Why bother with "Holy Books"

Hagar

What relevence does the Quaran, Bible or other "Holy" book have on our lives today? Indeed what relevence did they ever have?

They were all "written" centuries ago when hardly anyone could read or write.
They have been used over the years to maintain power over the ordinary punter.

Surely the fact that there are sects within major religions that differ on what is percieved to be a fundamental truth means that some of the sects are wrong. They can't all be right can they? Maybe the biggest and most important sects are the ones which are wrong.

Everyone who reads these books seems to be able to rationalise non-existant connections between life as it was then and life as we live it now. They are all littered with references to goats, sheep, swords, animal sacrifices, human sarifices, virgins, angels, demons, heaven, hell. None of these are commonly encountered in modern urban living.

Why bother with the Quaran at all?

Frank Grimes

Hagar wrote:

They were all "written" centuries ago when hardly anyone could read or write.

The Qur'an was recited, not presented in written form, to the original Muslims. Muhammed was illiterate anyway.

None of these are commonly encountered in modern urban living.

I don't believe (all anyway, I'm sure some religions would say their texts should be taken literally) religious texts are meant to be taken as an entirely literal guide/document, it's more the meaning behind the parables/metaphors etc. that are important. Although some people would take them literally.

Why bother with the Quaran at all?

If you're a religious Muslim (or even someone looking for some sort of spiritual guidance etc) then it is important. A believing Muslim considers it to be the word of God.
If you're not, then there's no need for you to bother. What sort of an answer to that question are you looking for?

Hagar

Frank Grimes wrote:

The Qur'an was recited, not presented in written form, to the original Muslims. Muhammed was illiterate anyway.

Does that mean that the Qur'an "evolved" a bit at a time so that people could learn it off a chapter at a time? I mean who could remember all that from scratch? If that's the way it happened inaccuracies must have crept in.
It must have been written down at some point, if not by Muhammed himself, by an educated person of his time. How old is the oldest written Qu'ran?

I don't believe (all anyway, I'm sure some religions would say their texts should be taken literally) religious texts are meant to be taken as an entirely literal guide/document, it's more the meaning behind the parables/metaphors etc. that are important.

A believing Muslim considers it to be the word of God.?

So god didn't say exactly what he meant? Or did he?

I'm sure god would have found a way to make his words relevent to all the future generations not just a few illiterate sheep herders. The Qu'ran seems to be aimed just at that market and not at our world today. Therefore I contend it is irrelevent to us now.

rsynnott

Hagar wrote:

It must have been written down at some point, if not by Muhammed himself, by an educated person of his time. How old is the oldest written Qu'ran?

It was, IIRC, narrated by Muhammed, and transcribed by one of his disciples.

wes

I reckon most of it is plenty valid. Its menat as a guide and its not meant to be taken literally. Way I see it god gave is all brainds to figure stuff out. The holy books are a guide for and we are suspose to read it and take our own meaning. Its is very important for every Muslim to read the Quran so they can get the meaning for themselves and not take the words of a preacher or someone else. Of course this can be hard since its all in Arabic, so the best way to get the true meaning is to learn the language.

Hagar

Thanks for the reply Rob.

Are only athiests active on this thread, and a non practising Muslim?

In-appropriate link removed by Hagar.

Frank Grimes

Hagar wrote:

Does that mean that the Qur'an "evolved" a bit at a time so that people could learn it off a chapter at a time? I mean who could remember all that from scratch? If that's the way it happened inaccuracies must have crept in.
It must have been written down at some point, if not by Muhammed himself, by an educated person of his time. How old is the oldest written Qu'ran?

It was put into "book form" by the Caliph Uthman and has stayed that way since. It was revealed (or whatever view you have) over 23 odd years. Parts were written by the literate followers, others were memorised. A lot of people in that part of the world at the time were illiterate, people generally memorised things in order to pass them on to others as opposed to writing them down.

So god didn't say exactly what he meant? Or did he?

So if you don't say something directly (i.e. without the use of metaphors etc), it's irrelevant? What about poetry etc.

I'm sure god would have found a way to make his words relevent to all the future generations not just a few illiterate sheep herders. The Qu'ran seems to be aimed just at that market and not at our world today. Therefore I contend it is irrelevent to us now.

It's the underlying message that's important. What do you expect to find exactly in religious texts that will make them "relevant to all"?
I don't understand why you think it's aimed at sheep hearders either, where are you getting that from?

Also, Wikipedia is probably a slightly more neutral source of information on this than that link you've posted.

Hagar

Sorry Frank I didn't go far enough into that site I linked to.
It's like a bloody Klan site.
I'm removing the link.
I will debate but I have no wish to offend.

Suff

Hagar wrote:

What relevence does the Quaran, Bible or other "Holy" book have on our lives today? Indeed what relevence did they ever have?

the Quraan contains the rules that set the way we should live, deal with other people (muslims or none)

Hagar wrote:

They were all "written" centuries ago when hardly anyone could read or write.

not written but recited by Mohammad (PBUH)
but people back then had an amazing memory where they can memorise the words then it was written into a number of books where they were collected and validated by the Calif Othman. less then 10 years of the Muhammad's death.

the oldest three Quraanic books are now in Trukey, Bukhara and one in Egypt. they are over 1200 years old.

NOTE:the Quraan didn't change during these years, the text remains the same from 1400 years until now.

today when students wish to learn the holy book by heart they learn from a scholar who holds a cert that he have learned the book from another well known scholar who learned it from another well known one which goes back all the way to the Prophet (PBUH)

Hagar wrote:

They have been used over the years to maintain power over the ordinary punter.

there is no holy men in Islam, not high priest or anything of that sort. so if any abuse is used its from the political power and not from the religion.

Hagar wrote:

Surely the fact that there are sects within major religions that differ on what is percieved to be a fundamental truth means that some of the sects are wrong. They can't all be right can they? Maybe the biggest and most important
sects are the ones which are wrong.

interesting theory, but on what are you basing it on?

Hagar wrote:

Everyone who reads these books seems to be able to rationalise non-existant connections between life as it was then and life as we live it now. They are all littered with references to goats, sheep, swords, animal sacrifices, human sarifices, virgins, angels, demons, heaven, hell. None of these are commonly encountered in modern urban living.

not true at all, life is life no matter whats the time.
people back them have the same things as we do now.

the quraan has rules on how to act/deal/treat with your parents, family,children, wife, business, eating, war, peace, marrige, death, and so on. also infromation on past history (other Prophets) and the afterlife and ofcouse Judgment Day and what happens on that day.

the Quraan also have scienctefic facts which have been discovered in our time now.they have been revealed 1400 years ago, like the process of birth for example (if you like more just let me know and I'll post the text to back it up)

Hagar wrote:

Why bother with the Quaran at all?

it's the source of Law, justice and soul clensing for all Humanity not only for muslims.
it;s also known as the book of life

if you have other questions let me know!

r3boot

there is no holy men in Islam, not high priest or anything of that sort. so if any abuse is used its from the political power and not from the religion.

are you sure you are talking about the current interpretation of islam?

What do you call the people who give speeches at friday prayer.

I agree with you in that there aren't supposed to be any priests or heads/ leaders the religion but the current method in which certain (=most) people practice islam, the more religious you are the more of a leader you are seen by the devout muslim community.

These changes in the methods of interpretation of the qurann and sunnah is what is dragging islam down. People are changeing what the quaran means in order to use it as a tool in a political front or to rise socially etc...

Suff

Yes there are no religious leaders in Islam in regards to the faith.

the Imam is the person who give the lesson/ speach on the friday prayer then leades the prayer.

Imam: a person who have completed a course of study of the Islamic Faith (Quraan and Sunnah).

they are assigned by an Islamic department within the Goverment (Wazaret Al Awqaf)
it's main duties are to Assign Imams to Mousqes and provid assistance to the bulding and restoration of mousqes.
it do not hold any political role within the Goverment.

in regards to leading the prayer, any person can!
if a group of people were unable to attened the Friday prayer they can select an imam and he can lead the prayer.

if a person is known to be religious infront of other people it doesn;t mean he is a leader or a holy man. but a scholar who people can use his knowledge to solve some issues they have.

r3boot

the wizarat il awaqaf has no jurisdiction outside the country it pretains to.

very few imams go through full training and even then they only train in the interpertation of islam that they think is correct.

the role of imams as you have described it is true. Unfortunatly alot of them see it upon themselves to dictate to other muslims how to live their lives and what stance they should take politically.They also tend to involve themselves in politics as part of thier islamic duty when infact the orignal role of an imam is only to give advice and clarify points that a person may not be sure of and not to force feed you his interpretation of islam.

also you are correct about leading a prayer but it is well known that 9 time out of 10 it is always the same person and that person views him self as being more religious than most (not as a result of leading the prayer but just genrally feels that way)

the above relates to traditional sunni faith, the shia faith in my opinion provides a more rubust training system for clerics and more freedom to choose which interpretation of islam you feel is more correct.

Suff

r3boot wrote:

the above relates to traditional sunni faith, the shia faith in my opinion provides a more rubust training system for clerics and more freedom to choose which interpretation of islam you feel is more correct.

The shia have introduced new teachings and elements into the faith that were not (in any part) in the prophet's (PBUH) life.

Note: sunnah mean " way of life" which all muslims should follow as that's the way the prophet (PBUH) lived his life and that's the true Islam.

and yes some imams do teach what they think is correct however they are only assigned into the position of an imam if they have the required level of knowledge. and it is true in some cases where not enough training is given but it's good to keep in mind that there is NO fully trianed/knowlegable imam in the world! they all keep learning until they get old and die! it is impossible to have a one person who knows it all and doesn;t keep learning.

r3boot

Suff wrote:

The shia have introduced new teachings and elements into the faith that were not (in any part) in the prophet's (PBUH) life.

Note: sunnah mean " way of life" which all muslims should follow as that's the way the prophet (PBUH) lived his life and that's the true Islam.

this is the biggest problem we have in islam. rather than aknowledge that there are 2 interpretations of the religion you say that people change it delibritly implying that sunni faith is the only way of practicing islam correct as the prophet had intended. I don't think that is correct. I think that both sunni and shia faith systems try to mimic the prophets way practicing islam but both tend to miss the point sometimes and get caught up in the minutiea of religion.

Suff

You have to remember that the Shai sect was not established out of faith study or some interpretation!

it's political nothing less!

when the Islamic nation at the time split due to a different political/opinion on who should take the Imamah (Leadership of the Muslims) it was between Ali and Moaweyah Iben Abi Sufian.

since then the people who followed Ali become known as the Shai (The Clan of - or - the Followers)

and yes they did change and introduced a number of practices that isn't valid with the Prohpet Muhammad's (PBUH) Life.

Yes I would say that the sunneh is the accurat and the correct method of Islam simply cos it's based on the way the Prophet lived his life.
as the prohpet (PBUH) said:
" Man raghiba ann sunnaty, fa laysa men ommaty"
Translation :
" The one who rejects my way of Life is'nt a part of my
Nation"
(Saseeh Al Bokhari)

r3boot

Suff wrote:

You have to remember that the Shai sect was not established out of faith study or some interpretation!

it's political nothing less!

when the Islamic nation at the time split due to a different political/opinion on who should take the Imamah (Leadership of the Muslims) it was between Ali and Moaweyah Iben Abi Sufian.

since then the people who followed Ali become known as the Shai (The Clan of - or - the Followers)

and yes they did change and introduced a number of practices that isn't valid with the Prohpet Muhammad's (PBUH) Life.

Yes I would say that the sunneh is the accurat and the correct method of Islam simply cos it's based on the way the Prophet lived his life.
as the prohpet (PBUH) said:
" Man raghiba ann sunnaty, fa laysa men ommaty"
Translation :
" The one who rejects my way of Life is'nt a part of my
Nation"
(Saseeh Al Bokhari)

I think we both know it's a little more complicated than that and had more to do with the way moawiya and ali acted at the time and how confused people were at the time of the prophets death.

In the end the fundmentals of all muslims are the same. Its just the expression of ones faith and a couple of technicalities that differ.

Also things were never introduced. the quran and sunnah are used to determine islamic judgement, just like in the sunni faith. The only difference is that shia clerics have to go through a heirarchy of training before telling you that those who do what they say will go to heaven and those who don't will go to hell, unlike the sunni mufti's who only need to train for a few years to be able to tell people the same thing.

Having said that there are some sunni and shia clerics who seem slightly enlightened and have some valid points of view, maybe someday listen to some of their advice but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.

In order for islam to develop in a more robust manner we need to have a better training and appraisal system for clerics and practice more tolerance amoung muslims and other religions. This won't happen on a mass scale for some time.

(p.s. we could have this arguement for the next two years (and I think you know that some people have for more than that) and we will both have the same point of view regarding it. )

Suff

Totaly agree in regards to the historical argument.

No one can tell who's going where, it's up to GOD not us or any high cleric.

training is just as important in the sunnah as for the shia.
you seem to think so little of the sunnah!

as i said no matter how high in the shia heirarchy you go
you can never know the whole thing (Islam).
No one can.

that's the thing I hate most, some clerics think they know it all and tell people what to do.

Islam is simple, but became complicated with all these sects and interpretations.