From tariqas-digest-approval@europe.std.com Sun Jul 21 14:47:50 1996 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:04:57 -0400 (EDT) From: tariqas-digest-approval@europe.std.com Reply-To: tariqas-digest@world.std.com To: tariqas-digest@world.std.com Subject: tariqas-digest V1 #54 tariqas-digest Wednesday, 10 July 1996 Volume 01 : Number 054 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Maqam1@aol.com Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:00:18 -0400 Subject: Re: Questions In a message dated 96-07-10 12:31:12 EDT, you write: >I thought I'd just watch the Question Discussion. I wasn't being sensitive >to your needs or call for help, I wasn't being a good brother, muslim, or >human. Next time... > > I am guilty of this also and in my answer to Kaffea I felt someone had to apologize for any improper muslim etiquette she experience as for myself I came to this list to share and learn, as you said Mushin if you don't ask you don't learn this is true. There is and appropriate way to agree to disagree in a way where love and pure brother & sisterhood is still shown. * Let's keep asking*. Sh. J-Kenyatta Chicago,Ill. ------------------------------ From: "Michael J. Moore" Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:46:07 -0700 Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions Jacquie Weller wrote: > > I am a friend of the Muslims, but not a convert. I feel like I have been > raked over the coals. This last person, I lost the post suggested I read > about sin in the Gayan, or some word like that I never heard of, as if I > never heard of sin before and had no idea about this term. > > I have said that I thought the Quaran was a beautiful book and to hear it in > Arabic is quite soothing; I have said that I respected your five pillars of > faith, especially in giving a portion of your wages to the poor. > > I have mentioned that my friend from pakistan mentioned to me about the > stoning of individuals for adultery, and so asked for verification whether > this is true or not. In no way do I condemn the peaceful Muslims, and the > teachings of > Mohammed who recomended freedom and peaceful co-existence among his > neighbors of various religious beliefs. > > Your Friend, Kaffea Lalla Thank You for expressing your feelings about the responses you have been getting. I am sure that nobody intended to insult your intelligence. Speaking for myself, I have enjoyed the gentle nature of your inquiries and encourage you to continue. Please understand that there are some cultural differences among the members here and sometimes those differences come across as harshness or abruptness. This may not be the case here, but I have seen it happen. Some people here are also using english as a second language. We native English speakers need to understand that they may not always understand some of the subtlties of English usage. For example, when somebody says: "You should read about sin in...." , to a native English speaker this sounds like a reprimand! A chastisement. In fact, it is called a 'YOU SHOULD' statement; we say you've been 'shoulded'. A more experienced English speaker might say, "I think you would find this book on the nature of sin to be very interesting." I to have many questions about the Quaran but am somewhat reluctant to ask for various reasons. Best Wishes, - -- Michael Moore home page --> http://home.aol.com/michaeljm8 ------------------------------ From: Well333@turbonet.com (Jacquie Weller) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:07:46 +0100 Subject: Re: feelings and questions Thankyou for your kind responses to my kind of heart-pain. Yes lily, you were kind and some others. I'm glad I can trust you enough to let you know my feelings and you did not chastise me for that. Ever grateful, Kaffea Lalla ------------------------------ From: frank gaude Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:11:01 -0700 Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions Michael J. Moore wrote: [...] > I too have many questions about the Qur'an but am somewhat reluctant to ask > for various reasons. Come on, Michael, put on that coat make of stainless steel and fiber glass, and step up to the microphone. Peace, tanzen ------------------------------ From: frank gaude Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 11:11:01 -0700 Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions Michael J. Moore wrote: [...] > I too have many questions about the Qur'an but am somewhat reluctant to ask > for various reasons. Come on, Michael, put on that coat make of stainless steel and fiber glass, and step up to the microphone. Peace, tanzen ------------------------------ From: jabriel@peoples.net (Jabriel Hanafi) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:06:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions Hi Kaffea Lalla my beautiful firend. I am sorry you feel raked over the coals. I just wanted you to know that you were heard. And I feel sorry for the pain my e-mail friend feels. Some of us, certainly this is the case with myself, lend something less than diplomacy when using this medium. It is a new medium and I discern we each are trying new ways to communicate as well as exchange information of value and benifit to one another. I pray that this does not stop your interest in Islam or any other religeon or path. As you know I find your contribution, personally, always refreshing. God Bless you my friend. Jabriel - ----------------------------------------- Jabriel Hanafi Pivotal Point Dynamics ------------------------------ From: "Michael J. Moore" Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:15:19 -0700 Subject: Qur'an, Question 1 frank gaude wrote: > > Michael J. Moore wrote: > > [...] > > > I too have many questions about the Qur'an but am somewhat reluctant to ask > > for various reasons. > > Come on, Michael, put on that coat make of stainless steel and fiber glass, > and step up to the microphone. > > Peace, > > tanzen Ok then. There is the doctrine of abrogation which simply states that when cronologically later sections of the Qur'an conflict with earlier revealed parts then the later part abrogates the earlier part. There is also the idea that the Qur'an exist eternally in heaven. Does the heavenly Qur'an have abrogated parts in it? If not, then do we have the real Qur'an? If so, then how is Allah able to reverse his position? - -- Michael Moore home page --> http://home.aol.com/michaeljm8 ------------------------------ From: maarof@pc.jaring.my Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:38:32 +0800 Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Well333@turbonet.com (Jacquie Weller) wrote: >I am a friend of the Muslims, but not a convert. I feel like I have been >raked over the coals. This last person, I lost the post suggested I read >about sin in the Gayan, or some word like that I never heard of, as if I >never heard of sin before and had no idea about this term. > >I have said that I thought the Quaran was a beautiful book and to hear it in >Arabic is quite soothing; I have said that I respected your five pillars of >faith, especially in giving a portion of your wages to the poor. > >I have mentioned that my friend from pakistan mentioned to me about the >stoning of individuals for adultery, and so asked for verification whether >this is true or not. In no way do I condemn the peaceful Muslims, and the >teachings of >Mohammed who recomended freedom and peaceful co-existence among his >neighbors of various religious beliefs. > >Your Friend, Kaffea Lalla > Dear Lalla, You feel as if being stoned? :) Next time, turned those stones into flowers, as that wonderful sufi guy, Asha, used to say. your brother, maarof ... sometimes throws stone lovingly into the pond. ------------------------------ From: "Erik S. Ohlander" Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:24:13 Subject: RE: Qur'an, Question 1 >Ok then. >There is the doctrine of abrogation which simply states >that when cronologically later sections of the Qur'an >conflict with earlier revealed parts then the later >part abrogates the earlier part. There is also the idea >that the Qur'an exist eternally in heaven. Does the >heavenly Qur'an have abrogated parts in it? The idea is that the Qur'an was transmitted *tanzil* (that is causing to descend) piecemeal from the 'prototype of the scriptures' which exists with God in heaven. This 'guarded tablet' is said to contain all the scriptures given to mankind, of which the words which constitute the Qur'an only make up its 'last section' (so to speak). These revelations were recieved by the Prophet as the occasion merited, and were often aimed at resolving specific situations which the 'ummah was facing (thus the need for knowing *abwab al-nuzul* today). Chronology was not the factor, and what appeared to be out of focus at first was usually set in perspective by further revelation at a later date (usually through *naskh* or 'aborgation). The Sunni theologians of the 1st-2nd centuries AH (i.e., 7th & 8th CE)worked out a theory which said that the Qur'an was uncreated, but in the next century the Mu'tazliyya (a rationalist school of theological thought) avanced the idea that it was created. Almost all Muslims today accept the idea of *i'jaz al-Qur'an* (or the 'uncreatedness of the Qur'an), which in the end tells us that the Book is the Word of God. >If not, then do we have the real Qur'an? The idea of the 'Mother Book', the 'Guarded Tablet', etc., etc.; is a tricky one to contextualize within the paradigm of 'i'jaz al-Qur'an' and the fact that naskh (i.e., aborgation) also constituted a part of the Prophet's Qur'anic experience. I am sure that this question has been discussed in Islamic religious literature (I do not have any referances off hand); and I would be most interested to see how this seeming 'quandry' has(or has not) been resolved. I have my own ideas on the subject, but I will wait to see what others come up with before I present them. If so, then how is Allah able to reverse his position? Allah (SWT) knows best ;) !!! Your brother, Erik. ------------------------------ From: Salikun@vnet.net Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:27:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Qur'an, Question 1 > Michael J. Moore wrote: > >There is the doctrine of abrogation which simply states >that when cronologically later sections of the Qur'an >conflict with earlier revealed parts then the later >part abrogates the earlier part. There is also the idea >that the Qur'an exist eternally in heaven. Does the >heavenly Qur'an have abrogated parts in it? Sorry Michael, no answers here. But I would like to add a sub-question to the disscussion, cause this concept confuses me as well. Does the doctrine of abrogation refer to the chronological transmission of the Quran or the order of assembly? And, sorting chapters by length to form a book seems a little haphazard to me. Is there any hadith which support the manner in which the Quran was assembled? Who made this decision, when and why? Was it a "revealed" or "rational" decision? The Question Lover, Muhsin ------------------------------ From: jabriel@peoples.net (Jabriel Hanafi) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 18:28:06 -0500 Subject: al Muqaddim al My Akhkir al Muqaddim al Mu Akhkir Who is chosen, ,moved forward, left behind? When the Murshid holds a mother's child and looks into its eyes what does he see? A future history: the triumph the ordeal, the great potentiality, and than Baraka, the blessing of the saints through all of history. Look at the pain in a seven year old boy in Calcutta dying of aids Look at it mixed with bliss most spiritual seekers and tourists travel all their lives just to witness. What does it mean to be brought forward, or to be held back? Listen to the heart when it is still. Movement is just the debris one finds in the context of a measurement, and time is pierced with a love which disappears the illusion most think of as reality. Jabriel - ----------------------------------------- Jabriel Hanafi Pivotal Point Dynamics ------------------------------ From: Fred Rice Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:16:31 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: Quran 9:5 Assalamu alaikum, Just a quick reply... regarding Qur'an 9:5, when it is read *in context* of the verses preceding it, it says you may fight those idolators who you had a treaty with who broke their treaty with you. It is prohibited to fight those idolators who have not broken their treaty with you, this is what Qur'an 9:4 says. When you read verses in context, it is really not so puzzling. According to what we know historically, the Muslims in Madinah had a number of treaties with various idolator groups. Some of these groups then went out a killed a number of people who were allied with the Muslims, violating the treaty. The beginning of Surah 9 then says that since they have violated the treaty, the treaty is also no longer binding on the Muslims with respect to those idolators. However, those idolators who have kept their end of the treaty, the treaty is still binding. Unfortunately, you will often see those writing against Islam (in books, pamphlets, wherever) take verses like 9:5 out of context to look like Muslims have to kill all non-Muslims, or some kind of crap like that. This is really an incredibly dishonest tactic, any who do it knowingly are certainly not scholars but are instead engaged in propaganda. Wassalam, Fariduddien Rice ------------------------------ From: Fred Rice Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:24:09 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: Feelings about Questions Assalamu alaikum, On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Jacquie Weller wrote: > I am a friend of the Muslims, but not a convert. I feel like I have been > raked over the coals. This last person, I lost the post suggested I read > about sin in the Gayan, or some word like that I never heard of, as if I > never heard of sin before and had no idea about this term. Sometimes people think to themselves, "I know better than them!" and reply in a superior manner. This comes from the ego, not from piety. When I talk about this stuff, I try to talk about "just the facts" as best I can to the best of my knowledge.... though I must admit sometimes I cringe at the distortions I see.... I think a good thing to realize is there are many different groups and viewpoints in the Muslim world. If someone tells you a point of view, regarding sin or whatever, it is _their_ point of view, but it might not be the point of view of all Muslims. Even among those who say they are on the Sufi path there are differing points of view. Also, there are many different levels of understanding... to get the highest level of understanding, it is best to ask a true Shaykh. Peace, Fariduddien Rice ------------------------------ From: Fred Rice Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:33:09 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: Qur'an, Question 1 Assalamu alaikum, On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Michael J. Moore wrote: > There is the doctrine of abrogation which simply states > that when cronologically later sections of the Qur'an > conflict with earlier revealed parts then the later > part abrogates the earlier part. There is also the idea > that the Qur'an exist eternally in heaven. Does the > heavenly Qur'an have abrogated parts in it? > > If not, then do we have the real Qur'an? > If so, then how is Allah able to reverse his position? What springs to mind for me is, sometimes it is wise to do things in stages. For example, the elimination of drinking wine came in stages. Chronologically, these are: 1. Do not pray when drunk (4:43) 2. There is sin and some good in wine, but the sin is greater than the good (2:219) 3. Leave aside strong drink completely (5:93-94). I think the wisdom in doing things in stages is the essence of "the abrogating and the abrogated". Note, that this does not mean there is a contradiction between the verses. For example, although the above verses show a gradual elimination of the consumption of alcohol, the verses do not contradict each other. Wassalam, Fariduddien Rice ------------------------------ From: Fred Rice Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:38:59 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: Qur'an, Question 1 Assalamu alaikum, On Wed, 10 Jul 1996 Salikun@vnet.net wrote: > Does the doctrine of abrogation refer to the chronological transmission of > the Quran or the order of assembly? Chronological order.... > And, sorting chapters by length to form a book seems a little haphazard to > me. Is there any hadith which support the manner in which the Quran was > assembled? Who made this decision, when and why? Was it a "revealed" or > "rational" decision? The Qur'an is not sorted by length (from long suras to short suras), you can say it is _roughly_ sorted by length, but only very roughly. For example, Surah 42 has 53 verses, while Surah 43 has 89 verses. To my understanding, the order is revealed. Peace, Fariduddien Rice ------------------------------ From: Well333@turbonet.com (Jacquie Weller) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:43:53 +0100 Subject: Peace They had wounds of the heart Beaten, Bitten, Bound, Blamed Abundance of pain and impoverished love... They were taken from tribes, the Indian children To read the books and learn the white man's religion. They were cramped in Block Houses without campfires and Tent, Without the sweetness of the Moon Nights, and The Wind to come in a love song, near thy ear. They had wounds of the soul; The African Mother, Father and Child Yet still One can hear the drums of Home Come O deliverer, and break these Chains and Reigns of slavery. Come O lover and cleanse these sores, And bring the peace cup to these lips And let us drink together Equally, to bow our heads to Thou the One who speaks to each, Of Peace, and Love, and Harmony The white Buffalo has come The drums of east, west, north, south Will Speak, Let us bury weapons of distruction And gather at a feast of eternal love. ------------------------------ From: barzakh@idola.net.id Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 07:46:29 +0700 Subject: Hello again ... Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Assalamu'alaykum, Hello Tanzen, Carol, Lily, Maarof, Fred, and all... Hi, Michael Moore, it's nice to have another michael here.. :-) And welcome to brother Martin, i'm your Indonesian brother (besides Hudoyo) in this list. Hudoyo, are you still with us? Glad to be back here in this list. After a week-long trip to my sheykh and another week of trouble with my phone, I was afraid my incoming e-mails were already deleted from the server. But thank God, they're still there. Let's see...... There were Kaffea's questions (well, the answers are actually hidden within you, dear sister :->), tanzen's daily Rumi, bugs killing, stoning and sharia, and many more ..... Hmm, just like a bowl of mixed fruit salad.:-) Sweet and tasty. I love it. It is surely the most beautiful list in the cyberspace. Thank you brother Habib for hosting us. Love to all of you... Wassalamu'alaykum, your cyberspace-brother, Michael Roland ------------------------------ From: barzakh@idola.net.id Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:04:19 +0700 Subject: Re: Quran 9:5 Bismillahirrahmanirahim. Assalamu'alaykum, At 09:25 PM 7/9/96 -0400, Muhsin wrote: ..... >To read a book, even a holy book, is one thing. But the real learning >begins when one begins to read a Living Book. This is why I think the >spiritual teacher/guide is so important in sufism. To find, or to be found, >by one who actuates?, lives, possesses The Message in the heart, is truly a >blessing. > >It has been said that Muhammed read the book of his heart, read his nafs. >Was the Quran revealed by an external Gabriel? Impossible - Allah has no >partners. Illusions - There is no external. Truth/Reality/Love/God is One! > ..... > >Even the best of books can only allude to such realities. > > > There is a little note above my Sufi master's huge collection of Sufi books: "Read these books, and you won't get smart." Any comment...? Wassalamu'alaykum, your dumb brother, Michael Roland ------------------------------ From: "Erik S. Ohlander" Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 20:08:19 Subject: Re: Qur'an, Question 1 >But I would like to add a sub-question to the disscussion, cause this >concept confuses me as well. > >Does the doctrine of abrogation refer to the chronological transmission of >the Quran or the order of assembly? > To the chronological transmission of the ayat and suwar; this is why knowing the asbab al-nuzul (i.e., the occassions of revelation) is an important branch of the Islamic science of Qur'anic exegesis (i.e., tafsir). >And, sorting chapters by length to form a book seems a little haphazard to >me. Is there any hadith which support the manner in which the Quran was >assembled? Who made this decision, when and why? Was it a "revealed" or >"rational" decision? The Prophet is said, and this is related by both Ibn Ishaq (I know) and in Bukhari and Muslim (I think; I'll check), to have ordered the arrangement of the suwar (surahs) during his lifetime. But (and this is important): while he was alive, there was always the chance for fresh revelation to occur, this is why the text was not codified until after his death. In term of recension (and by extension, canonization) it wasn't until the Caliph 'Uthman (r. 644-656 CE) appointed a council to set the order, and consonatal text, of the Qur'an that the text we read today took definite form (i.e., no offical MSS. before that). This recension process involved, and indeed marshalled, all of the Islamic community in helping with the work. 'Uthman made it clear that everyone must agree, and/or speak up if they had questions during this process; and of course most of the Muslims alive at this time knew the Prophet himself, and therefore were able to speak with great authority on the subject. I don't want to be too academic here, so please stop me if you get bored :) I hope this helps- Your brother, Erik. >The Question Lover, > >Muhsin > > > ------------------------------ From: maarof@pc.jaring.my Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 09:00:30 +0800 Subject: Abrogating and abogated verses Assalamualaikum Here's a passage from Allamah Sayyid M H Tabataba'i book "The Quran in Islam" which might provide some answers to Michael's questions. maarof ============== The Existence of Abrogating and Abrogated Verses in the Quran: "Among the verses in the Quran containing orders or laws there are verses that abrogate verses previously revealed and acted upon. These abrogating verse are called _nasikh_ and those whose validity they terminate are called _mansukh_. For example, at the beginning of the Prophet's mission, Muslims were ordered to cultivate peace and friendship with the people of the Book, "Forgive and be indulgent (towards them) until God gives command," [2:109]. Some time later, fighting was allowed and the order to establish peace was abrogated: "Fight against such as those who have been given the Book but who believe not in God nor the last day, and do not forbid that which God has forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth... [11:29] The common notion of abrogation, that is, cancelling of one law or code by another, is based on the idea that a new law is needed because of a mistake or shortcoming in the previous one. It is clearly inappropriate to ascribe a mistake in law-making to God, Who is perfect, and whose creation admit of no flaws. However, in the Quran, the abrogating verses mark the end of the validity of the abrogated verses because their heed and effect was of a temporary or limited nature. In time the new law appears and announces the end of the validity of the earlier law. Considering that Quran was revealed over a period of twenty-three years in ever-changing circumstances, it is not difficult to imagine the necessity of such laws. It is in this light that we should regard the wisdom of abrogation within the Quran: "And when we put a revealation in place of (another) revealation and God knows best what He reveals -- they say: you are just inventing it. Most of them do not know. Say: The Holy Spirit (Gabriel) has revealed it from your hand with truth and as a guidance and good news for those who have surrendered (to God)" [16:101-102] ------------------------------ End of tariqas-digest V1 #54 ****************************