Koraan: Miracles or Mistakes?

[Ezra]

In this thread we will start discussing some issues regarding the mistakes in Koraan. We will discuss scientific, social, and historical mistakes in the Koraan.

We will start today with some scientific mistakes that most Muslims tries to avoid discussing. I though you should all be aware of. We welcome any comments from the Muslims in the forum, namely Mr. Reason and his tail, Mss. Ily.

Soorah: 18

[83] They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story."
[84] Verily We established his power on earth, and We gave him the ways and the means to all ends.
[85] One (such) way he followed,
[86] Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: near it he found a people: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority), either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."

The Koraan says the sun sets in a spring of murky water! Haaa??

Soorah: 67

[5] And We have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

Soorah: 37

[6] We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars,
[7] (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits,
[8] (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side,
[9] Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual Penalty,
[10] Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.

The planets and starts are now stones that Angels use to throw the Devil with? Haaaa??

Soorah: 36

[38] And the sun runs its course for a period determined for it; that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.

I never knew that the Sun stops somewhere! We all know that the sun spins around it axis and the whole solar system spin around!

To be continued...

[nileman]

Scientific Miracles in the Holy Qur'an

MOUNTAINS

A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities around the world.

One of its two authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press.

He was the Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.

His book says that mountains have underlying roots.

These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a shape like a peg.
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-b-img1.jpg
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-b-img2-big.jpg
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-b-img3-big.jpg
This is how the Quran has described mountains. God has said in the Quran:

Ãóáóãú äóÌúÚóáö ÇáúÃóÑúÖó ãöåóÇÏðÇ * æóÇáúÌöÈóÇáó ÃóæúÊóÇÏðÇ
ÇáäÈà 6 ¡ 7

Have We not made the earth as a bed, and the mountains as pegs?
(Quran, 78:6-7)

Modern earth sciences have proven that mountains have deep roots undand that these roots can reach several times their elevations above the surface of the ground.

So the most suitable word to describe mountains on the basis of this information is the word ‘peg,’ since most of a properly set peg is hidden under the surface of the ground.

The history of science tells us that the theory of mountains having deep roots was introduced only in the latter half of the nineteenth century.

Mountains also play an important role in stabilizing the crust of the earth.

They hinder the shaking of the earth. God has said in the Quran:

æóÃóáúÞóì Ýöí ÇáÃóÑúÖö ÑóæóÇÓöíó Ãóä ÊóãöíÏó Èößõãú æóÃóäúåóÇÑðÇ æóÓõÈõáÇð áøóÚóáøóßõãú ÊóåúÊóÏõæäó
ÇáäÍá 15

And He has set firm mountains in the earth so that it would not shake with you...
(Quran, 16:15)

Likewise, the modern theory of plate tectonics holds that mountains work as stabilizers for the earth.
This knowledge about the role of mountains as stabilizers for the earth has just begun to be understood in the framework of plate tectonics since the late 1960s.

Could anyone during the time of the Prophet Muhammad have known of the true shape of mountains?

Could anyone imagine that the solid massive mountain which he sees before him actually extends deep into the earth and has a root, as scientists assert?
http://www.agpix.com/catalog/AGPix_DiPiAg20/large/AGPix_DiPiAg20_0004_Lg.jpg

A large number of books of geology, when discussing mountains, only describe that part which is above the surface of the earth.

This is because these books were not written by specialists in geology.

However, modern geology has confirmed

[Mediocrates]

That's interesting however if you mix post in arabic it comes out like gibberish for most of us. That is, no arabic language PC support.

Actually in many cultures mountains are descrbed as teeth or bones or growths out of the earth. Greek mythology describes some mountains as having roots down to Hades. Icelandic mythology (written later than the Koran around 1200-1300 in the Prose Edda, Snorri Stirlsson and others but the legends are 700-1000 years older), the mountains underneath Valhallah reach all the way down to the core of the universe, down to the lair of Yggdrasil.

[nileman]

Human Embryonic Development

In the Holy Quran, God speaks about the stages of man’s embryonic development:

æóáóÞóÏú ÎóáóÞúäóÇ ÇáúÅöäÓóÇäó ãöä ÓõáóÇáóÉò ãøöä Øöíäò * Ëõãøó ÌóÚóáúäóÇåõ äõØúÝóÉð Ýöí ÞóÑóÇÑò ãøóßöíäò * Ëõãøó ÎóáóÞúäóÇ ÇáäøõØúÝóÉó ÚóáóÞóÉð ÝóÎóáóÞúäóÇ ÇáúÚóáóÞóÉó ãõÖúÛóÉð ÝóÎóáóÞúäóÇ ÇáúãõÖúÛóÉó ÚöÙóÇãðÇ ÝóßóÓóæúäóÇ ÇáúÚöÙóÇãó áóÍúãðÇ Ëõãøó ÃóäÔóÃúäóÇåõ ÎóáúÞðÇ ÂÎóÑó ÝóÊóÈóÇÑóßó Çááøóåõ ÃóÍúÓóäõ ÇáúÎóÇáöÞöíäó
ÇáãÄãäæä 12 - 14

We created man from an extract of clay. Then We made him as a drop in a place of settlement, firmly fixed. Then We made the drop into an alaqah (leech, suspended thing, and blood clot), then We made the alaqah into a mudghah (chewed substance)...
(Quran, 23:12-14)

Literally, the Arabic word alaqah has three meanings: (1) leech, (2) suspended thing, and (3) blood clot.

In comparing a leech to an embryo in the alaqah stage, we find similarity between the two2 as we can see in figure 1. Also, the embryo at this stage obtains nourishment from the blood of the mother, similar to the leech, which feeds on the blood of others

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img1.jpg
Figure 1: Drawings illustrating the similarities in appearance between a leech and a human embryo at the alaqah stage.

The second meaning of the word alaqah is “suspended thing.” This is what we can see in figures 2 and 3, the suspension of the embryo, during the alaqah stage, in the womb of the mother.

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img2-big.jpg


Figure 2: We can see in this diagram the suspension of an embryo during the alaqah stage in the womb (uterus) of the mother.


http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img3.jpg


Figure 3: In this photomicrograph, we can see the suspension of an embryo (marked B) during the alaqah stage (about 15 days old) in the womb of the mother. The actual size of the embryo is about 0.6 mm.

The third meaning of the word alaqah is “blood clot.” We find that the external appearance of the embryo and its sacs during the alaqah stage is similar to that of a blood clot.

This is due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo during this stage (see figure 4).

Also during this stage, the blood in the embryo does not circulate until the end of the third week.5 Thus, the embryo at this stage is like a clot of blood.

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img4-big.jpg

Figure 4: Diagram of the primitive cardiovascular system in an embryo during the alaqah stage. The external appearance of the embryo and its sacs is similar to that of a blood clot, due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo.

So the three meanings of the word alaqah correspond accurately to the descriptions of the embryo at the alaqah stage.


The next stage mentioned in the verse is the mudghah stage. The Arabic word mudghah means “chewed substance.” If one were to take a piece of gum and chew it in his or her mouth and then compare it with an embryo at the mudghah stage, we would conclude that the embryo at the mudghah stage acquires the appearance of a chewed substance. This is because of the somites at the back of the embryo that “somewhat resemble teethmarks in a chewed substance.” (see figures 5 and 6).
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img5.jpg


Figure 5: Photograph of an embryo at the mudghah stage (28 days old). The embryo at this stage acquires the appearance of a chewed substance, because the somites at the back of the embryo somewhat resemble teeth marks in a chewed substance. The actual size of the embryo is 4 mm.

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a-img6-big.jpg




Figure 6: When comparing the appearance of an embryo at the mudghah stage with a piece of gum that has been chewed, we find similarity between the two.
A) Drawing of an embryo at the mudghah stage. We can see here the somites at the back of the embryo that look like teeth marks.
B) Photograph of a piece of gum that has been chewed

How could Muhammad have possibly known all this 1400 years ago, when scientists have only recently discovered this using advanced equipment and powerful microscopes which did not exist at that time?
Hamm and Leeuwenhoek were the first scientists to observe human sperm cells (spermatozoa) using an improved microscope in 1677 (more than 1000 years after Muhammad ).

They mistakenly thought that the sperm cell contained a miniature preformed human being that grew when it was deposited in the female genital tract.

Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore is one of the world’s most prominent scientists in the fields of anatomy and embryology and is the author of the book entitled The Developing Human, which has been translated into eight languages.

This book is a scientific reference work and was chosen by a special committee in the United States as the best book authored by one person.

Dr. Keith Moore is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

There, he was Associate Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy.

In 1984, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists.

He has directed many international associations, such as the Canadian and American Association of Anatomists and the Council of the Union of Biological Sciences.

In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Quran about human development.

It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later.

This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.”

http://www.islam-guide.com/video/moore-1.ram (see)

[nileman]

Human Embryonic Development

Consequently, Professor Moore was asked the following question: “Does this mean that you believe that the Quran is the word of God?” He replied: “I find no difficulty in accepting this.”

During one conference, Professor Moore stated: “....Because the staging of human embryos is complex, owing to the continuous process of change during development, it is proposed that a new system of classification could be developed using the terms mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah (what Muhammad said, did, or approved of).

The proposed system is simple, comprehensive, and conforms with present embryological knowledge.

The intensive studies of the Quran and hadeeth (reliably transmitted reports by the Prophet Muhammad’s companions of what he said, did, or approved of) in the last four years have revealed a system for classifying human embryos that is amazing since it was recorded in the seventh century A.D.

Although Aristotle, the founder of the science of embryology, realized that chick embryos developed in stages from his studies of hen’s eggs in the fourth century B.C., he did not give any details about these stages.

As far as it is known from the history of embryology, little was known about the staging and classification of human embryos until the twentieth century.

For this reason, the descriptions of the human embryo in the Quran cannot be based on scientific knowledge in the seventh century.

The only reasonable conclusion is: these descriptions were revealed to Muhammad from God.

He could not have known such details because he was an illiterate man with absolutely no scientific training.

http://www.islam-guide.com/video/moore-2.ram

[IlyaFurman]

Hi, Im the Tail Mss: Ily

Soorah: 18

[83] They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story."
[84] Verily We established his power on earth, and We gave him the ways and the means to all ends.
[85] One (such) way he followed,
[86] Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: near it he found a people: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority), either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."[/COLOR]

The Koraan says the sun sets in a spring of murky water! Haaa??

Clearly English is not your first language, it never says what you assumed.

Soorah: 67

[5] And We have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

Soorah: 37

[6] We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars,
[7] (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits,
[8] (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side,
[9] Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual Penalty,
[10] Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.

The planets and starts are now stones that Angels use to throw the Devil with? Haaaa??

Never does the word Angel or Devil come in that verse or soorah you provided, assuming once again.

Soorah: 36

[38] And the sun runs its course for a period determined for it; that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.

I never knew that the Sun stops somewhere! We all know that the sun spins around it axis and the whole solar system spin around!

WHERE DOES IT SAY IT STOPS LOL

To be continued...

Please do.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by nileman
God has said in the Quran about one of the evil unbelievers who forbade the Prophet Muhammad from praying at the Kaaba:

.

nileman, you are welcome to join the discussion, but spamming is not allowed.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Ezra
In this thread we will start discussing some issues regarding the mistakes in Koraan. We will discuss scientific, social, and historical mistakes in the Koraan.

We will start today with some scientific mistakes that most Muslims tries to avoid discussing. I though you should all be aware of. We welcome any comments from the Muslims in the forum, namely Mr. Reason and his tail, Mss. Ily.


The claim that the Koran anticipated modern scientific discoveries is, of course, pure nonsense. If the Koran provided advance insights into scientific knoweldge, then why are Muslim countries so backwards and lacking in science?

It is easy to take vague statements from 1,400 years ago and read into them more than is there. The Koran does not claim to be a book of science, and there are no scientific explanations or illustrations.

More important, of the three religions from the Holy Land, Islam is clearly the least compatible with science. Maimonides and Aquinas persuaded their co-religionists that religion must not contradict itself or knowledge acquired through human inquiry. Islam, in contrast, was influenced by Algazali, who argued that logic is fine as long as it serves Islam. Thus, Islam rejects knowledge acquired through human inquiry that conflicts with the Koran.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by nileman
He could not have known such details because he was an illiterate man with absolutely no scientific training.



Therefore, he did not know anything about science.

[Ezra]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
The claim that the Koran anticipated modern scientific discoveries is, of course, pure nonsense. If the Koran provided advance insights into scientific knoweldge, then why are Muslim countries so backwards and lacking in science?

It is easy to take vague statements from 1,400 years ago and read into them more than is there. The Koran does not claim to be a book of science, and there are no scientific explanations or illustrations.

More important, of the three religions from the Holy Land, Islam is clearly the least compatible with science. Maimonides and Aquinas persuaded their co-religionists that religion must not contradict itself or knowledge acquired through human inquiry. Islam, in contrast, was influenced by Algazali, who argued that logic is fine as long as it serves Islam. Thus, Islam rejects knowledge acquired through human inquiry that conflicts with the Koran.

Of course. And not only that, but I'm also going to show here the scientific mistakes in the books that they claim it's God's words.

[nileman]

hey
whats the reason to delete my posts ?

is this the rules here in this site to delete the topics you dont agree with ?

i want explainion ?

[nileman]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Therefore, he did not know anything about science.

Therefore the quran is god words not mohamed
mohamed was a messenger of god god words

[Ezra]

Originally posted by nileman
Therefore the quran is god words not mohamed
mohamed was a messenger of god god words

And God thinks the sun set in a spring???????????

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by nileman
hey
whats the reason to delete my posts ?

is this the rules here in this site to delete the topics you dont agree with ?

i want explainion ?

I deleted several of your lengthy posts.

This is a discussion forum. You posted lengthy messages like the ones on "Human Embryonic Development" above. You cannot post essay after essay merely to drown out the discussion.

If you want to submit these ideas to other participants for discussion, you are welcome to do so. But you cannot simply wallpaper IsraelForum with lengthy posts while making no effort to engage other participants in discussion.

It also appears that your "posts" are just material cut & pasted from Islamic sites. I found the exact same words on two other sites.

[Ezra]

Originally posted by nileman
hey
whats the reason to delete my posts ?

is this the rules here in this site to delete the topics you dont agree with ?

i want explainion ?

Nileman, we are here to discuss issues together not to cover the forum with 10 feet long essays that I'm sure you haven't even read before posting.

Let's hear your opinion. If you want to post something, you can always summarize it by your OWN words and put a link for the original content.

[IlyaFurman]

CAN ANYONE please explain this to me, maybe im missing something, please tell me HOW THIS >>>>



[38] And the sun runs its course for a period determined for it; that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.[/COLOR]

EQUALS THIS

I never knew that the Sun stops somewhere! We all know that the sun spins around it axis and the whole solar system spin around!


I dont get it? :confused:, I dont see how it says the SUN stops in that sentence???????

[Ezra]

Originally posted by IlyaFurman
CAN ANYONE please explain this to me, maybe im missing something, please tell me HOW THIS >>>>



EQUALS THIS



I dont get it? :confused:, I dont see how it says the SUN stops in that sentence???????

Keep barking! No one answers barking do**.

[reason]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
The claim that the Koran anticipated modern scientific discoveries is, of course, pure nonsense. If the Koran provided advance insights into scientific knoweldge, then why are Muslim countries so backwards and lacking in science?

It is easy to take vague statements from 1,400 years ago and read into them more than is there. The Koran does not claim to be a book of science, and there are no scientific explanations or illustrations.

More important, of the three religions from the Holy Land, Islam is clearly the least compatible with science. Maimonides and Aquinas persuaded their co-religionists that religion must not contradict itself or knowledge acquired through human inquiry. Islam, in contrast, was influenced by Algazali, who argued that logic is fine as long as it serves Islam. Thus, Islam rejects knowledge acquired through human inquiry that conflicts with the Koran.

If the Koran provided advance insights into scientific knoweldge, then why are Muslim countries so backwards and lacking in science?

That wasnt always true! So you blame the Kuran for the backwardness but dont give it credit for when the muslims were the top? what logic is this?

More important, of the three religions from the Holy Land,

Islam is clearly the least compatible with science

Last I saw, Christianity dosnt agree with evolution!And Algazali wasnt exactly the prophet now was he?

It is easy to take vague statements from 1,400 years ago and read into them more than is there.

They are anything but vague . It says the embryo is like a leech, it didnt say a spider, cat or hippo it said leech. Now what coincidence is it that the embryo looks exactly like a leech and acts like one? If the quran would have said anything else it would have been held against it, but it said leech so it becomes acceptable even today.

[Mediocrates]

I tried to make this point before. It has to do with cultural semiotics. All cultures share common symbolics and common myths. Whether or not Islam is miraculous, it is not unique in that respect. Philosophies from all over the world understand the symbol of seeds, mountains, forests and so on.

Even the Copernican system isn't really Copernican. He's just the person lucky enough to have his name associated with it. For example Aristarchus of Samos (c.310-c.250 BC) described a Sol centric cosmology.

[reason]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I tried to make this point before. It has to do with cultural semiotics. All cultures share common symbolics and common myths. Whether or not Islam is miraculous, it is not unique in that respect. Philosophies from all over the world understand the symbol of seeds, mountains, forests and so on.

Even the Copernican system isn't really Copernican. He's just the person lucky enough to have his name associated with it. For example Aristarchus of Samos (c.310-c.250 BC) described a Sol centric cosmology.


I would tend to agree Mediocrates if it wasnt for the fact that the embryo isnt visible with the naked eye. You need a microscope to see it.

[Mediocrates]

A human egg cell is the largest cell in the human body, you can, with practice see it unaided if you know what to look for. Certainly people had an opportunity to examine very early stage fetuses and draw their own conclusions.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by reason
If the Koran provided advance insights into scientific knoweldge, then why are Muslim countries so backwards and lacking in science?

That wasnt always true! So you blame the Kuran for the backwardness but dont give it credit for when the muslims were the top? what logic is this?

I don't remember blaming the Koran for backwardness.

Regarding Islam's golden age, it came long before the rise of modern science. I don't wish to take anything away from Muslim contributions during that period. But it hardly overshadows the Renaissance or Enlightenment.

More important, of the three religions from the Holy Land,

Islam is clearly the least compatible with science

Last I saw, Christianity dosnt agree with evolution!And Algazali wasnt exactly the prophet now was he?

You miss the point. The Theory of Evolution is a product of Christian civilization. In today's West, you can teach Evolution in public schools but you can't teach Christianity.

The majority of Christians accept the notion that religion must not contradict proven facts, and they accept separation of church and state as a prerequisite to intellectual freedom.

Algazali wasn't the Prophet, but he laid the ideological foundation for the Muslim tradition of treating the Koran as the guide to nearly every issue on nearly every subject.

It is easy to take vague statements from 1,400 years ago and read into them more than is there.

They are anything but vague . It says the embryo is like a leech, it didnt say a spider, cat or hippo it said leech. Now what coincidence is it that the embryo looks exactly like a leech and acts like one? If the quran would have said anything else it would have been held against it, but it said leech so it becomes acceptable even today.

So how is this a great scientific discovery? An embryo is like a leech in one way. An embryo is unlike a leech in ten thousand ways.

More to the point, how does a religion that supposedly provides all of the answers encourage scientific inquiry? How does over reliance on a religion contribute to scientific inquiry?

Does the Koran urge followers to create and test their own hypotheses? Does it teach them to base knowledge on repeatable, verifiable experiments? Does it urge them to not let religious or political considerations dissuade, curb, or influence scientific investigation?

I think not.

[Mediocrates]

Most relgions in the world today predate western science or at least they ascribe to a nonempirical non secularist view of nature. That's not really the debate.

The debate is really twofold:

One how does that religion coexist in the world today with the world.

Two how does that religion make use of whatever can or might be gleaned from the world since then.

Now, for number one, lots of religions have a problem with that and they are not just the 'fundamental' ones. For example the whole debate about abortion has degenerated to a discussion of 'when life begins' because a hundred years ago the entire discussion was moot. It began at birth. But we look for increasingly abtract 'scientific' rationale to tweak a moral code that doesn't easily fit into the modern world or it's values. All over the world from Chabad to Amish to Islam to Pentacostal to 7th Day Adventist religions ignore or deny modern technology and instead wrap ALL of it up in the sheet called "The Other".

For the second item, related to the first the point is, what use if any does a religion make of the world around it. In most Conservative Judaic interpretations of Bresheit for example the question of whether the universe was created in 7 24 hour periods is left open. The reason for this is that for many people, the answer clearly is that the 168 hour guideline really doesn't make any sense. So the religion has made use of modern information to tweak itself. Similarly if we look at the 613 Mitzvoth as well as the Mish Patim we see all sorts of things that we don't have to worry about, like yoking the ass to the oxen or adopting the children of slaves or concubines. The relgion has tweaked itself so that these laws now server as moral homilies for appropriate behavior. I suspect that other religions have mad similar adjustments such as the Vatican II.

The category of 'hard' Islam is like 'hard' Christian Fundamentalism or French Catholic apostacy (the excommunicated Latins, some of you might be familiar with this) where every word is literally as-is is a denial of the world, a hermetic religion that fears and hates the outside world and change and sees indepedent thought as a threat. That one thousand year old translations of dubious provenance can be used to justify miracles seems almost unimportant.

[Ezra]

Originally posted by reason
Again Ezra you show your true self. An intolerable half brain- dead moronic cantelope. Now be respectful of others before I clean up my shoes with your non existant dignity.

Oh.. I'm so afraid! I'm shaking!

Why don't you show me? Please show me.. Please please please..

Are you angry because we are revealing more of the crab in your "halla" (I mean holy) book?

[Ezra]

Soorah: 18

[83] They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story."
[84] Verily We established his power on earth, and We gave him the ways and the means to all ends.
[85] One (such) way he followed,
[86] Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water : near it he found a people: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority), either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness."

What are we debating here guys?! We are talking about a book that says "he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water "!

Not only that, but near the place where the sun "sets" he found people! What more nonsense do we need!

[reason]

So how is this a great scientific discovery? An embryo is like a leech in one way. An embryo is unlike a leech in ten thousand ways.

Its not a discovery ibro, the Quran isnt used as a source of scientific knowledge and was never intended for that. But the fact that it dosnt contradict it is miraclous to me. Yes there is only one similarity between the embryo and the leech, but there is a similarity so it dosnt contradict it.Lets say for example the Quran used anything other than a leech in that verse would it still be valid?Would a dog be valid in that verse? Its not the fact that the Quran provides discoveries but that it is never in contradiction that makes me a believer. Considering that this book was written by an uneducated, illiterate Arab who lived 1400 years ago, is proof enough for me.


More to the point, how does a religion that supposedly provides all of the answers encourage scientific inquiry? How does over reliance on a religion contribute to scientific inquiry?

Islam dosnt provide all the answers, it simply dosnt contradict them.

Does the Koran urge followers to create and test their own hypotheses? Does it teach them to base knowledge on repeatable, verifiable experiments? Does it urge them to not let religious or political considerations dissuade, curb, or influence scientific investigation?

Here are some verses that inspired many muslim scholars before.

"Those of His servants only who are possessed of knowledge fear Allah. Surely, Allah is Mighty, Forgiving." (Surat Fatir: The Originator).
"Surely in the heavens and the earth are signs for believers." (Surat Al-Jathiya : The Kneeling).

"And in the earth are signs for those who are sure. (Surat Al-Zariyat : The Scatterers).

"And He it is Who has made the stars for you that you might follow the right way thereby in the darkness of the land and the sea. Indeed We have made plain the signs for a people who know." (Surat Al-Anaam: The Cattle).

"And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colours. Surely there are signs in this for the learned." (Surat Al-Rum: The Romans).

"Seest thou not that Allah sends down water from the clouds, then We bring forth therewith fruits of various hues? And in the mountains are streaks, white and red, of various hues and (others) intensely black. And of men and beasts and cattle there are various colours likewise." (Surat Fatir : The Originator).

"Say: Are those who know and those who know not alike?" (Surat Al-Zumar: The Companies).

But even if you still think it dosnt provide incentives for scientist to gain knowledge, you cant say that it discourages them.

[reason]

Originally posted by Ezra


What are we debating here guys?! We are talking about a book that says "he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water "!

Not only that, but near the place where the sun "sets" he found people! What more nonsense do we need!


Here is another translation I found.

[18:86] When he reached the far west, he found the sun setting in a vast ocean, and found people there. We said, "O Zul-Qarnain, you can rule as you wish; either punish, or be kind to them."

But lets assume that your translation is more accurate. The verse is talking about a MAN WHO SAW the sun setting in a murky spring. This is how it appeared to the man, like how you would stand by the ocean and then sun would seem like it was setting in the ocean. It is telling us what the man saw.

[IlyaFurman]

CAN ANYONE please explain this to me, maybe im missing something, please tell me HOW THIS >>>>



[38] And the sun runs its course for a period determined for it; that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.[/COLOR]

EQUALS THIS

I never knew that the Sun stops somewhere! We all know that the sun spins around it axis and the whole solar system spin around!


I dont get it? :confused:, I dont see how it says the SUN stops in that sentence???????

ANYONE??

[Ezra]

Originally posted by IlyaFurman
CAN ANYONE please explain this to me, maybe im missing something, please tell me HOW THIS >>>>



EQUALS THIS



I dont get it? :confused:, I dont see how it says the SUN stops in that sentence???????

ANYONE??

Keep barking!

[reason]

Originally posted by Ezra
Keep barking!


LoL Ilya its clear to everyone here but you that ezra dosnt know how to read , thats why i didnt even bother answering it. It dosnt say it stops(on the contrary) he just assumed it did .In arabic it means "goes on its path" or "runs its path" in the translation he used the word "course" for "path" so he ended with "runs its course", which ezra assumed meant it comes to a stop.

[IlyaFurman]

Originally posted by reason
LoL Ilya its clear to everyone here but you that ezra dosnt know how to read , thats why i didnt even bother answering it. It dosnt say it stops(on the contrary) he just assumed it did .In arabic it means "goes on its path" or "runs its path" in the translation he used the word "course" for "path" so he ended with "runs its course", which ezra assumed meant it comes to a stop.

I know he doesnt know what he is talking about, and says "keep barking" cause he doesnt have an answer. I love stumping him.

[ayesha]

Ezra, I would like to reply to your first post, as i can see there is an issue of misnderstanding. if i may, i will comment on this at my first opportunity.

[Ezra]

Originally posted by ayesha
Ezra, I would like to reply to your first post, as i can see there is an issue of misnderstanding. if i may, i will comment on this at my first opportunity.

I'm looking forward for that. At least we can get back to civilized discussion after the usual interruption from the BS-specialized-two-brothers .

[ayesha]

Originally posted by Ezra
I'm looking forward for that. At least we can get back to civilized discussion after the usual interruption from the BS-specialized-two-brothers .

lol :D. looking forward to the discussions

[ayesha]

Ezra:

These ayats illustrate a hadith that explains how the nonbelievers of Mecca went to the learned Jews to ask them to look in their scripture and see if Muhammed (pbuh) was really the Prophet prophesised to come. So, the Jews instructed the nonbelievers to ask the Prophet (pbuh) about a series of things - if he was able to answer them then he was indeed the Prophet. One of the things the Jews told the Quraish to ask the Prophet was Who was Dhil Qarnayn? What was his story? Why was he significant? This surah was revealed in response to these Qs.

As a footnote - concerning Dhil Qarnayn, Muslims believe he was a noble and righteous man, a servant of God who called upon people to worship God. Upon completion of building the Ka'ba, Dhil Qarnayn accompanied Prophet Ibrahim (pbuh) in performing tawaf. (Dhil Qarnayn's closest ally was Khidr, who is mentioned with Prophet Moses (pbuh) in the verses prior).

There is somewhat of a difference of opinion from all corners about why he was called Dhil Qarnayn .

The Israelites/Jews believe he was called Dhil Qarnayn because he was Head King and ruled the 2 great nations of the Roman and the Persians. Other Jews and some Christians believe that he was called this because he had 2 horns on his head. Another narration says he is called Dhil Qarnayn because he was struck with a blow to the head after calling people to the worship of God and consequently killed. But then came back to life, called them to God's worship again and was struck and killed again.

Why he was called Dhil Qarnayn is irrelevant. What is relevant is his story. The story of this man is an exceedingly long one - you must read to verse 98/99, then understand the tafseer, accompanying ahadith, understand Dhil Qarnayn's connection to Gog and Magog (Jooge wa Magooge), G & M's connection to when Israfil blows the horn, the Day of Judgement and Anti-Christ. To understand 83-99 you must understand all this because all the above information must be utilised in accordance with each other continually.

Nonetheless, I will attempt to explain the verses you quoted from Chapter 18 (Al-Kahf / The Cave) 83-86.

Verse 83 (Arabic)
"Wa yas-alounaka a'n Dhil Qarnayn. Qul: 'Sa-atlou a'laykum minhu thikra"

(English)
"And they ask you about Dhil Qarnayn. Say: 'I shall recite to you something of his story"

Very basically, 83 is just speaking about what I said previously - about the Prophet being asked about Dhil Qarnayn. Note, the verse only says "they ask you" it doesn't say why or who is asking (therefore, you see why it is paramount to real all the background information to know what is going on exactly, otherwise you're lost).

Verse 84 (Arabic)
"Innaa makanna lahou fil ardi wa a'taynahu min kulli shayin sabbaba"

(English)
"Verily, We established him in the earth, and we gave him the means of everyhing"

Meaning, Allah granted Dhil Qarnayn a great kingdom, he was above wll other kings. He had a magnificent army, could speak all languages, was the most knowledgeable of all men. Everyone was under his rule and he had everything at his feet. This is what is meant by he was given all means.

Verse 85 (Arabic)
"Fa atba' sabbaba"

(English)
"So he followed a way"

"Sabbaba" in this context means "path". The verse meaning he journeyed on a pth, that was a pathway from the west end of the earth to the east.

Verse 86 (Arabic)
"Hata itha balagha maghrib ash-shamsi wajadaha taghrubu fi a'ynin hami-a-tin wa-wajada e'ndaha qowma. Qulna: 'Ya Dhal Qarnayn imma an tua'thiba, wa imma an tatakhitha feehim husna."

(English)
"Until when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black, muddy (hot) water. And he found near it a people. We said 'O Dhal Qarnayn either you punish them or treat them with kindness."

This verse speaks of Dhil Qarnayn and his army travelling on the pathway until sunset, and he perceived it to be setting in the water. "a'ynin" literally means "eye" but here is meant a spring or in another context a specific point/part of (the water). The sea is described as black and muddy/murky, the "hami-a-tin" means "clay-like liquid". It does not suggest that the sun sets there, only that he perceived it to. Just as if you watch the sun set on a beach, the a'nin would be the point where the sun goes down 'into the water'.
He finds nearby it a nation of people whom Allah allowed him to do with them as he saw fit. He calls them to the worship of God and warns them that those who practice mischief will be punished and those who do good will be treated well.

From here to verse 98 is his story but as I say it may not make sense without knowing accompanying information. However, for now I think I have deployed sufficient explanations and clarified the misunderstanding about the sun's setting.

If you have no further comments then I'll move to the other verses.

[reason]

This verse speaks of Dhil Qarnayn and his army travelling on the pathway until sunset, and he perceived it to be setting in the water. "a'ynin" literally means "eye" but here is meant a spring or in another context a specific point/part of (the water). The sea is described as black and muddy/murky, the "hami-a-tin" means "clay-like liquid". It does not suggest that the sun sets there, only that he perceived it to. Just as if you watch the sun set on a beach, the a'nin would be the point where the sun goes down 'into the water'.

I agree and this is what I posted earlier.

[reason]

Originally posted by Ezra
I'm looking forward for that. At least we can get back to civilized discussion after the usual interruption from the BS-specialized-two-brothers .

Hahahaha can your mother and father remain brother and sister after the divorce?

[ayesha]

Originally posted by reason
This verse speaks of Dhil Qarnayn and his army travelling on the pathway until sunset, and he perceived it to be setting in the water. "a'ynin" literally means "eye" but here is meant a spring or in another context a specific point/part of (the water). The sea is described as black and muddy/murky, the "hami-a-tin" means "clay-like liquid". It does not suggest that the sun sets there, only that he perceived it to. Just as if you watch the sun set on a beach, the a'nin would be the point where the sun goes down 'into the water'.

I agree and this is what I posted earlier.

we agree on something, zaghroutey!

[Hierophant]

The Israelites/Jews believe he was called Dhil Qarnayn because he was Head King and ruled the 2 great nations of the Roman and the Persians. Other Jews and some Christians believe that he was called this because he had 2 horns on his head. Another narration says he is called Dhil Qarnayn because he was struck with a blow to the head after calling people to the worship of God and consequently killed. But then came back to life, called them to God's worship again and was struck and killed again.

This just stood out to me because in summerian mythology (and those myths derived from them) the two horns are representative of being a god.

but i didnt mean to interrupt. :)

[ayesha]

Originally posted by Hierophant
This just stood out to me because in summerian mythology (and those myths derived from them) the two horns are representative of being a god.

but i didnt mean to interrupt. :)

Your interruption is valued. :)
Your post is somewhat intriguing I have not heard this before, could you elaborate at all?

[Hierophant]

I can give an example:

Anu (sumerian for 'heaven') was the sky god, living in the 'third heaven' His second consort was Ishtar (Innina) He has the ability that anything he puts into words, becomes reality. He was also the father to Ea. Anu is symbolised by the 'divine horned cap'

If you take a look around the web you'll find images of different stone and clay tablets and cylinder seals from the sumerian kingdoms (and some of the subsequent ones) up to the hittites, you'll see all followed this pattern of identifying gods with a horned cap on their head.

this image depicts the creation of man, with tree of life and all.
http://www.crystalinks.com/enkilab.jpg

[Hierophant]

I was doing some more reading on this topic and i came across a curious fact: There are actually several different versions of the arabic quran. So, which one is supposed to be the 'revealed' one?

Now i dont completely understand how this all works in regards to "Readers" and "Transmitters" Perhaps someone can explain.

It appears the muslim world in general use a version of the quran in which the transmitter is Hafs and the reader is Abu Bakr `Asim.

some other readers are: Nafi`(Algeria, Morocco, parts of Tunisia, West Africa and Sudan, Libya, Tunisia and parts of Qatar), Ibn Kathir al-Bazzi, Abu `Amr al-'Ala' (Parts of Sudan and West Africa), Ibn `Amir (Parts of Yemen), Hamzah, al-Qisa'i, Abu Ja`far, Ya`qub al-Hashimi, and Khalaf al-Bazzar. (There are even more Readers than these but these are considered the most authoritative. The information regarding the current area of use comes from Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'aan, United Kingdom: Al-Hidaayah, 1999, p. 199)

Now, if it was me defending the differences in these versions, i'd dismiss most of them as they are usually very minor differences (wa instead fa for example) assorted differences in diacritical marks, etc. And they, most likely, do not affect overall meaning of the texts. ... But then i've never claimed the book(s) was(were) perfect and the precise words of the Creator.

[andak01]

Originally posted by Hierophant
I was doing some more reading on this topic and i came across a curious fact: There are actually several different versions of the arabic quran. So, which one is supposed to be the 'revealed' one?


Let me answer this one. I just returned from Morocco where I visited an ancient madrasa in Fez. In that madrasa, seven different 'readings' of the Qur'an were taught. First off, if you believe that these readings mean different things, it should strike you as strange that all seven readings would be acceptable within the same mosque. Saying that these readings are different versions ammounts to saying that Bizet wrote a different version of Carmen for every tenor that sings the part of Don Jose. There are different readings, but the notes and the lyrics remain the same. Likewise, every syllable and letter remain the same with different Qur'anic recitations, only the breathing and stress changes. I am familiar with this subject because my father-in-law is a hafiz (having memorized the entire Qur'an) and when he recites it, there is a distinctive metric difference in where he places the stress. But the words and meaning are absolutely unchanged.

[Hierophant]

i agree that the basic meaning remains the same. altho i can't prove it, it makes the most sense to me. But, what you said about every syllable and word being the same, and only the breathing and how different words are stressed, is false. (i gave the example of 'fa' and 'wa') these differences ARE acknowledged by islamic scholars.

I already acknowledged the insignificance of these differences to me. but then i'm not a muslim.

heres what a cpl scholars say regarding the different readings (to be objective)
SCHOLARS WHO SAY THAT THE VARIANT READINGS ARE ALL PART OF THE QUR'AN

This oral tradition (of the Qur'an) embraces ten distinct systems of recitation, or, as they are generally called among scholars, "Readings" (qiraa'aat), each tranmitted by a "school" of Koran-readers deriving its authority from a prominent reader of the second or early third century of the Islamic era. The slight variation among the Ten Readings is attributable to the dialectal variation in the original Revelation. ... It should be emphasized that all of the Readings were transmitted orally from the Prophet (Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version, translated by B. Weis, M. Rauf and M. Berger, Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975, p. 53)

Every reading in accordance with Arabic (grammar) even if (only) in some way, and in accordance with one of the masaahif of Uthmaan, even if (only) probable, and with sound chain of transmission, is a correct (Sahiih) reading, which must not be rejected, and may not be denied, but it belongs to the seven modes (ahruf) according to which the Qur'aan was revealed, and the people are obliged to accept it, no matter whether it is from the seven Imaans, or the ten or from other accepted Imaans (Abu-l-Khair bin al-Jazari, cited from Ahmad von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur'an, UK: The Islamic Foundation, 1994. p. 119)

SCHOLARS WHO SAY THAT THE VARIANT READINGS ARE FROM HUMAN ERROR

The Koran was originally recited in one language and one dialect, namely that of the Quraysh. However, as soon as readers from the different tribes began to recite it, a variety of readings emerged, reflecting dialectal differences among the readers. The diversity was so great that later generations of readers and scholars had to labor intensely over the recording and careful analysis of these readings. In so doing they give rise to a special science, or rather special sciences, devoted exclusively to this enterprise. ...
... I should pause here to note that certain religious authorities have supposed that the Seven Readings were transmitted by a process of continuous transmission (tawaatur) on a wide scale from the Prophet himself, unto whom, so they allege, they were revealed by Gabriel. These authorities therefore consider that whoever rejects any of the established readings is an unbeliever. They have not, however, been able to produce any evidence for what they claim except that the tradition which reads, "The Koran was revealed in seven dialects (ahruf)".
The truth of the matter is that the seven Readings had nothing to do with the Revelation, nothing in the least; and whoever rejects any of them is not for having done so an unbeliever; nor has he sinned or gone astray in his religion. The origin of these Readings is to be found in the diversity of tribal dialects among the early Muslim Arabs, and everyone has the right to dispute them, and to accept and reject them, or parts of them, as seems proper.
In point of fact, people have disputed the Readings and argued over them, and have even accused each other of error with respect to them; yet we know of no Muslim who ever charged another with unbelief over this matter (Taahaa Husayn, Fi'l-Adab al-jaahilii, pp. 98-99. Cited from Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version, translated by B. Weis, M. Rauf and M. Berger, Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975, pp. 97-99) Before closing this note a few words about the recitations Qir'aat - It is generally known that there are seven or ten different recitations of the Qur'an - By recitation is meant the different wordings which convey the same or allied meanings Maalik and Malik - Such as Yatta'harna and Yat'harna. It is generally believed the recitation of the seven or the ten reciters of the first, second and third century of Islam are valid and the Muslims are allowed to adopt either of these in their reciting Qur'an and it is generally held that the origin of these various recitations go back to the time of the Holy Prophet who approved these varieties but according to the Shia Ithna-Ashari School whose views are based on the teachings of the Holy Imams, the revealed recitation of the Qur'an cannot be but one and as the Imam puts it, "Qur'an is One, came down from the One, the variation in recitation comes from the reciters not from God." (S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali, The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary, New York: Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, 1988, p. 58a)

of course, as soon as excuses are offered for the differences, claims of authenticity become highly suspect. This is compounded by researching how the surahs were collected.

[reason]

Originally posted by Hierophant
i agree that the basic meaning remains the same. altho i can't prove it, it makes the most sense to me. But, what you said about every syllable and word being the same, and only the breathing and how different words are stressed, is false. (i gave the example of 'fa' and 'wa') these differences ARE acknowledged by islamic scholars.

I already acknowledged the insignificance of these differences to me. but then i'm not a muslim.

heres what a cpl scholars say regarding the different readings (to be objective)


of course, as soon as excuses are offered for the differences, claims of authenticity become highly suspect. This is compounded by researching how the surahs were collected.

The words and the meanings are unchanged its the way you pronounce it, thats the difference.The words are the exact same, but some dialects pronounce words differently. I think you misunderstood that post.

[Hierophant]

what happens to an arabic word when the vowel points are changed?

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by andak01
There are different readings, but the notes and the lyrics remain the same. Likewise, every syllable and letter remain the same with different Qur'anic recitations, only the breathing and stress changes.


I tend to look for purely linguistic distinctions. Whether by history, custom, language corruption or successive translation errors. There are local variations in Arabic just as there are in every language. Different vowell stress, different words, different context. When those differences are collected and standardized and then either codified or translated some peculiar things can arise.

Or, one can use the same text over and over with different stress and rhythm for a different usages. In Judaism, those of you familiar with Kaddish will recognize this. Kaddish are prayers that used the same text to different effect depending on speed, meter and prnounciation to some extent. The Kaddish is Aramaic by the way. Sometimes it's used as a prayer for the deceased, other times it's a 'happy Kaddish' and so on but structure is the same.

[andak01]

Originally posted by Hierophant
what happens to an arabic word when the vowel points are changed?

When the vowel points are changed, a word could change meaning. However, within one dialect, there is little or no chance of making such a mistake. It was only when the Qur'an spread to peoples for whom Arabic was not a native language that this became an issue. Voweling was developed to resolve this issue. The part of Arabic study concerning voweling is called i:rab. My wife studied it for a couple of years growing up. The grammatic rules are complex, but regular. A well versed Arab can correctly vowel an entire book without error. There is also a long and short pronunciation of words that includes grammatical information that native speakers tend to skip over. This would never change the meaning of a word.

If the implication here is that differences in readings include changes in the voweling, that is not true. One need only purchase a Qur'an for Tajweed to see that the vowels are the same as in a normal Qur'an. However, there is an extra set of symbols for breathing and stress.

[Hierophant]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I tend to look for purely linguistic distinctions. Whether by history, custom, language corruption or successive translation errors. There are local variations in Arabic just as there are in every language. Different vowell stress, different words, different context. When those differences are collected and standardized and then either codified or translated some peculiar things can arise...

i've been looking into this for awhile now, its extremely fascinating. One problem i'm running into is 'letter definitions' for the arabic alphabet. I can't seem to find any good sources for this. Right now i'm concentrating on names from the quran but hope to move on to concepts as well.

andak, do you have any source material for this?

[andak01]

I'm not sure what you mean. If you are referring to the Alif Lam Miim or the Taa Haa that begin some of the Surahs, I wouldn't waste your time. There are much more important subjects towards understanding the Qur'an. The meanings of these letters can be known, but they are hidden. Why not begin at the beginning and try to understand Bismillahi raHmahni raHeem. In the name of Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful. What does it mean to be infinitely compassionate, infinitely merciful? How can taking on these attributes in our own lives bring us closer to God? How does avoiding compassion and mercy deliver us over to evil?

[ayesha]

Originally posted by andak01
I'm not sure what you mean. If you are referring to the Alif Lam Miim or the Taa Haa that begin some of the Surahs, I wouldn't waste your time. There are much more important subjects towards understanding the Qur'an. The meanings of these letters can be known, but they are hidden

im afraid you are wrong there andak. these letters are miracles of Allah, if which only He knows their meaning.

[Hierophant]

Originally posted by andak01
I'm not sure what you mean. If you are referring to the Alif Lam Miim or the Taa Haa that begin some of the Surahs, I wouldn't waste your time. There are much more important subjects towards understanding the Qur'an. The meanings of these letters can be known, but they are hidden. Why not begin at the beginning and try to understand Bismillahi raHmahni raHeem. In the name of Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful. What does it mean to be infinitely compassionate, infinitely merciful? How can taking on these attributes in our own lives bring us closer to God? How does avoiding compassion and mercy deliver us over to evil?
no i wasnt referring to Alif Lam Mim. But that is an interesting topic too. I was just referring to names in your koran. nothing mystical or anything like that. just a simple linguistic study of the names. but speaking of the saying "Bismillahi raHmahni raHeem" are you aware how old that expression is? or who used it before the muslims?

[andak01]

I shudder to ask. Before you give me a proof that Islam arrived from some earlier source, I will say that I am aware of that. It was the same God that created all of the religions of the world by giving his message to mankind. There is one message and it comes through all relgions. Each one interprets, edits, adds, deforms and perverts according to the will of man. So we would expect to find similarities with Judaeism whose Prophets we acknowledge as well as Christianity whose Christ we admire as a Prophet. It comes as more of a surprise to many that references to Muhammed (SAW) can also be found in the Avesta of the Zoroastrians as well as the Vedic scriptures. Since the Vedic scriptures and the Avesta were revealed by the same God, it isn't surprising to find similarities among them. It wouldn't even surprise me if you could find some Satanic sect that quotes from the Qur'an as they already do the Bible. The Freemasons quote from the Qur'an during some of their rituals.

[Hierophant]

no, i didnt say that islam came from an earlier source. obviously, the argument that you just presented addresses that in a reasonable manner. Altho the avesta example you provided is pretty weak, i've heard it before and wouldnt bother with it. I was just referring to the above expression alone. I wasnt even going to use it as an argument for the origins of islam. i understand that you may be on the defensive here all the time andak, but you shouldnt let that get in the way of seeking knowledge.

[andak01]

Originally posted by Hierophant
I understand that you may be on the defensive here all the time andak, but you shouldnt let that get in the way of seeking knowledge.

Actually, being on the defensive has required me to do much more research in order to defend my positions. I have grown rather accustomed to it.

I can't know what you are going to tell me until you come out with it, but meanwhile I will relate a short tale. I had someone on another board that kept dropping hints, that "if only I knew the secrets about Islam", etc. And she was private posting other members, to tell them all the secrets I wasn't privey to. Well, as it turned out, the Muslims, according to her, are Hindu Moon worshippers, though none of us is aware of it. And the proof is those little crescent moons that sit on top of the mosques.

I was very intrigued, what an astounding revelation. So I did research and found that the crescent moon is a symbol of the Ottomans. In fact, I asked this question of several of my Muslim aquaintances. "Do you know the significance of the crescent moon, and would it bother you if they took that symbol from the top of every mosque?" Most of them couldn't tell me its significance other than to relate it to our lunar calendar. As for caring, they didn't feel that either the calendar or the crescent symbol in any way affected their worship one way or another.

Then I travelled around in Morocco to some of the oldest mosques there. And on top of their mosques, no moon, only three golden balls. Guess which country was never made part of the Ottoman Empire?

Now for the Hindu part. She said that the Kiswah (the curtain that covers the Kaaba in Mecca) is hiding a bunch of Hindu symbols and that the Black Stone of the Kaaba is a Hindu lingam. Well, I explained that the Kaaba was actually torn down during the early days of Islam and rebuilt by Muslims. So these Muslims would have been the ones painting in Sandscrit. In addition, the Kiswah is changed every year and I even know people who have seen the Kaaba uncovered. There isn't anything painted on it at all, simply plain blocks of stone. And the significance of the Black Stone, according to the Hadith? It's a rock. A rock with some history, but still a rock. Kissing it or touching it is not a requirement of Hadj.

Lastly, I met a man who has actually been inside the Kaaba! He was a Pakistani journalist who was a guest of a head of state. And the big secret inside? Nothing. There is nothing inside, only walls.

The secret of Islam is that there are no secrets, that a rock is a rock and a decoration on a mineret is a decoration. We do not worship these things or put them above Allah. But worshipping such things is a natural human failing. It is a constant struggle to remind ourselves to stay away from superstition and magic and fortunetelling and anything that leads us to place earthly things about God. The Arabic word for this personal struggle is jihad.

[elke]

You know, Andak, the Holy of Holies in the Temple was an empty room, where G-d lived. Only the High Priest was allowed to stand on the doorstep of that room, and only on High Holidays. The Romans - and others - had all sorts of weird thoughts as to what was there: some thought there was a bull's head (?!), others - gold, etc. etc. So, Pompey, the Roman conqueror of Judea actually went there, because he was extremely curious. And what did he see? Nothing! It was empty, although he did say that it gave him the creeps being there. :p

That's what he wrote in some letters to Roman senators that survived the millenia.

The moral of the story is: people have all sorts of weird ideas about other people's religious beliefs. One can't pay attention to them, except for entertainment value. ;)

Very, very interesting discussion here. :cool: