Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10
1
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by Emre_1974tr on September 22, 2021, 06:28:43 PM »
Muhammad was the first Muslim in the world in his time. In another verse, it is said that Moses was the first person to believe. Because Moses was the first believer of his time.

Peace
2
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by Emre_1974tr on September 22, 2021, 06:27:58 PM »
Muhammad was the first Muslim in the world in his time. In another verse, it is said that Moses was the first person to believe. Because Moses was the first believer of his time.
3
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by QuranSearchCom on September 22, 2021, 10:15:32 AM »
Jazaka Allah Khayr, brother Thinker.  While your answer is 100% correct, but the Prophet would not have been the first Muslim there existed true unitarians in the land that he was in.  Allah Almighty did categorize them in Noble Verse 5:44:

اسلموا للذين هادوا والربانيون والاحبار

The ones who Haadu (the Jews), Rabbaniyoon (ones who believe in the One GOD Almighty), and Ahbaar (also unitarians similar to the ones before them).  Among those were true Muslims in Arabia and among the Arabs even before Prophet Muhammad was born:

https://www.answering-christianity.com/which_book_recited.htm

There are even references that our mother Khadijah (the Prophet's first wife) was from among them.  She wasn't a pagan.

Be as it may, both of our answers are 100% accurate.  I believe mine is a broader, because AWWAL here wouldn't necessarily have to mean the literally first person, but rather the leading one or the best one.


Take care,
Osama Abdallah
4
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by AThinker on September 22, 2021, 03:40:00 AM »
in sura 6 verse 14 stands

Say, “Shall I choose as a supporter someone other than Allah, Who is the Originator of the heavens and the earth and Who feeds and does not need to eat?” Say, “I have been ordered to be the first to submit myself (to Him), and O people, do not be of the polytheists.”



God was teaching the messenger on how to be firmed with the polytheists. When interacting with Arab polytheists, the messenger will definitely say he is awwal since none among the polytheist receive any command prior to the messenger.
5
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by QuranSearchCom on September 21, 2021, 01:41:26 PM »
Wa Alaikum As'salam,

‏6:14 قل اغير الله اتخذ وليا فاطر السماوات والارض وهو يطعم ولايطعم قل اني امرت ان اكون اول من اسلم ولاتكونن من المشركين

[006:014]  Say: "Shall I take for my protector any other than God, the Maker of the heavens and the earth? And He it is that feedeth but is not fed." Say: "Nay! but I am commanded to be the first leading one from among of those who bow to God (in Islam), and be not thou of the company of those who join gods with God."

اول AWWAL means first and also means leading one.  In other words, the Noble Verse is saying you should always do your best to be among the leading Muslims in good example.


The Noble Word is similar to the English words "top" and "best".  There is only one top and one best.  But the two words are also used for leading people:  "top ones"; "best ones".  Among the top ones and among the best ones.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
6
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Sure 6 Verse 14
« Last post by Onur on September 21, 2021, 01:00:50 PM »
Selam aleykum

i have a question about a verse in quran

in sura 6 verse 14 stands


Say, “Shall I choose as a supporter someone other than Allah, Who is the Originator of the heavens and the earth and Who feeds and does not need to eat?” Say, “I have been ordered to be the first to submit myself (to Him), and O people, do not be of the polytheists.”

So it says that the Prohfet Muhammed is the first who surrenders to allah, only then there is no mistake because the first who surrenders was not the Prohfet Muhammed but Adam. I ask you to tell the answer what this has to do with



7



What we can see here from the image is the belief of Roman Christians during the Council of Nicae era (early 4th century) depicted through the sculptures on the coffin. The sculptures resonate the stories from passages about Jesus during the Nicene period after selecting the canonical or sacred scriptures which is true to the Nicae decree.

It is interesting to note that one of the ancient roman God (Ariel) is used to depict angels or loving creature in show in the sculptures.





The Roman Christians interpreted that God are of 3 divine men of equal status. God the Spirit. God the Father. God the Logos (before manifesting as infant Jesus inside the womb) as shown in the sculptures. This is most probably due to their encounter with the so called 'Old' Testament stating that Adam was created from the image of God. With such custom belief for a millennia that that ancient Gods were human looking, they easily interpreted the verse from the passage likewise to what they were accustom with.

If we look at Adam's figure  (in 1st image). Its exactly sculptured like that of God the Father minus the beard. Which means the genital in between Adam's thigh which is covered by the leaf (refer image) too was inherited from God the Father. Christians may perceive that the function of such bodily part shall be dissimilar for divine men as opposed to created men.



Image of Ancient Roman Gods Prometheus sculpturing man. Athena breathe in soul. (3rd century scuplture)

For ancient Romans, having a new belief in Christianity or accepting doctrine of 3 male looking Gods in one equal stature regarded as the one creator of mankind would be not much of a reform to their culture en masses. Afterall, its still the same male God with male beard, wearing clothing that created mankind.

The teaching of Christianity of having men looking Gods made the religion to be acceptable to the standard of ancient Romans of that era.

8
Kabul fell into the hands of the Taliban; this is only true for the Western press!
Kabul is liberated by the Taliban, for others.
The Afghan Taliban have indeed liberated their country from the Anglo-American-Zionist invaders, this strangely reminds the fall of Aleppo in Syria, lamented in its time by all the Western media!
The invaders return home with their tails between their legs. The Taliban are Afghans, by the way and each people has its specificities. Afghanistan was occupied by the Anglo-American-Zionist invaders, the administration in place was corrupt and in their pay. The Afghans didn't want it anymore, and wanted to regain their independence.
 
Thus the people of Vietnam and the people of Afghanistan will have confirmed that a people can turn an over-equipped, over-funded occupation army of gigantic technological superiority. In any case, it is a positive sign for Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine. By the way, for the Anglo-American-Zionist invaders, the Vietnamese syndrome reappears followed by another Afghan syndrome.

The all-out Western press has told us that during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, the Afghan resistance fighters were heroes fighting against the world's first army.
Today after dismissing the Yankee invaders, the Afghans are presented as obscurantist, who oppose the most powerful country in the world and Western civilization.
How many times have we been presented with this Afghanistan as completely retrograde, even medieval, It is to make believe that the Taliban arouse terror and yet it is the same Afghans who had after 20 years of war, understood that the imperialists do not want them any good, and with the occupiers the reality is quite different, they are sowing desolation and death everywhere with their incessant wars. The imperialist does not fight terrorism, but creates, finances and arms groups that practice terrorism.

I welcome the departure of the Anglo-American-Zionist invaders. There, in Afghanistan, the coalition has forty-nine nations that are part of ISAF and it is among at least the top 5 military powers in the world. And now they are leaving with their tail between their legs, leaving a corrupt country and without even having thought of helping economic development.

I always rejoice when a people kicks the backs of invaders. That makes me happy indeed. This withdrawal is a victory for the Afghan people, and I take as a good example it is not because the situation was disastrous for the Algerian people in 1962 following independence, that one had to complain about the departure of the French. .

How you look at the Taliban depends very much on how Western propaganda portrays them. When in power, from 1996 to 2001, the Taliban applied radical Islam as did Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf countries. At the time, opium production had fallen by 90%.
The Afghan narco state was a product of American imperialism to hide the plunder of important resources: Copper, rare earths, lithium ...
It should be noted that 30 to 45 thousand Western civilians were deployed on the Afghan territory to exploit the natural resources of the country without counting the 8 thousand Colombian mercenaries of the FARC, recovered by the CIA are in charge of monitoring the culture of the drug as well as its delivery. .
   
The unacknowledged goal of this drug allowed the CIA to finance covert operations to destabilize countries resisting the US empire. Plunder and massacre are indeed the two breasts of the USA, hypocrite master of an abject double game, in addition to being an arrogant although poor giver of lessons, be careful not to say, it is indeed the USA which destroyed the Afghanistan as well as Libya, Iraq, Syria.

But I hate this moralizing and protective attitude of the great Western Democrat whose ulterior motives we discover a few decades later. Indeed the Americans have set up with billions of dollars an administration to their boots of which there are only thousands of Afghans trying to flee the country.

As for the fight against terrorism dear to the West, and in this international coalition are at least the 5 leading military powers in the world, simple objectivity says that it is only a term of propaganda. Nowhere are terrorists invading other countries to install a government of their own. It was the Anglo-American-Zionists who did it.
 
We also see the French Army in the Sahel, charged among other things with protecting and financing through Christian NGOs under the Vatican, Terrorist groups.
In the Malian Sahel, the French army will march with Civitas, because the hostages quickly become Muslims.
Who is the terrorist?
All the Western press is worried about the plight of Afghan women, but in fact it's just a pretext, and this is where Western machos have an opportunity to spit on Muslims and pretend they care. womens rights. Yet the lot of ultra-Orthodox Jewish women is no better, but Westerners do not care.

In fact, they don't care about the fate of Afghan women. They were never concerned about Afghan women during the time of the invaders, yet with a presence of 20 years, this international coalition had not built any schools or hospitals for the Afghan people. This underdeveloped country of Afghanistan was therefore of no interest to the West. Except for these natural resources and its Opium By neglecting the degraded internal situation of the Afghan population, Western countries have allowed conditions favorable to anarchy, to the law of the most violent to insecurity, to develop there. - to say a failure or an abandonment of the international community in Afghanistan, especially when we see that the basic work vis-à-vis the Afghan civil society accomplished by the West is minimal enough not to say totally absent.

The international coalition could not achieve any of its goals because it began by sweeping away everything the country had organized; what the Americans themselves subsequently recognized. he population is increasingly hostile to the presence of Western occupiers, that corruption and drug profits have never reached such levels.
But now after the coalition debacle, then they are going to write tearful pleas about Afghan women. Not for women, of course, but just to demonize the Taliban, who they will not forgive for defeating the handsome, well-shaven Westerners, well equipped for a war ballad.
This defeat of the Anglo-American-Zionist invaders will hurt Western racists, but it will be a good example for all the others, scenes of panic that we saw at Kabul airport reminded us of those in Saigon during the US defeat in Vietnam.
However, what are these Afghans who cling to aircraft, certainly not Western NGO employees, but surely CIA-backed Afghan paramilitary forces agents. They are members of the Khost Protection Force (KPF) and the National Directorate of Security (NDS), counterinsurgency auxiliaries, mercenaries, have committed summary executions and other serious abuses with impunity, these rapid intervention forces illegally killed civilians during night operations, subjected prisoners to enforced disappearances, abducted and raped women, attacked health establishments on the pretext that they had provided medical treatment to rebel fighters .

The Taliban have frequently committed violations of the laws of war and human rights. More than certain, the CIA-backed Afghan forces have allegedly committed so many crimes that the Taliban are altar boys against them.

Our lesson givers are just racists now obsessive mantra, they hate Muslims. There was also a whole propaganda worthy of colonization to pass off the Afghans as backward barbarians. They will never forgive them for defeating the Allied oppressor when they themselves never dared to revolt against his imperial designs.
In fact, they blame the Taliban for having the courage to cast out a tyrant and for bringing out their own cowardice.

The failures in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and their dire consequences, were evident from the start each time. Driven out of Afghanistan, Americans can no longer see themselves as the world's policemen. We can therefore say that the Taliban contributed a lot to the defeat of this gendarme… !!!!!
One of the lessons of the American defeat is that imperialism and the occupation must be fought vigorously by the peoples in order to be liberated.
It will thus be important that territorial respect be elementary in the application of International Law and above all that the will of a people is also honored otherwise it is no longer democracy, but anarchy.

In the end, as Machiavelli says: "We start a war when we want, we end it when we can. "

http://kadertahri.canalblog.com/

9
I translated my article with the machine. But of course machine translation can make many mistakes, but you can generally understand what I am talking about in my article.

Resolution of Heritage Verses

Each of the heritage verses, Nisa 11, 12 and 176, actually offers separate formulas for individual situations. In fact, each sentence in these verses mentions a separate situation and formula in its own right...

When I was researching it online, I saw that there were people who noticed and said that these three verses gave separate formulas in them. But as I said, not only the verse, but also every sentence in the verses also mentions a different situation and sharing in its own right. Each sentence is a separate list of heirs and the proportions they will receive.

Whoever's mentioned in the sentence, they're the only heirs. So either they're alive, or they're still being inherited, even if they're others.

Therefore, in fact, there is no ratio to each other, common formula, hunting, as the sects practice. In Nisa 11, for example, "If there are more than two women, they own two-thirds of what the deceased leaves." is a separate formula alone (if only girls are heirs and more than two girls, this rate applies, or else it is not in other stylish and circumstances).

And so the stones are in place. In any case, it's enough. Not only is there increased inheritance in some cases, but there is also who will be given this increased amount in light of the verses. (E.g. Verse 8 of Nisa...)

Now let's write verses Nisa 11, 12, and 176 describing this heritage share and then provide an example of analysis through one:

Nisa

4:11 God directs you regarding the inheritance of your children: "To the male shall be as that given to two females. If they are women, more than two, then they will have two thirds of what is inherited. And if she is only one, then she will have one half. And to his parents, each one of them shall have one sixth of what is inherited, if he has a child. If he has no child and his parents are the heirs, then to his mother is one third; if he has siblings then to his mother is one sixth. All after a will is carried through or a debt. Your parents and your children, you do not know which are closer to you in benefit, a directive from God, for God is Knowledgeable, Wise."

4:12 And for you is half of what your wives leave behind if they have no child; but if they have a child then to you is one quarter of what they leave behind. All after a will is carried through or a debt. And to them is one quarter of what you leave behind if you have no child; but if you have a child then to them is one eighth of what you leave behind. All after a will is carried through or a debt. And if a man or a woman who is being inherited has no ascendants, but has a brother or a sister, then to each one of them is one sixth, but if they are more than this then they are to share in one third. All after a will is carried through or a debt, which does not cause harm. A directive from God, and God is Knowledgeable, Compassionate.

4:176 They seek a ruling from you, say: "God gives you the ruling for those who have no ascendants. If a person passes away and has no children but has a sister, then she shall receive half of what he leaves behind; and he will inherit from her if she has no child. However, if he has two sisters, then they will receive two thirds of what he left behind; and if he has siblings, men and women, then the male shall receive twice what the female receives." God makes clear to you that you do not stray; God is aware of all things.

***

As an example, let's open up the information given in verse 11.

I have said that each of these verses, let alone each sentence in them, offer separate formulas for different situations. Let's present his analysis:

Nisa

11. "Allah advises you regarding your children: For the male, the share of two females."

That is, if the heirs consist of only children and there are both male and female children, male children will receive 2 units, while female ones will receive 1 unit.

Briefly, with an example, if there is 300 L. inheritance and a man and a woman have children, the male will receive 200 L. and the woman will receive 100 L.

"If they are more than two women, they have two-thirds of what the deceased left."

So if they only have daughters as inheritors and their number is more than two, they have two-thirds of the inheritance. Here I would like to draw your attention again; The desired here is for girls to receive two-thirds only and only in this case. Otherwise, there is no such share in other terms and conditions.
(By the way, considering the statement in verse 176, if the inheritors are 2 girls, these 2 people share two thirds).


If we continue with the 300 L. example, they only have girls and if they are more than two, they share 200 liras among them.

"If the child is just a woman, he owns half the inheritance."

As stated in the continuation sentence in the verse, if the deceased left only a single daughter  she could receive half of the inheritance.

Again, if we go over 300 Lira, 150 Lira means this one girl child.

"If the deceased has a child, he will have a sixth share for each of the parents as he left them behind."

We understand from this statement that this time the heir has left his parents behind as well as his children, and that's why they have a share (one sixth for each ...).

Of the 300 lira, 50 lira belongs to the mother, 50 lira to the father, and the remaining is the children.

"If the deceased has no children and his parents have inherited him, then his mother is one third."

In this sentence in Nisa 11 verse, it is mentioned that "only the mother and father are inheritors". So this time there are no children, only the parents of the deceased are inheritors (even if there are siblings or something left behind, they are not inheritors).

In this case, the mother received a third. Since the share rate is not given although the father is mentioned in the sentence, the remaining two thirds means your father.

In this case, the mother receives 100 Liras of 300 Liras, while the father receives 200 Liras.

"If he has siblings, his mother's share is one-sixth of what is left of his will and debt."

If the deceased has a mother but does not have a father and also has siblings, the share of the mother decreases to one in six. The rest are shared by the brothers. But let's repeat, if the father had also been the father, only the mother and father would have received the estate, and the siblings would not have their share ... (And as it is understood from the verses, if the deceased has a child, the siblings cannot get a share.)

Likewise, in verses 12 and 176, special cases and formulas are mentioned, sentence by sentence. For example, if the deceased left a spouse in verse 12, verse 176 tells how the division would be if only siblings / siblings left behind, and as I said, each sentence in these verses contains a list of heirs and a formula.

If you wish, let us briefly examine the verse 176 of Nisa in this context:

4:176 They seek a ruling from you, say: "God gives you the ruling for those who have no ascendants. If a person passes away and has no children but has a sister, then she shall receive half of what he leaves behind; and he will inherit from her if she has no child. However, if he has two sisters, then they will receive two thirds of what he left behind; and if he has siblings, men and women, then the male shall receive twice what the female receives." God makes clear to you that you do not stray; God is aware of all things.
Here, too, "if only siblings are heirs", it is explained what the proportions are and of course, each sentence offers a separate list and a separate formula:

If the heir is only 1 sister, half of the inheritance,
If the heir is 1 brother, he takes all of the inheritance,
If 2 sisters are heirs, they get two-thirds,
If only the siblings are inheritors and they are men and women, that is, of both sexes, they share the entire estate as one (female) and two (male).

By the way, we indirectly understand from these verses that if there are only many brothers left, these sisters will receive the entire inheritance, or if there are more than two sisters (referring to verse 11), these sisters will receive two-thirds of the inheritance (equally divided among themselves).

If you read verses 11 and 176 of Nisa one after the other, you will see that the rates given to boys and girls only when children are inheritors in verse 11 are exactly the same as those given to brothers and sisters when only brothers are inheritors in verse 176.

(Incidentally, let us state that the siblings mentioned in one sentence of Nisa 12 verse and the deceased's spouse are the heirs. But in this verse 176, "only brothers" are heirs.)

In summary: In verse 11, there is no spouse, while in verse 12, there is a spouse, verse 176 tells how to make a taksim when there are only brothers.

***

And as it is known, what is essential is the testament according to the verses, and these rates are for the division of the remaining property after the will is fulfilled and the debts, if any, are paid.

As you can see, there are none of the problems such as insufficient inheritance or courtyard. The verses describe the sharing of heritage in a flawless manner. The important point here is to be able to see that each sentence gives a separate formula according to a separate list of heirs. In other words, each sentence in the verses gives a unique list of heirs and tells what the heirs will receive in this case.

While solving problems related to inheritance sharing, it is checked who the surviving heirs are, and the inheritance is divided by determining which sentence of the verses related to inheritance.

As an example, let's solve the question involving 3 famous girl heirs.

“A man dies and leaves behind a mother, a father, three daughters and a wife. How will the heritage be shared? ”.

Since both the spouse and the children are inheritors here, the fourth sentence of Nisa 12 verse describes the relevant section (each sentence of this verse describes what should be done if there is a surviving spouse):

". And to them is one quarter of what you leave behind if you have no child; but if you have a child then to them is one eighth of what you leave behind"

According to this sentence, if the man leaves his wife behind and has children, only these people can be inheritors. His wife gets one eighth of the estate, and the children get seven eight . Even if the deceased has a mother, father or siblings, he cannot get a share in this case.


***

As I said, each sentence gives a separate heir list and formula, and as you can see, inheritance is always enough.

Increasing inheritance is in question only in some cases, again, as I mentioned at the beginning of my article, there are verses containing signs that show who this increased heritage can be given ... For example:

4:8 And if the distribution is attended by the relatives and the orphans and the needy, then you shall give them part of it and say to them a kind saying.


http://emre1974tr.blogspot.com/2014/08/miras-ayetlerinin-cozumu.html
10
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Noah
« Last post by QuranSearchCom on August 01, 2021, 07:26:05 AM »
The ship was a small boat that carried Noah and his believers and some livestock.  The flood was local and the hill or small mountain that they landed on was also local.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube