The New Islam

[Peace Within]

Assalamulaikum,

A new Islam? Redefine Islam? This is a very interesting thread, indeed. As for those who think they can redefine Islam, please give me supportive evidence and how you can change words of a 1400 years old prophetic revelation. What is - simply is.

Peace Within
------------
Admin of faithoffreedom.topicboard.net

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Assalamulaikum,

A new Islam? Redefine Islam? This is a very interesting thread, indeed. As for those who think they can redefine Islam, please give me supportive evidence and how you can change words of a 1400 years old prophetic revelation. What is - simply is.

Peace Within
------------
Admin of faithoffreedom.topicboard.net

Welcome to the forum Peace Within.

If you wouldn't mind, could you tell our members more about yourself on our intro thread. Completely voluntary - though we like to get to know something about our new members

Back to the topic - the question isn't so much about "changing the words" of the Quran, but rather focusing on the spiritual message it offers, instead of the ritualistic one that most of us grow up with. I must also point out that most Islamic scholars are in agreement that we do not have an absolutely clear understanding of what the Quran says, due to the difficulties in interpreting classical Arabic, and therefore I support searching for interpretations beyond the traditional ones - such as the translation of a particular verse that deals with the treatment of wives by an Iranian American scholar, Laleh Bakhtiar:

Though some translators render the word in question as "beat," Bakhtiar believes "go away" more closely conveys the meaning. Because Muslims are taught to read the Quran in Arabic, English translations are used only as supplements. There is no single authority that governs whether a translation is valid.

BackyardConservative: The Sublime Quran

P.S: The site I linked to isn't one I tend to agree with, but I did think that the synopsis of Bakhtiars efforts was one of the better ones available.

 

[Spring Onion]

Yup, that is what I said.

You are analyzing the effects of islam on you as a muslim. You have an understading of islam.

Now try to use the same understanding of islam and think that you are not a muslim, say a christian or hindu. Analyze the effects when you are in
i)islamic country
ii)non-islamic country.

From a completely theoritical standpoint, what will be the effects on you.

And how on earth you understood or misunderstood that Islam hindus or christian or any non-Muslim is being asked to follow Islam and hence leads to affects on him.

The affects of Islam in a non-Islamic country will only arise (if there are any), by Islamo phobic steps that are taken just in haste due to anti-Islam views.

 

[Spring Onion]

Assalamulaikum,

A new Islam? Redefine Islam? This is a very interesting thread, indeed. As for those who think they can redefine Islam, please give me supportive evidence and how you can change words of a 1400 years old prophetic revelation. What is - simply is.

Peace Within
------------
Admin of faithoffreedom.topicboard.net

That is what i was wondering when read the title of the thread.

I believe there is need to understand Islam with unbais mind and heart.
And someone from India (intrestingly they being hindu even dont know their religion completly and jump into to every other thread about Islam defining and interperting Islam their way) question Islam being complete code of life.

Why not, to understand Islam as complete code of life one needs to read each and every word with its real context.

 

[Peace Within]

Welcome to the forum Peace Within.

If you wouldn't mind, could you tell our members more about yourself on our intro thread. Completely voluntary - though we like to get to know something about our new members

Back to the topic - the question isn't so much about "changing the words" of the Quran, but rather focusing on the spiritual message it offers, instead of the ritualistic one that most of us grow up with. I must also point out that most Islamic scholars are in agreement that we do not have an absolutely clear understanding of what the Quran says, due to the difficulties in interpreting classical Arabic, and therefore I support searching for interpretations beyond the traditional ones - such as the translation of a particular verse that deals with the treatment of wives by an Iranian American scholar, Laleh Bakhtiar:


]BackyardConservative: The Sublime Quran

P.S: The site I linked to isn't one I tend to agree with, but I did think that the synopsis of Bakhtiars efforts was one of the better ones available.

Salaam,

Of course I'll give a brief description of myself (and my sole purpose in life). I know Laleh Bakhtiar very well. I have also done research in these areas. You're right about how the translations cannot be perfect, because I, someone who knows a good amount of Arabic understands that one word - lets take the word Toufadhoul for example - can mean many things. It translates into english as the following: please sit down, please be seated, seat yourself, hurry, come in, welcome, be comfortable. This can be understood without conjegating the word from it's infinitive form.

Giving difference in opinion in how the translation of the Quran should be registered - is only a matter of observation. I feel learning Arabic progressively has taught me to better understand the Quran. Yet alone, Arabic has not solved my problem. Current day Arabic is based on a 1200 year change in the language due to the many different bedouin tribes that inhabit Saudi. I have lived in Saudi Arabia for quite some time, so I understand the culture, the spirits, and the religion of the people. Suprisingly, there are 14 million Arab Coptic Christians - it's quite a 'hush hush' part of the Saudi Peninsula. It's important that one be aquainted with Quraishi Arabic, which I hope to soon inshallah learn.

I don't agree with all the translations myself (there has always been a mistranslation) but I do feel that the spirit of Islam hasn't been the same since our Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) left this world. However, I see a rise in the Islamic faith. According to American and Euro Census, Islam is the fastest growing religion (in those particular regions).

Spirituality is a personal facet, which can be felt only through personal means. It does not have to become part of the larger social structure. That's as much as I have to say today. Inshallah I'll write a bit of myself on the new members board. I feel welcome here, Alhamdolilah.

Peace Within
------------
Admin of faithoffreedom.topicboard.net

 

[Samudra]

Though some translators render the word in question as "beat," Bakhtiar believes "go away" more closely conveys the meaning.

A very positive way of looking at it. Earnest attempts at rationalizing and making the Quran compatible to our modern world.

But frankly, what in your personal opinion are the chances of Quran prescribing beating a wife? It was pretty normal in medieval Arabia and Mohammad belonged to that period.

Godspeed to those trying to re-interpret but I believe this will end up as mere sugarcoating.It will take a lot of imagination to guess nice translations for a lot of uncomfortable verses.

Honestly, the Quran should been seen in isolation of its "divine origin". It should be read from the perspective of a rationalist. It should not be seen as infallible.

 

[Spring Onion]

A very positive way of looking at it. Earnest attempts at rationalizing and making the Quran compatible to our modern world.
But frankly, what in your personal opinion are the chances of Quran prescribing beating a wife? It was pretty normal in medieval Arabia and Mohammad belonged to that period.

Godspeed to those trying to re-interpret but I believe this will end up as mere sugarcoating.It will take a lot of imagination to guess nice translations for a lot of uncomfortable verses.

Honestly, the Quran should been seen in isolation of its "divine origin". It should be read from the perspective of a rationalist. It should not be seen as infallible.

And how can you claim the whoever had translated the Quran first in other language from Arabic is right ????

Do you have any proof for whatever interpretation, that statisfy your ego against Islam, is all authentic ???


in other words you believe in the interpretation which suites your views right ??


As far medieval Arabia, Hindus were the one who used to burry their daughters alive wasnt it ????

There is no incident quoted in History not even by Western writers which suggests that Prophet (PBUH) ever beaten his wives.

 

[HK-47]

I think this wife beating issue is one of our religion's gray areas along with some others;and we need one single standard interpretation for them instead of making various comments about such "uncomfortable "verses.

 

[IndianMunda]

And how can you claim the whoever had translated the Quran first in other language from Arabic is right ????

Do you have any proof for whatever interpretation, that statisfy your ego against Islam, is all authentic ???


in other words you believe in the interpretation which suites your views right ??


As far medieval Arabia, Hindus were the one who used to burry their daughters alive wasnt it ????

There is no incident quoted in History not even by Western writers which suggests that Prophet (PBUH) ever beaten his wives.

I agree with you that sati pratha or any other related traditions are not at all accepted in the modern world even if religion says, which simply means change in old religious thoughts and induct new modern way of living life.

Any religious script like manu shashtra from hindu dharam or any other script from any religion can not be accepted fully in this modern era, but I can understand where ever religion is very powerful, people fears to against it which is really sad.

 

[Samudra]

And how can you claim the whoever had translated the Quran first in other language from Arabic is right ????

You've got to be kidding me! Show me all the available translations and point out which translation of Quran explicitly bans all forms of slavery or beating women.

Even if slavery is approved of in a symbolic manner - the idea is outdated by a century. Humans have moved beyond that. We've had the will to abolish slavery in toto. However, God did not seem interested 1400 years ago.

Apparently, the socio-economic situations had him constrained. For the sake of all the nice things attributed to God by all religions - hey, I expected a little more authority and love for humans from him.

Think about it - A God - He loves us all so much - yet kills kids with cancer, blinds them, amputates them and watches kids getting molested by humans in hundred all across the world. I don't see any love from God.

If I had the power to stop every crime against a kid or a woman in the world - I'd stop everything in a jiff. Not stand back and watch. Wont you do the same?

That much compassion is left in every human mind. However, God - it appears is a lot more slow.

People give me the excuse that God will punish them in hell. We're all deluding ourselves. We have no proof for God or hell or any of his punishments.

We are cowards. We don't want to take the responsibility of taking forward our civilization. We attribute all the nonsense to a super-natural. We are weak and meek.

Right now - there is no pressing need for a God or any of his 'religions'.

They have become irrelevant just like the Qurans instructions about slavery.
Humans - acknowledge the fact or not - have by their progress in science and civilization made religion and all religious laws irrelevant.

Every religion is so unscientific and full of yarns spun by the wise to herd over the deluded! Let's believe in what we see and verify - lets not long for something to be ruling us from up above. We have to rule over ourselves and make our destiny.

If there was a God - he'll respect us for that.

There is no incident quoted in History not even by Western writers which suggests that Prophet (PBUH) ever beaten his wives.

I was not accusing Mohammad of beating anybody.

BTW - nothing bad about Mohammad could survive. So we only have the Muslim side of the story. Even in this modern age many Muslims threaten to kill those who make mere cartoons of Mohammad. 1400 years ago - amongst those Arabs - you expect me to believe that any criticism of Mohammad would've survived?

The critic would be slaughtered like sheep.

No offense meant etc. Straight from the heart. Just think about what I've written. Makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[roadrunner]

You've got to be kidding me! Show me all the available translations and point out which translation of Quran explicitly bans all forms of slavery or beating women.

I can show you quite a few.

Pickthall
When ye have divorced women, and they have reached their term, then retain them in kindness or release them in kindness. Retain them not to their hurt so that ye transgress (the limits). He who doeth that hath wronged his soul.
Surah Al-Baqarah: Translation and Commentary on The Holy Qur-an: by Dr. Zohurul Hoque

Shakir
And when you divorce women and they reach their prescribed time, then either retain them in good fellowship or set them free with liberality, and do not retain them for injury, so that you exceed the limits, and whoever does this, he indeed is unjust to his own soul
Surah Al-Baqarah: Translation and Commentary on The Holy Qur-an: by Dr. Zohurul Hoque

It clearly states that injuring a wife "exceeds the limits" in this verse, so as "beating" in this context means to injure someone, obviously wife-beating is an excess of the limit. In the Hadith it's even more clearer..

I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them
(Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)

How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then he may embrace (sleep with) her?...
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, op.cit., vol.8.hadith 68,pp.42-43).

Even if slavery is approved of in a symbolic manner - the idea is outdated by a century. Humans have moved beyond that. We've had the will to abolish slavery in toto. However, God did not seem interested 1400 years ago.

Slavery exists today. It's pretty commonplace in India. Surprised you haven't noticed. There's even servants there.

Apparently, the socio-economic situations had him constrained. For the sake of all the nice things attributed to God by all religions - hey, I expected a little more authority and love for humans from him.

Well, this is your own perverse imagination at work here.

Think about it - A God - He loves us all so much - yet kills kids with cancer, blinds them, amputates them and watches kids getting molested by humans in hundred all across the world. I don't see any love from God.

Whoever said God controls our everyday lives? We have freedom of choice on earth, isn't that what it's all about?

If I had the power to stop every crime against a kid or a woman in the world - I'd stop everything in a jiff. Not stand back and watch. Wont you do the same?

That much compassion is left in every human mind. However, God - it appears is a lot more slow.

People give me the excuse that God will punish them in hell. We're all deluding ourselves. We have no proof for God or hell or any of his punishments.

We don't have any proof that God doesn't exist either.

We are cowards. We don't want to take the responsibility of taking forward our civilization. We attribute all the nonsense to a super-natural. We are weak and meek.

Oh, I'm sure you'll come up with an explanation on where the matter originated from before the Big Bang occured (itself purely theoretical). No doubt you can explain evolution from primodial slime into yourself today. Actually, that might be possible to explain! But not for fully fledged functional humans!

Right now - there is no pressing need for a God or any of his 'religions'.

......except for worshipping cows and following something "rational" like Hinduism, I suppose is what you wanted to finish that sentence off with.

They have become irrelevant just like the Qurans instructions about slavery.
Humans - acknowledge the fact or not - have by their progress in science and civilization made religion and all religious laws irrelevant.

Like I said, slavery exists today. And if you consider humans to have progressed, the Qu'ran already had worked out the speed of light before it was calculated last century. That too in the 7th century.

Every religion is so unscientific and full of yarns spun by the wise to herd over the deluded! Let's believe in what we see and verify - lets not long for something to be ruling us from up above. We have to rule over ourselves and make our destiny.

You can hardly call some of the stuff in the Qu'ran as unscientific. It makes precise predictions about scientific constants that have been proven today.

BTW - nothing bad about Mohammad could survive. So we only have the Muslim side of the story. Even in this modern age many Muslims threaten to kill those who make mere cartoons of Mohammad. 1400 years ago - amongst those Arabs - you expect me to believe that any criticism of Mohammad would've survived?

well, the cartoons survived. I saw them reprinted in many newspapers, so why not anything bad from the 7th century surviving?

No offense meant etc. Straight from the heart. Just think about what I've written. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Indeed, idiocy does make sense to the idiot

 

[Flintlock]

I can show you quite a few.

Pickthall
When ye have divorced women, and they have reached their term, then retain them in kindness or release them in kindness. Retain them not to their hurt so that ye transgress (the limits). He who doeth that hath wronged his soul.
Surah Al-Baqarah: Translation and Commentary on The Holy Qur-an: by Dr. Zohurul Hoque

Shakir
And when you divorce women and they reach their prescribed time, then either retain them in good fellowship or set them free with liberality, and do not retain them for injury, so that you exceed the limits, and whoever does this, he indeed is unjust to his own soul
Surah Al-Baqarah: Translation and Commentary on The Holy Qur-an: by Dr. Zohurul Hoque

It clearly states that injuring a wife "exceeds the limits" in this verse, so as "beating" in this context means to injure someone, obviously wife-beating is an excess of the limit. In the Hadith it's even more clearer..

I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them
(Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)

How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then he may embrace (sleep with) her?...
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, op.cit., vol.8.hadith 68,pp.42-43).

Fine, what about this verse?

004.034 Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

Whoever said God controls our everyday lives? We have freedom of choice on earth, isn't that what it's all about?

Freedom of choice? Really? Freedom to die from hunger and tsunamis? Freedom to be born diseased, reatarded, physically handicapped?

Like I said, slavery exists today. And if you consider humans to have progressed, the Qu'ran already had worked out the speed of light before it was calculated last century. That too in the 7th century.

I wonder why all these miracle verses are always found after being discovered by scientists, and not the other way around?

Islamic scientists, like their greek counterparts, believed the speed of light to be infinite.

Only in the 17th century, did someone manage to actually do the dirty work, and measure the speed.

But now that we know what to find in the quran, its easy to find, isn't it?
Screw you Europeans and your naive scientists, the muslims knew it all along!!

 

[Samudra]

Freedom of choice? Really? Freedom to die from hunger and tsunamis? Freedom to be born diseased, reatarded, physically handicapped?

Well said!

The fact that this supernatural thing(capable of changing anything anytime) chooses to remain idle even as babies are born with AIDS, CANCER and blindness is reason enough for me to cease respecting it in any form - either Cow or Allah.

 

[roadrunner]

Fine, what about this verse?

004.034 Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

What about that verse?

The word "idribuhunna" can mean "beat" or "leave". Perhaps in the 7th century the normal thing to do was beat your wife, and in the 20th it's to leave your wife. So the Qu'ran is eternal in this respect. Translate it as leave, it makes better sense, and is more in line with the other verses.

Freedom of choice? Really? Freedom to die from hunger and tsunamis? Freedom to be born diseased, reatarded, physically handicapped?

Why not? The religious amongst people would say that they are being punished for not being religious, I would say it's just fate. Everybody has a destiny, if it's to be starve, then that is destiny. They can be good Muslim or bad Muslim, why should that matter. Everyone's reward supposedly starts in heaven.

I wonder why all these miracle verses are always found after being discovered by scientists, and not the other way around?

But they didn't. This is just your imagination. Go to the oldest Qu'ran found in Uzbekistan I think it is. You will see it still has the same words which predict the speed of light precisely and other things. No changes, you can even carbon date it, and it will prove the same thing.

Islamic scientists, like their greek counterparts, believed the speed of light to be infinite.

Islamic scientists might have, but in the Qu'ran is written indirectly what the speed of light is.

Only in the 17th century, did someone manage to actually do the dirty work, and measure the speed.

But it was written in the Qu'ran in the 7th century.

But now that we know what to find in the quran, its easy to find, isn't it?
Screw you Europeans and your naive scientists, the muslims knew it all along!!

Muslims didn't know it. That's what I'm trying to tell you. It was part of the code in the Qu'ran. It was not known to anyone.

 

[Flintlock]

The word "idribuhunna" can mean "beat" or "leave". Perhaps in the 7th century the normal thing to do was beat your wife, and in the 20th it's to leave your wife. So the Qu'ran is eternal in this respect. Translate it as leave, it makes better sense, and is more in line with the other verses.

Thats not my point, my point is the following:

1. God wants to micromanage my marriage, by giving shady advice that might mean wife-beating. If you want marriage counselling, read a book on it. A couple of verses is hardly enough to explain the complexity of a relationship.

2. The verse implies that men are superior to women, which is totally innacurate.

3. It implies that women have to obey the husband, failing which, the husband may beat his wife,

4. God cares about my relationship with my wife, but doesn't seem to care if I am born with 2 limbs instead of 4. (God works in mysterious ways?)

Why not? The religious amongst people would say that they are being punished for not being religious, I would say it's just fate. Everybody has a destiny, if it's to be starve, then that is destiny. They can be good Muslim or bad Muslim, why should that matter. Everyone's reward supposedly starts in heaven.

But why give different people different destinies, and then why send all non-believers to hell? Are Gandhi, Teresa, Ackbar, Martin Luther King, Galileo, Da Vinci all in hell?