير المؤمنين

تركت عليه يده ؟ قال : فقال لهم : فان تاب فبأي شيء يتوضأ ؟ لأن الله يقول : ( والسارق والسارقة فاقطعوا أيديهما ـ إلى قوله : ـ فمن تاب من بعد ظلمه وأصلح فان الله غفور رحيم ) (2) .


you are looking in a wrong way to how things actually work... :zaru

in this story, regarding the thief and cutting his hand, there is a disagreement on where the chopping should start. The first party, said it should start from the ankle since God said:

فَٱمْسَحُوا۟ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُم
"then purify yourselves with clean earth by wiping your faces and hands"

the second party said it should be from the elbow since God Said:

فَٱغْسِلُوا۟ وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْمَرَافِقِ
" wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows"


then Imam Mmuhaman bin Ali said what I already told you beforehand

وَأَنَّ ٱلْمَسَـٰجِدَ لِلَّهِ فَلَا تَدْعُوا۟ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ أَحَدًۭا ١٨
"The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him."

since the worshipper needs his hand in the prayer.

you are looking at this ignorantly without taking into consideration that the thief could be Muslim and he must prayer regardless.
his, the punishment takes into consideration those things, otherwise, how would he do his prayer? :zaru


(note: there are more details in the aforementioned passage, I just picked those ones without the details, since the main point
and also I suck at translation. It's there for you if you want to translate it, however...)
Bruh u always said you need hand to do salah, wtf. So people who born with no hand cant do salah? What kind of logic it is? So to facilitate it one cant get their hand removed or one that get their hand removed cant/may not do salah? Quran said to cut the hand, if one sect/country do only fingers doesnt change the fact Quran said to cut the hand


for one my country & I don't really follow the same sect. :hm
and I am not sure what does murder have to do with theft... :ahmm

and I don't really know the details here so can't say much about what the government found out or thought about the case. :mlpshrug
My point is this murder prove that all capital punishment, one that alter body or removing life have potentially punish innocence people and when that happened you cant simply re attach the hand or revive the person that is executed. Tell me how this is not backward than country that only use jail system such as EU or blue state (US that is ruled by Liberal Democrat party, not red state, they are ruled by republican that is Christian conservative)
 

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
I think the consensus among unbiased observers is that Sharia law, as found in the Quran, was progressive for its time, i.e. compared to the laws of the Eastern Roman Empire, Sasanian Persia, Tang dynasty China, and other cultures of the 7th century.

But that we have since progressed and become even more enlightened than the Prophet and his companions were.
 

dergeist

Well-Known Member
Aren't there multiple Quran verses that say that "this book has been revealed to you in clear language" or other words to that effect?

Shouldn't that mean that God is never intentionally obscure? That the surface meaning of a verse is usually the intended meaning?

Of course, sometimes we may need to extend the spirit of a verse beyond the literal meaning. For example, when God forbids alcohol it presumably also means that Muslims are not allowed to use methamphetamine, even though meth wasn't invented in the Prophet's time.

But to say that a verse "really" means the exact opposite of the surface meaning seems like a stretch.

Who said it's obscure, you're not a Qadhi (Islamic Judge), mufti (one who passes rulings) wakeel (lawyer), you've not spent your lifetime studying the law, it's transmission, application etc. So not sure why you're even discussing it or trying to tell people how it is or isn't?

You're the same guy who blows himself and his PhD in Chinese studies as your expertise on the field, yet have the nerve to tell others what the law means or how it's taken.

To give you a little context this is a commentary from one of the schools of jurisprudence and what principles they used to dervive the laws etc. And this is one of many on many jurisprudential works on this book and many there are many different works. And that involves years (many) of study under teachers (specialists in the field).



Imagine going to a university and telling a professor what the law, how it works, its spirit and how to interpret it. Even during the companions (may God be pleased with them) time only a few of them passed rulings because they were trained and qualified to do it.

I would advise some humility when talking about religious law, when not knowing the jurisprudence behind it. And no a wiki article doesn't qualify you.

What I will say to you is that you read it and understand God disapproves of something which is why punishment is mentioned, therefore the opposite is also true. That is what the laymen (general reader) is supposed to take.
 

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
I checked the criminal code of the Tang dynasty, promulgated 624 AD (conveninently in the Prophet's lifetime).

The Tang code gives five options for punishment:

1. Execution, either by hanging or beheading. Presumably beheading was for the more severe crimes, as it mutilates the body, which Confucians find especially degrading.

2. Exile, to a distance of either 2000 li, 2500 li, or 3000 li, depending on the severity of the crime.
[In 1949 the Communist Party defined a Chinese li as exactly 500 meters, in which case these distances would equal 1000 km, 1250 km, and 1500 km, respectively. But we don't know if the Tang dynasty li was the same length as the modern li]

3. Forced labor, for a period of 1 year, 1.5 years, 2 years, 2.5 years, or 3 years, depending on the severity of the crime.

4. Beating with a heavy rod, for either 60, 70, 80, 90, or 100 strikes, depending on the severity of the crime.

5. Beating with a light rod, for either 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50 strikes, depending on the severity of the crime.
 

wibisana

still newbie
That is, why does he appear to give commandments that (according to you) are not intended to be followed?
He said that? It is pretty big different than what was taught to me. Maybe the variation (him being shia, and me being came from Indonesia sunni, that might have differences than arab sunni to beign with)

What was taught to me, Torah, Bible etc was valid word from Allah, all prophet (from Adam, Moses, Abraham to Isa/Yesus) are actually Islam (not in the name of Islam but in sense of "" teaching or conceptnof monotheism of Allah).
What more accurate way of saying is God didnt lie, he "change his mind?" Or maybe plan this all along he just gave us update, With founding/transmission of Islam teaching to Muhammad means that all other Abrahamic religion should convert to this new teaching because here God claim that it is the last, new Improved and always up to date (didnt need revision)

Tho if New Folder really said that, Torah is never meant to be followed, it really shows how much he learn about it, and idk why he even want to argue about trinity, if he cant even explain this.

Aren't there multiple Quran verses that say that "this book has been revealed to you in clear language" or other words to that effect?

Shouldn't that mean that God is never intentionally obscure? That the surface meaning of a verse is usually the intended meaning?

Of course, sometimes we may need to extend the spirit of a verse beyond the literal meaning. For example, when God forbids alcohol it presumably also means that Muslims are not allowed to use methamphetamine, even though meth wasn't invented in the Prophet's time.

But to say that a verse "really" means the exact opposite of the surface meaning seems like a stretch.
This idk tbh. I wont pretend to know what he meant with clear language. Even my teacher warn me, "novice" should always consult to their superior when they want to learn the content of the Quran (not just recite it).


But to say that a verse "really" means the exact opposite of the surface meaning seems like a stretch.
This i never learn deep enough to find something mean other thing completely,
Tho my teacher said that i should consult "experts"/superior because verse usually (almost always) have asbab an nuzul (back story/reasons or what kind of conditions when the verse is "transmitted"), so yeah the literal meaning might differ a bit with what intended meaning, but afaik havent heard exact opposite.

Tho i have funny fun fact. It was my fave verse/surah back then
Al Alaq
In indonesian translation we translate it as 1st step of human is from blood clots, not eggs, or Zygote or embrio

In saheeh international translation it says clinging substance (maybe they change the literal translation to fit modern science)
Other that i check also usually drop out the blood parts, just say clots (again maybe it sounds stupid to say the blood part?)
 

wibisana

still newbie
Pretty funny that Shadow is being confronted by muslim who gambled on stocks.

Not that what deg said is not true, but still funny AF

Edit.
Btw shadow still has a point tho. He said obscure as in a sense as i said, you generally cant just translate and know the meaning of the word yourself. Maybe need better phrasing/wording
 

dergeist

Well-Known Member
Pretty funny that Shadow is being confronted by muslim who gambled on stocks.

Not that what deg said is not true, but still funny AF

@bold:
I'm glad you acknowledge the truth some of the time:dillon

As for stocks, we had this discussion is the past and buying and own parts of companies is halal. Whether you are told otherwise isn't my concern. Frankly, I'm not interested in rerunning it either. You can go back over it, iirc, it's in the stock exchange thread and reflect upon it.
 

wibisana

still newbie
Why does God lie in the Quran?

That is, why does he appear to give commandments that (according to you) are not intended to be followed?
And btw i said in above that Quran/Islam is an update (not technically a lie) fully from my knowledge

But if there is verse in Torah that said it suppose to be final/perfect no need an update so maybe he did lie.
 

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
Who said it's obscure, you're not a Qadhi (Islamic Judge), mufti (one who passes rulings) wakeel (lawyer), you've not spent your lifetime studying the law, it's transmission, application etc. So not sure why you're even discussing it or trying to tell people how it is or isn't?

You're the same guy who blows himself and his PhD in Chinese studies as your expertise on the field, yet have the nerve to tell others what the law means or how it's taken.

To give you a little context this is a commentary from one of the schools of jurisprudence and what principles they used to dervive the laws etc. And this is one of many on many jurisprudential works on this book and many there are many different works. And that involves years (many) of study under teachers (specialists in the field).



Imagine going to a university and telling a professor what the law, how it works, its spirit and how to interpret it. Even during the companions (may God be pleased with them) time only a few of them passed rulings because they were trained and qualified to do it.

I would advise some humility when talking about religious law, when not knowing the jurisprudence behind it. And no a wiki article doesn't qualify you.

What I will say to you is that you read it and understand God disapproves of something which is why punishment is mentioned, therefore the opposite is also true. That is what the laymen (general reader) is supposed to take.

I've told you, I'm something of a polymath.

:cat
 

New Folder

Well-Known Member
@New Folder

Why does God lie in the Quran?

That is, why does he appear to give commandments that (according to you) are not intended to be followed?
God doesn't lie... :confusedjr


- if you mean how hard they are to be followed in those cases, it's simply to prevent those crimes from happening. If they were to happen, and those conditions were to be met, the criminal will know that there is a punishment to follow. If they were to escape in this life, they aren't escaping in one after.

Aren't there multiple Quran verses that say that "this book has been revealed to you in clear language" or other words to that effect?

Shouldn't that mean that God is never intentionally obscure? That the surface meaning of a verse is usually the intended meaning?

Of course, sometimes we may need to extend the spirit of a verse beyond the literal meaning. For example, when God forbids alcohol it presumably also means that Muslims are not allowed to use methamphetamine, even though meth wasn't invented in the Prophet's time.

But to say that a verse "really" means the exact opposite of the surface meaning seems like a stretch.
there is a surface level, and there are deeper levels.


"He is the One Who has revealed to you ˹O Prophet˺ the Book, of which some verses are precise—they are the foundation of the Book—while others are elusive.1 Those with deviant hearts follow the elusive verses seeking ˹to spread˺ doubt through their ˹false˺ interpretations—but none grasps their ˹full˺ meaning except Allah. As for those well-grounded in knowledge, they say, “We believe in this ˹Quran˺—it is all from our Lord.” But none will be mindful ˹of this˺ except people of reason."


Hence, for us, it's important to take said knowledge from the Prophet & his Household specifically.
the ones who are ought to be followed are the Imams (after the prophet), as they explained all type of things in said regard...

Do you ignore the part of them being repeated offenders? I am not gonna pretend the law is just, but u simply ignore it met same amount or bigger conditions since the perp actually have to do the theft so many times
Son, there are tens of thousands of cases in the U.S of all ages going to prison for an enormous amount of years. A lot of cases, they end up being innocent on top of that. If you prefer western "justice" more power to you. :oldshrug

for me, I believe the Islamic way is better off than the west.

Bruh u always said you need hand to do salah, wtf. So people who born with no hand cant do salah? What kind of logic it is? So to facilitate it one cant get their hand removed or one that get their hand removed cant/may not do salah? Quran said to cut the hand, if one sect/country do only fingers doesnt change the fact Quran said to cut the hand
:tiredpepe

what do those who are born with defects have to do with anything?
we are talking about a physically-well adult who stole something here. In this case, you cannot take his full hand, only the 4 fingers from
the right hand.

if someone has birth defects they are excused by default. Don't know why you thought it was a good idea to bring such an example...


Already explained the law from the Quran. :edu

(1 / 5) أعلم الناس 379 - رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله): إني تارك فيكم أمرين إن أخذتم بهما لن تضلوا: كتاب الله عز وجل، وأهل بيتي عترتي. أيها الناس، اسمعوا وقد بلغت أنكم ستردون علي الحوض، فأسألكم عما فعلتم في الثقلين، والثقلان كتاب الله جل ذكره وأهل بيتي، فلا تسبقوهم فتهلكوا، ولا تعلموهم فإنهم أعلم منكم (4).

"and the people of my house, so do not precede them, so you will perish, and do not teach them, for they are more knowledgeable than you"


I am happy to inform you that the Prophet's Household is more knowledgable than you, and know best of the Quran and God's law. :catsadfeels

My point is this murder prove that all capital punishment, one that alter body or removing life have potentially punish innocence people and when that happened you cant simply re attach the hand or revive the person that is executed. Tell me how this is not backward than country that only use jail system such as EU or blue state (US that is ruled by Liberal Democrat party, not red state, they are ruled by republican that is Christian conservative)

*speaking in general here, and not to the case you specifically listed*


O believers! ˹The law of˺ retaliation is set for you in cases of murder—a free man for a free man, a slave for a slave, and a female for a female.1 But if the offender is pardoned by the victim’s guardian,2 then blood-money should be decided fairly3 and payment should be made courteously. This is a concession and a mercy from your Lord. But whoever transgresses after that will suffer a painful punishment.

There is ˹security of˺ life for you in ˹the law of˺ retaliation, O people of reason, so that you may become mindful ˹of Allah˺.


the capital punishment for murder is indeed to secure the community and the rest of people. If the one who killed someone else, got killed, that will scare the rest of commenting the crimes.

you mentioned the west, will guess what? How many mass shotting happened already, in this year alone?
Last I checked, it wasn't us who suffered from those mass-shottings, no? (not including War-zone, altho even those countries seems safer than the U.S at this point)


Are you saying it's important to let the country go loose to save a criminal's feelings? :laugh

Heck, even the criminal in this case, still has a way out as well. What else do you want?

one that alter body or removing life have potentially punish innocence people

I already told you that there are over 40+ conditions to be met.
one of which is removal of any doubt. If there is a doubt that the thief is innocent/was confused..etc, his/her hand's fingers are not to be chopped off. :zaru

4 ـ ارتفاع الشبه : ومع وجودها لا يقطع السارق لقوله (ع) : ( ادرأوا الحدود بالشبهات ) (1) . ومثال ذلك اذا توهم فرد اخذ المال ظاناً انه ملكه ، ثم تبين انه ملك الغير ، فانه لا يقطع بسبب وجود الشبهة .\\

 

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
He said that?

The argument between you two is that the Quran says "chop their hands off", but Folder says this doesn't really mean "chop their hands off". In fact, there is no realistic situation where anyone would actually end up with their hand chopped off.

That would mean God said "chop their hands off" even though he didn't actually mean "chop their hands off". So God lied, in a sense.
 

dr_shadow

Moderator
Moderator
Hence, for us, it's important to take said knowledge from the Prophet & his Household specifically.
the ones who are ought to be followed are the Imams (after the prophet), as they explained all type of things in said regard...

How many Imams are there?
 

New Folder

Well-Known Member
Then why do Zaidis believe that there are 5 and the Ismailis that there are 7?

And if I want to become a Shia Muslim, how can I objectively determine which one is correct?
As far as we are concerned, the prophet mentioned all 12 by their names.
and mentioned that they are 12

There will be twelve successors (khalifas) after my death, all of them from the .
In some versions, amir (lit. 'commander') or qayyim (lit. 'guardian') or Imam appear instead of kalipha. The version cited by (d. 275/889) adds that the Islamic community would be united during the reign of these twelve successors. Another version predicts that anarchy and turmoil would prevail after their reign. Another version compares these twelve successors to the twelve leaders (al-nuqaba) of . argues that this hadith was in circulation during the reign of the Umayyad (r. 724–743), long before the reported (ghayba) of the twelfth and final Shia in 260/874.

As far as I am aware, the Sunnis also agree with this narrative, but they don't know who those 12 are, nor do they agree with us on them.
meanwhile, for us we have several hadiths with their exact names. :catshrug
 

New Folder

Well-Known Member
Why is some information that is essential to Muslim life found in ahadith and not in the Quran itself? Why can't the Quran contain everything a Muslim needs to know conveniently in one place?
it does. Altho that more in the تآويل (Tauweel) than the tafseer.
altho it's likely wouldn't make sense/ be apparent to you, such as
"Indeed, the number of months ordained by Allah is twelve—in Allah’s Record"

as Quran uses metaphor in verses as well.

with that being said, since you like reading so much, perhaps you could spare some time to read in their sirah(?) سيرة


------------

on side note: this laptop will drive me crazy, why are all the keys all over the place and different from the older one :catflip :reeee:reeee:reeee
 
Top Bottom