Idolizing the Koran

temporal

What is worship?

kaalchakra # 33:

:)

So what is worship, temporal ji?

All right, on a friendly note, let me help out here. We can go step by step.

Do Parsis worship the fire?

kaalchakra sahib:

kyuN ghumana chah rahay hO humaiN?

aap ko bhi pata hay

aur hum ko bhi

(aur hum nay tO likh bhi diya hay saaf saaf in #32- aap PaRhaiN na paRhaiN -- aap samjhna chahaiN, na samjhna chahaiN - aap ki marzi)

have a nice weekend

t

Re: # 36
I have read ur comments Sir and the rest of them here including urstruly,temporal & Ajeya. I have question here we all believe on GOD. But if u want to prove scientifically u can`t do that so my point is that those who believe on GOD are they having any mind sickness, accepting some thing true which don`t exist.
What ``deity`` is ????

Re: # 37
worship : to treat somebody or something as divine and show respect by engaging in acts of prayer and devotion
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2005. © 1993-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Its all there it all depends on u how u wanna take it.

stinger_kh

I don`t think that people who belive in God have any sickness! That would be silly.

So, using that defintion, what is your and your friends` view of Parsis? Do Parsis worship the fire?

Temporal ji

There was this Christian tract on how one must avoid cults. It offered a very simple definition of a cult: any religion that does not fully conform to the Word of Living God as available in the Christian Bible is a cult and dangerous.

There are understandings, and then there are understandings :)

Re: # 41
i think they workship fire becoz GOD can be in any form of energy that is what i think i don`t know much about others. For few extra information about Parsi i have to contact Cowasjee for that.

Stinger_kh

Thanks. That is a great answer. A person who does not know and knows that he does not know is in a far better position than one who does not know and is so sure of his knowledge that he refuses to find out.

When Cowasjee explains, please listen to him with an open mind. He will tell you that Parsis do not worship the fire.

Re: # 30

I will answer your second question first. The verses contained in Chapter Al-Nisa (The Women) were revealed from 3rd year of Prophet Mohammad`s migration to medina and upto the early part of the fifth year. The exact date of verse 23 is not known for certainity but from ahadith and accounts of his life an approximate time period have been established, which I don`t know at this time. Please keep in mind that the sequence of verses in Qura`n are not arranged in chronological order but they have been arranged according to the instructions of Holy Prophet (pbuh). That is why it takes a little reaserch to establish the chronolgy.

As far as second question is concerned. I think by foster mother and foster sister, you mean a relationship that is established due to adoption. In Islam, to encourage the institution of adoption and to provide the love and care of the whole family, adoption does not establish any relationship between adoptee and the adopted. The adoptee does not have a right in inheritence and thus eliminates the competition from foster siblings. But accoding to the Islamic law of inhetritence each blood relationship has pre-ordained share from the two third of the estate and from the 1/3rd left over portion an adoptee may bequeth a part or whole of of that part to the adopted.

In short, upon puberty, the adopted has to be seprated from opposite sex of the household and a certain demeanor must be established among them just as one would maintain the demeanor between un-related man and woman as per Islamic values. So to address your question more directly an adopted can marry his or her foster parent or sibling.

the various points of interest so far have been:

*athar vs. arthur.

*athar`s questionable ``return`` to the faith.

*koran vs. qur`an.

*worship as opposed to reverence.

- - if the qur`an were indeed just a book in the eyes of a group of people, a man or a village wouldn`t have to be destroyed for allegedly desecrating it now would it?

- - if many muslims do understand the difference between worship and reverence then why is it that a group of muslim men brutally and fatally punish those who would desecrate it?

what then is reverence? and what is worship. and are excess reverence and worship synonymous.

i believe shiraz sahib is already testing this idea of reverence as opposed to worship in his constant usage of the spelling ``koran`` as opposed to ``qur`an`` -- a spelling he has chosen to use more than twenty times in this article (which beats bill clinton standing outside a running plane and using the term genocide twenty times to refer to what happened in rwanda within a span of no more and perhaps less than ten minutes). already it has gotten a riled-up reaction, and questioning.

reading this article, i can`t really determine that shiraz`s views have changed all that much. it is certainly a lot more reasonable than past attempts. advocating that one read the qur`an and devour it is reading it as one would tolkien, or c. s. lewis, or faiz, ghalib or iqbal, is not necessarily a return. . . it is a continuing journey to a destination where shiraz will still meet with massive resistance. courage!

A real investigation of the genetic relationship between the three so-called Abrahamic faiths may well throw up some surprises.

A common understanding of the relationship is, in a nutshell: Christianity as a schismatic variant of Judaism, minus the Chosen People tribalism and the taboos, modified for propagation among the Gentiles; and Islam as an attempt to reform and ‘rationalise’ Christianity by discarding some of the myths and the central mysteries as well as the institution of the Church, while reabsorbing some taboos from Judaism.

There is reason to believe that this description is completely wrong in the place it assigns to Christianity. Christianity may have originated not as a Hellenized Judaism, but rather, as a Judaized version of the pagan mystery religions that predominated in the Roman empire in the first century CE. According to this view, the metaphorical-mythical-mystical elements in the New Testament – stuff like the Triune God, Christ as the Son of God, the Virgin Birth, assorted miracles, the Resurrection, etc. were put there quite deliberately. There was never any intention to present the Gospels as a historical account of events that ‘actually’ occurred. It was well-understood that a historical Jesus never existed.

If this account is accurate, Christianity is the odd man out among the so-called triad Judaic religions, originating as a ‘pagan’ creed rather than a variant of Judaic monotheism. The attempt by the human author(s) of the Quran to purge Christianity of obvious ‘irrationality’ and ‘idolatry’ by, for instance decreeing that Christ was a Prophet and not the Son of God, would then be a consequence of misunderstanding and misplaced concreteness.

From the following few posts by Kalchakra and temporal etc. I see that there has emerged confusion about the Islamic concept of worship. The title of this article has added to the confusion as well.

In order to understand the monotheistic nature of Islam one must understand the difference between two closely related terms - idolatry and iconolatry . The term idolatry has two connotations i.e. a worshiper worships an idol assuming that the deity that he is worshipping has a physical form that is depicted in the form of the idol. The other connotation is that “this sacred idol” is the god or deity himself.

Similarly, iconolatry has two connotations as well – a symbol is associated with something or someone sacred and in extreme cases this symbol itself becomes either a deity or starts possessing the same characteristics, as a deity would have.

Islam forbids both practices of idolatry and iconolatry period. However, we see that Islam attaches some form of sanctity to places, objects, and symbols. Is this Iconolatry then? Or is it outright Idolatry, as the article suggests. There is such a gray line between these two concepts that a person who does not know the difference may confuse one for the other.

In Islam, in order to keep its practices stand clear from either of “iconolatry” or “idolatry” two concepts have been introduced to us by Allah and his Prophet (pbuh). These concepts are called “Kufr” and “shirk”.

A Kafir is one who practices kufr, and the practice of kufr is the outright rejection of the belief that a High Entity, God, or Allah exists. The modern English equivalents of Kafir are – atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, humanists, skeptics and to some lesser degree the doubters.

A “mushriq” on the other hand is that who does not deny the existence of a Higher Entity but he thinks that there are many higher entities that share the workload of the universe. A particular idol may be responsible for rains and other for prosperity A certain symbol may be associated with fertility and other with destruction. And the worshiper worships one or the other as per his requirement.

In Islamic cultural practices “iconolatry” has taken its extreme form. For example, in shia theology, Ali (RA) have all those powers that Allah has reserved for himself. Also in other sects certain dead personalities are addressed for help, wealth, prosperity, fertility etc. at their graves or in person assuming that they have a special connection to Allah or they share powers with Allah somehow, under one context or the other. Similarly, as for symbols the written text of Qura’n or other prayers is considered to heal etc.

Islam strictly forbids these practices because this is “Shirk” period. It stipulates that every man has a direct connection to Allah by saying that Allah is closer to man than his carotid artery.

However, I must clarify here that, there is certain demeanor as ordered by Holy Prophet (pbuh) while dealing with Qura’n as a book. Men and women are forbidden to touch it without ablution. Its recitation at certain times is forbidden. And it is instructed that we should listen to it attentively by taking a break from our daily affairs.

Similarly, Kaaba in Mecca has no significance other than a center point for direction and to produce uniformity among worshipers. The black stone at one corner of Kaaba is merely a marker from where the seven ritual circles begin. It is important because since Abraham established this house of God ten thousand years ago, he himself put that marker there, and its black color separated it from other stones. God may have ordered him to kiss this stone on every circle and offer prayer, and Holy Prophet (pbuh) continued the practice. Other than that, the building or the stone have no powers that they share with Allah and Muslism of any sect do not consider them forms of deity or deities themselves.

Re: #44 by Urstruly

In an earlier post (#29), you had mentioned:

``Prohibited to you (For marriage) are:- Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father`s sisters, Mother`s sisters; brother`s daughters, sister`s daughters; foster-mothers (Who suckled you), foster-sisters;.....``

This tells me that according to Mohammeds`s rules, foster-sisters are always prohibited, but only foster-mothers who suckled you are prohibited. Therefore foster-mothers who did not suckle you are fair game, but foster-sisters are never so.

But in this post you say:

``So to address your question more directly an adopted can marry his or her foster parent or sibling.``

So which one is correct?