#Quran word for word Roman translation

[chashmenaaz]

tammat-bil-KHair

तम्मत-बिल-ख़ैर • تَمَّت بِالْخَیر

Noun, Feminine a good end🔚

خیریت سے ختم ہوئی

[v0idund3rth3v3il]

https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/s/1401QvzC6v

These are not my words, please use the link if you want to see the author.

Explanation to verse 7:81 or the "Anti-gay" verse.

People often bring up verse 7:81 with out any context to show why the Quran forbids gay people and thinks that gay sex is haram, I'm here to give the full context and show why their wrong.

For those who don't know, verse 7:81 say's something like "Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people." Which sounds bad alone until you actually take into full context what it means.

The verse is talking about the village of Lot who were actively RAPING men, not just having sex with them (a major problem in the world back then as both the Romans and Greeks were known to rape other males). As in their lust had become so overwhelming that women weren't enough anymore, they had to attack visitors (a big no no in Islamic culture) and rape them even though they where guys. The people of Lot where so depraved that they literally tried to rape angels before being wiped out so it's a warning against the depravity of rape instead of homosexuality in general as no where in the Quran, unlike the bible, does it say anything against gay sex.

The verse literally right before it say's something like (plenty of translations but roughly) "How do you commit such a horrible that NO ONE/THING BEFORE YOU HAVE COMMITTED". This can't mean homosexuality as we know homosexuality in animals does exist and homosexuality was very well known to just about every person on the planet as shocker, gay people have always existed. Historically speaking, the Code of Hammurabi , which ordered society in most of the Tigris-Euphrates Valley for more than a thousand years, has nothing to say about homosexuality. The laws of Eshunna and Egypt are also silent on the subject with us knowing that there were ancient Egyptian gay couples including a Pharaoh who was more then likely bi. The Hittites forbade father-son relations, but that was part of a general rule against incest. The Assyrians thought it shameful for a man to repeatedly offer himself to other men, and also prohibited men from raping males of the same social class, but all other male-male sexual relations were ignored. These are all states that were around centuries before Sodom and Gomorrah were apparently destroyed destroyed. The much more rational explanation would be they made an entire society based on rape of men and other "abominations" to a point where they would kick people out for wanting to stay "pure" (line 7:82), something that no group of people before them have done.

Now people will often say "if it's bad raping man then it's ok if we rape woman right?" well no. This is because when you take it with the previous verse and the verse after it, it's clear that these people wanted the pleasure of doing something that no other group of people had ever done which was the mass rape/normalization of rape of men. It's absolutely horrible but the rape of women was a lot more normalized back than and so wouldn't fit with the previous line of them doing something that no group of people/creatures had ever done before. That also explains why they didn't except Lot's daughter (which could be interpreted as him trying to save them because the angels didn't take to kindly to wanting to be raped) as they got their rocks off by doing what no other people had ever done which was to mass rape men, not women which again, is also disgusting but a lot more normal back then.

To go more into Islamic history courtesy of u/cold-blue, The grand mufti of the Abbasid caliphate in the mid-9th century, Yahya ibn Aktham, was a known homosexual, and viewed a few verses through the gender/sexuality lens.

One of them was the verse where Allah says He prepares males for some, females for others, and mixes the males and females. I’ve read that ibn Aktham once said that this verse confused people because it alludes to sexual preferences. He also said that the heavenly cupbearers mentioned in the Quran are sexual rewards like the houris. (Whether or not homosexuality is allowed in Jannah was debated, and some came to the conclusion that it is, and the only reason it isn’t in this life is because the rectum is dirty.)

The Ottoman empire, the last caliphate of the Muslim world, not only didn't care about gay people (unlike the Europeans) but actually had art depicting it.

Another is al-Razi. While he didn’t outright say that homosexuality is allowed, he allowed gay couples to be together sexually so long as they didn’t have anal sex. He was concerned with homosexual men committing suicide over their innate feelings and said that if there is risk of that, and the man cannot change himself from homosexual to heterosexual/survive in an opposite-sex marriage, he may be with his beloved (a man) so long as he does not transgress the limits (in his opinion, anal sex).

One of the transmitters of the Quranic variants we have today (of which Warsh and Hafs are two) was a man named al-Kisa’i, who was also a known homosexual. So one of the seven qira’ats came from a gay man.

There was another man ALSO named al-Kisa’i, who was a historian in 1100 CE, and he said in his Stories of the Prophets (Qiṣaṣ al-'Anbiyā') that the people of Lut were specifically MEN WITH WIVES who raped other men, not homosexual men, lining up with what we know historically.

And speaking even more so on the physical element, the male "gspot" is actual in the anus which even if you find gross, is a design of Allah and not a flaw. Why would he do that if homosexuality is a sin?

The reason homosexuality is so hated in the Islamic world is none other then the heretical Salafi and Wahhabi movements (actually considered heretics for most of the time they were around including their top scholars, not my opinion, and the only reason their not now is because of British) and because of Europeans as homosexual relationships were generally tolerated in pre-modern Islamic societies, and historical records suggest that these laws were invoked infrequently, mainly in cases of rape or other "exceptionally blatant infringement on public morals". Public attitudes toward homosexuality in the Muslim world underwent a marked negative change starting from the 19th century through the gradual spread of Islamic fundamentalist movements such as Salafism and Wahhabism, and the influence of the sexual notions and restrictive norms prevalent in Europe at the time: a number of Muslim-majority countries have retained criminal penalties for homosexual acts enacted under European colonial rule.

People often only bring up verse 7:81 and don't bring the verses directly previous or after it nor does it take into consideration the histography of their actions and the verse. It would be like me saying a book said "...kill all black people." but not elaborating and saying that the line previous to is says "These people were so horrible that they would regularly chant..." and the line after it is "I can't believe they would say/do something so disgusting." with the entire context of the book being that they would kick out anyone who didn't want to kill all black people. They only say's that the book said to kill all black people. It's very disingenuous to say the least.

To further prove my point, the word "sodomite" is often used to mean the rape of another person through the ass, not consensual sex between the two. If you google "sodomized" than you'll see rapists, not a loving consensual couple. Even the Arabic words for "sodomite" and a gay person is different as sodomite is literally translated into "lut" well a gay person is translated into "shakhs mithliu aljins".

To get more philosophical about it, sex is not some fetish which just develops in people, it is the most primal human desire that a person can have. So why would Allah make a group (there's homosexual animals as well) a certain way and then say not to follow the most basic desire they'll ever have right after wanting food and water but then say the rest of that group can follow that desire after they get married? People can control their desires until marriage as the Quran makes clear, they don't just never have sex. So why would it be any different for a gay couple? This is like saying that sex with it self is haram.

Finally, people often forget the fact that Allah is an all loving and all knowing being so why would he make certain people that he hates or want's other people to hate aka be "phobic" of when in the Quran it's made clear that we should be loving and affectionate? Now even if after all of this people still believe homosexuality is haram, Allah is said multiple time to be all loving, all understanding and all forgiving so as long they are good people and don't commit a truly horrible sin (shirk aka worship of other false gods, rape, murder, hurting others, you know, the classics) Allah will inevitably forgive them for giving into their most basic human desire especially if it's with a loving partner with in a marriage so why would anyone else have a problem with them?

I'm not gonna add a tl;dr because I worked waaay to hard on this for it be condensed into a few sentences and I really want people to read it and fully understand where it's coming from.

[givemearmstopraywith]

This may be a bit of a dump question but I've always wondered about this and I thought I could ask this from you since you seem to know more about it. I hope that's okay! Are the translations of the bible and their differences very important? Are the messages that the writings send us that different from each other depending on the translation?

it's very important. translation is an art, like anything else. from a semitic language like hebrew or arabic, it's difficult and often impossible to fully capture the meaning of a word in the original text using english (or any other language). in judaism every stroke of every letter is thought to be an emanation of God: he is the words themselves. the quran is the word of God exactly as it was transmitted to the prophet. so abrahamic religions, bar christianity, place extraordinary important in literal meaning, because you encounter God not only in the meaning of the words but in their very essence, their form and shape.

scriptural translation has always, always been fraught with problems. for instance jerome, developing the vulgate, encountered exodus 34, where moses encounters God face to face and is transformed with rays of light. the hebrew word for this transformation is קָרַ֛ן, and jerome translate it to "cornuta," horns: for centuries afterward moses is depicted in art as having horns, like a goat, because of this mistranslation. it may be that jerome meant "glorified" rather than "horned," based off his later commentaries and use of the term by previous exegetes, but the fact remains that outside of the theological sphere this single word, translated to a western language, stripped back meaning tragically. even to the extent that it propagated harmful stereotypes about jews.

or consider the use of the word "atonement" in english translations of the new testament: katallage, used in romans 5:11, is translated as atonement, but it actually means "reconciliation" or "restitution." in fact, jesus never speaks of atonement. in the old testament the word translated to atonement is כָּפַר, "kaphar", which means "covering." in 1 peter 4:8 we are told, "love covers over a great number of sins." how different would christian understandings of atonement be if we translated "kaphar" as "covering" and not atonement? forgiveness for wrongdoing becomes not something we offer to or beg from God, but something to which we submit, because the action is removed from us, humble as we are, to the great forgiver- the great lover.

i say all this to contextualize the difficulty of translation to begin with. but in the sense of critical pedagogy, every translation of any religious text is subject to the bias of the translator. a good translator is conscious of their bias and seeks to remove it from their work. but christian scripture has an agenda. it is not only something we read for a personal relationship to God but something that is used to dictate right behaviour, as a means of social control, something that develops culture. if a person translating a text has this in mind, they can construct the meaning of the text towards what version of a society or culture they feel is "right," based on their personal and invariably biased understanding of a text. this is why i dislike the kjv translation and never recommend it. the kjv is a product of its time. it is not a good translation of the bible: it is old, but it is not the oldest english translation, and its meaning is absolutely skewed. this is difficult, because many evangelical christians believe the kjv is the absolute word of God, and they are already wrong, because no translation will ever be absolute truth: it is only translation.

words are a limiting system. when we try to capture the essence of something like a god, we are limiting him to our vocabulary.

i always recommend the nrsv because it is version i use for scholarly work. it isn't beautiful but it is as close to a "correct" translation as you can get. but i always supplement my reading with other tools: the jewish annotated new testament is wonderful, for instance, and biblehub has detailed interlinear translations of different translations and the original text. but i am also aware i will never be able to fully comprehend the depth and beautiful of scripture until i learn hebrew and greek, at minimum. but this should not discourage anyone: scripture is meant to be read. but it has to be read actively, critically. God wants you to swallow his words, but he needs you to chew them first.

[lillahqur]

Can I be a Muslim witch?

This is my first post, and I saw someone post here earlier asking about being a Christian witch, so I thought I might ask for help too.

I don't know how to start or where to start, but I was never a really religious person. Growing up with autism, I was questioning everything, it wasn't until my teen years that I discovered witchcraft and thought "wow, this makes sense". Maybe it was how I was raised (Roman Catholic, but we didn't pray or go to church etc.) But I was frustrated at the lack of answers I got from god. While being a child all I did was ask and ask things of God, but never got anything, but when I found witchcraft and paganism, it made sense to offer things to the gods, pray to them, and do things in their honor, then they'll feel.. appreciated(?) I guess that's a good word. A thing that I thought often was putting it in human terms, I'd get annoyed only being asked things but never being appreciated, or given anything in return.

About a year after that is when my friends friend from Greece had asked if we wanted to know what Greek god would be best for us to worship. So we gave our details to her aunt who does witchcraft, in the end I found out Aphrodite would be the best for me, so I've been worshiping her for 2 years.

Now around that time a couple years ago I started to see more Islamic videos popping up on my TikTok and I kind of liked them periodically but never payed too much attention to them. Finally, last year I got curious, so I started to watch and read more about Islam. It was beautiful, it felt so inclusive, I was speechless.

By now I know a bit more than I did then, and two things replay in my head daily, 1) witchcraft/magic is forbidden [as stated in the Quran many times] and 2) worshipping another deity other than God (Allah) is also forbidden [also stated in the Quran]

So far I've only seen the Quran talk about, what some would call, baneful magic and as for the second one, it even states in the Shahada (Islamic declaration of faith) that there is no god but God (Allah), it's direct translation is "I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah; and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah"

These two things have been the only reason stopping me from converting/reverting to Islam, one more than the other obviously.

I guess my two questions are: what do I do about wanting to be Muslim but worshipping Aphrodite?

It states clearly there should only be Allah and I don't want to take my Shahada when it would be based on a lie.

And my next question being: Once I figure out the first, can I practice witchcraft and be Muslim?

I've seen another Muslim witch, but again, she didn't have the first issue as me.

Anyone and everyone's advice/thoughts would be appreciated, thank you :)

[alqotaefe]

The Advantages of the Arabic Language

The Arabic language, one of the oldest and most widely spoken languages in the world, holds a unique position due to its rich history, cultural significance, and linguistic features. Here are some of the key advantages of learning and understanding Arabic:

1. Cultural and Religious Significance

Arabic is the language of the Quran, the holy book of Islam, making it a crucial language for over a billion Muslims around the world. Understanding Arabic allows access to Islamic texts in their original form, offering deeper insight into the religion and its teachings. Moreover, Arabic is the language of a vast body of classical literature, poetry, and philosophy, providing a gateway to a rich cultural heritage.

2. Linguistic Richness

Arabic is known for its expressive and poetic nature. The language has a rich vocabulary, with words that convey nuanced meanings and emotions. Arabic's root system, where words are formed from a base set of consonants, allows for a wide range of word formations and meanings. This linguistic structure enables precise and articulate expression, making it a powerful tool for communication.

3. Global Relevance

Arabic is an official language in 22 countries and is spoken by over 300 million people as their first language. It is also one of the six official languages of the United Nations. Learning Arabic opens doors to a diverse and rapidly growing region, offering opportunities in fields such as diplomacy, international business, journalism, and translation.

4. Economic Opportunities

The Arab world is a significant player in the global economy, with countries rich in natural resources, particularly oil and gas. Knowledge of Arabic is highly valued in industries such as energy, finance, and trade. It can also be beneficial for those working in international relations and global development, where understanding the language and culture can enhance negotiations and partnerships.

5. Intellectual Challenge

Arabic is considered one of the more challenging languages to learn, particularly for speakers of Indo-European languages. The script, grammar, and pronunciation present unique challenges, but mastering them can be intellectually rewarding. The process of learning Arabic can develop cognitive skills such as problem-solving, memory, and analytical thinking.

6. Cultural Appreciation and Understanding

Learning Arabic provides insights into the values, traditions, and ways of life in the Arab world. It fosters cross-cultural understanding and respect, which is increasingly important in our globalized world. By understanding the language, one can better appreciate the contributions of Arab civilization to fields such as mathematics, science, medicine, and architecture.

7. Connection to a Rich History

Arabic has been a lingua franca in many regions throughout history, playing a central role in the spread of knowledge during the Golden Age of Islam. Scholars in the Arab world preserved and expanded upon the knowledge of the ancient Greeks, Romans, and Persians. By learning Arabic, one can access a vast archive of historical texts and gain a deeper understanding of human history.

8. Global Influence

The Arab world has a significant impact on global affairs, particularly in politics, religion, and culture. Arabic media, including television networks like Al Jazeera, play an influential role in shaping international perspectives. Proficiency in Arabic allows individuals to engage with these media sources directly, gaining unfiltered insights into current events and global issues.

Conclusion

The Arabic language offers numerous advantages, from cultural and religious insights to economic opportunities and intellectual challenges. Whether for personal enrichment, professional advancement, or academic pursuit, learning Arabic can be a deeply rewarding experience that opens up a world of possibilities.

[wolffyluna]

I think I may have made some prosleytizers happy today.

I just wanted to grab some pamphlets from the "Hello! Please join Islam" group (I Like Religious Pamphlets), but I was willing to talk and my approximate knowledge of many things extended enough to Islam that I think I kind of ?impressed? them. And I think I may have also convinced them that they had got me on the hook. I was a single failed conversational reflex save from saying the shahada.

The thing is, while my mouth was being friendly and interested, internally I was going "...that's not a revelation from God, that's something you could have known by mundane means," "that's not a revelation from God, and it's not even how mountains work," "While I can't say definitevely that that's not a revelation from God, I will point out that in any book containing a lot of imagery, the probability that that imagery can apply if you squint to something centuries later rapidly approaches 1."

And now, an hour or so later, I find myself coming up with ways to make their arguments for the truth of Islam better.

You see, the person I was talking to's argument against Christianity was that there were "too many versions of the Bible" and could you really trust your immortal soul with that? Now, he could have meant "the whole situation with the apocrypha is /weird/ when it comes to a revelation from God, what are y'all even doing." But no, from context, he meant the fact that they were multiple English translations.

Which, uh, bold words from the guy who's own sacred text has multiple English translation?

Now, points to Islam, they have way more of a tradition of reading the Quran in Arabic compared to Christians' and reading the original Hebrew/Aramaic/Koine Greek. But Christians do... do that. (I think he was also judging them for not reading Jesus' words in the "original Arabic" but. um. There are some technical difficulties with doing that.)

The thing is, if I wanted to argue that Christians had a) recieved a revelation from God, but b) had willfully misinterpreted it and stewarded it badly, I would not go for English translations. No, there's a better slam dunk* lined up here: The Nicene Creed.

It won't work against all Christians, but he's going for an Australian audience here, and Australian Christians mostly fall under the Nicene umbrella.

And the Nicene Creed is a statement of orthodox Christian belief that isn't in the Bible. Chunks of it are made up of implications from the Bible, that come with wild disagreement about. And it was (arguably) created for political purposes by a Roman Emperor! Come on! It's an easy shot, stop running down the wrong side of court going "but the NIV vs the KJV!"

*Read: more convincing to weird religious nerds like moi.

[wycliffeassociates]

The Message in Jesus’ Sacrifice for Humanity’s Sins

One of the foundational tenets of Christianity centers on Jesus Christ’s death on the cross and sacrifice on behalf of humanity and His resurrection. A revolutionary leader of his time, Jesus challenged the Roman rule of Jerusalem and the power held by Judaic high priests. He was arrested and tried in the Jewish court, Sanhedrin.

While many accusers gave false testimony, Jesus neither denied nor confirmed their words. Quiet throughout the proceedings, he did not respond to the charges arrayed against him. However, he did provide an affirmative response when asked the central question, “Are you the Messiah?” Chief priest Caiaphas deemed this as blasphemy and was a key element in the death sentence subsequently handed down.

Jesus was next brought before the Roman leader Pontus Pilate and again remained largely silent, except when asked, “Are you the king of the Jews?” to which he responded, “You say so.” While Pilate was not primarily concerned with matters of faith, he mercilessly upheld law and order and, given the restive state of many in the community, ordered Jesus’ flagellation and death.

Christ appeared unaffected by this sentencing, as he had already made peace with his fate. Following the Last Supper, realizing he had been betrayed by one of his disciples, Jesus meditated in the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives. Accompanied by disciples Luke, Mark, and John, he prayed and faced an agonizing decision of whether to escape into the desert before his pursuers arrived or stay and meet what would almost certainly be a fate of death.

With his sweat appearing as drops of blood in humanity’s darkest hour, Christ chose to stay and die for his principles and the salvation of humanity. When Judas arrived with a crowd of pursuers, Jesus went along peacefully, even rebuking one of his disciples, who lashed out with a sword. As Luke recounted, Jesus went to heal the pursuer who had suffered a wound by his disciple’s sword.

If Christ’s martyrdom was intentional and with foreknowledge, the central question is why he chose the course that ultimately led to His resurrection, ascension, and being revered as the Son of God. The answer in the New Testament is that, in sacrificing his life on the cross, Jesus accepted the punishment deserved by others for their sins. In return, he offered his life while preserving righteousness. This preserved humanity’s oneness with God and prevented society from sinking into un-enlightenment and darkness.

Theologians call this action a “substitutionary atonement,” as Christ took the world's weight on his shoulders without a sense of anger or retribution against those who reviled him. In return for this act of love, God provided the gift of mercy, such that humanity would live and witness Christ’s example as a guiding light and a pathway for a return to righteousness.

Christ’s selfless act serves as an inspiration for humanity to this day. An example featured on the website of Wycliffe Associates, which is leading global Bible translation efforts, centers on Pastor Du*. Raised in the Muslim faith, Pastor Du recalls being profoundly affected by a pocket-sized Gospel he was given. The passage particularly moved him, “She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).

This instigated his quest to understand just what kind of man would take sacrificial actions, counterintuitive to many, that would save others from their sins. Studying both the Bible and the Quran, Pastor Du ultimately realized that, without Christ’s blood sacrifice, he would not truly be saved. This brought him to accept Jesus into his life and embark on a journey as a Christian disciple and teacher.

*Using Pseudonym for security reasons.

[tittacal]

Surah al qadr transliteration

Surah al qadr transliteration how to#

An-Nâsīismi All ahi a lrra hm ani a lrra heem iģ. Select Transliteration Of Surahs Of The Holy Quran Display Index of Transliteration Of Surahs of the Holy Quran 1. Al-Qadr :: Transliteration Latin Arabic of The Holy Quran With Arabic English Translation Meaning :: Simplified Latin Letter Quran Surahs Verses and Arabic Text - Reading Quran in Latin Letter ABC Transliterated Quran Arabic English Quran Surahs Index - Chapters Listing :: 1. The Literary Heritage Of The Arabs : An.Surah 97. Literary Heritage Of The Arabs : An Anthology​, Saqi Books £32.75 Safwatul Tafasir: Shaykh Sabuni, Arabic 3V Set, Dar Al-'Alamiyah £38.95 Qur'an Translation and Study Juz 30 Word to Word Arabic-English £5.95 My Palestine Craft Box: Model Building, Books, Activities & Lots £19.99 A Believer's Guide to Prayer: Merits & Rulings, Dahlan & Burhani £10.00 3 Vol Madinah Arabic Course: Durus Al-Lughat Al-Arabiyyah, UKIA £21.50 Tales From Dhikarville- Brother and Little Sister Ramadan £4.00 Mashallah Award Girls Certificate, (10X per pack) £3.50 Giant Journey: 75 Piece Floor Puzzle With Map Guide (Age 5+) £12.99 Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah £17.99 Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. Al-Wusta Fi An-Nahw (Arabic) By Hashim bin Ismail al-Barbadusi £4.00 Upbringing Of Children By Maulana Moosa A. Al-Muntakhabat Min Kalam al Arab Wa Amthalihim, V.1 (Arabic) £4.00 The NAFS: Lessons from Prophet Yusuf (A) & Zulaykha, P/Size £7.50 Muslim Manners: A Guide Book For Parents & Teachers £5.95 100 Stories of Hadhrat Anas Bin Malik R.A - HB, ZamZam £3.95 Muslims Under Non-Muslim Rule: Ibn Taymiyya, Ed. Al-Nahw al-Wadih (Secondary Level, 3 Parts/1 Book), Arabic £19.95 Rozana Quran Padhne Aur Sikhne ke Liye Hamari Website Par Visit Karien Al Asr, Arabic. Concise Narrations to Raise the Next Generation By Dr M. Surah Qadr With English Translation & Transliteration. Anwar al-Muhammadiyya By Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabhani £10.95 Muhammadan Visions By Hassan S Ba'Alawi & Abdul Aziz Ahmad £34.95 An Introduction to Prayer: Muqaddimat al-Ṣalah, al-Nasafi £9.95 Softening the Heart (Kitab Az-Zuhd wa'r-Raqaʾiq) By Ibn Mubarak £12.99 Paragons Of The Qur'an By Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (D. Gracious Qur'an: A Modern Phrased Interpretation, Large(Arb-Eng) 18. Juz Amma For School Students Workbook Vol 1 (Taqwa Prints) 17. Clear Quran A Thematic English Translation, Mustafa Khattab -PB 16. Al-Qur'an With Colour Coded English Transliteration, A Y Ali 15. 16 Surahs A5, A Collection of Sixteen Surah From Quranul Kareem 14. Meanings of the Noble Qur'an, Taqi Usmani Revised New Edition 12. Majestic Qur'an: Arabic & Plain English By Dr. A Word for Word Meaning of Qur'an, Mohar Ali (Grammatical Notes) 9. Quraan Made Easy(Revised) Based on Jalalayn, Mufti Afzal Hoosen 8. Surah Yaa Seen With Translation & Commentary, Sarwar Qadri 7. Al-Sabuni's Tafsir of Surah Al-Mulk From Safwat al-Tafasir 6. Juz 'Amma for School Students (Weekend Learning) Green 2021 Edn 5. Al-Quran The Guidance for Mankind English Only: Azam Malik 4. Al-Qur'an The Guidance for Mankind Arabic-English: Azam Malik 3. Surah Yassin & Ayatul Kursi Arabic-English & Transliteration R92 2. It also contains an updated edited version of the translation of the meaning of these surahs in modern Standard English, based upon the translation of the meaning of the Qur'an of the late Abdullah Yusuf Ali.īestsellers 1. The text is transliterated in an easy to follow method, and is accompanied side by side by the Qur'anic (Arabic) text. This volume covers the surahs of the 30th part (Juz).

Surah al qadr transliteration how to#

This work is the first in the series to help English speaking Muslims learn how to recite the surahs of the Qur'an. Part 30: Holy Qur'an, Arb-Eng & Roman Transliteration, P/SizeĮnglish Translation By Abdullah Yusuf AliĮdited in Modern Standard English With Roman transliteration

[adventuresoutsidethegenderbinary]

As a queer Muslim, I 100% want to believe that it's permissible in Islam to...you know, be queer.

The thing is, majority of people say its not. Even Islamic scholars who I follow and respect, like Mufti Menk, and other Islamic pages run by straight people, say its wrong to act upon it. It upsets me, because why would Allah SWT love us, but not want us to love? Why would he want us to suffer alone? Why would he want us to feel restricted? Islam is not about restriction at all. Islam is the religion of peace, is it not?

Idk if IS the truth, or just my internalised homophobia talking, but I feel like queer Muslim pages say it's okay to be queer...because they're queer themselves. And they're trying to find ways bargain with themselves to say that its okay. And lots of (straight religious) people don't agree with them (like a scholar for example) I feel like there's just too much evidence on the opposing side for me to believe that it's not a sin.Idk what to do. I even tried to pray so that I could find out the truth or find out answers. Then the next morning I saw yet another person who said acting upon queerness is a sin. I know that it was just one opinion, but I feel like it just happened too soon for it to be a mere coincidence. I ask for signs to find out the truth, but then I don't like the signs.

What makes me even more angry is that all this questioning is happening to me during Ramadan - the time where you're supposed to become closer to Allah.

In the end, I'm just glad I like all genders and can marry a man, if being queer really is a ,,sin" 😔

Hello friend!

I have struggled with these same feelings myself. I often wonder if I am just interpreting the Quran in a certain way to make myself feel better. I don’t think these feelings will ever go away.

However, there is substantial evidence that homosexuality didn’t use to be such a haram concept in Islam, or at least, not homosexuality the way we think of it. For instance, there were many notable Muslim figures who practiced homosexuality or were thought to practice it, particularly from the 8th - 10th centuries. Such figures included Caliphs, and in later centuries, Ottoman sultans. However, this “homosexuality” often referred to men sleeping with young boys (typically too young to have a beard). 

I can’t seem to find it right now, but I saw a post somewhere talking about an Old Testament verse (I believe it was Leviticus) which said, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, for it is an abomination”, but people later determined that this was a mistranslation and that it originally said “you shall not lie with young boys as with women”. This would make sense given how widespread such pedophilia was at the time, especially in the Greco-Roman world. 

Thus, I think there’s substantial evidence that the Quran was actually banning pedophilia, especially since the word “homosexuality” was never in the book and people had to come up with one when translating it. When we also consider our Allah, most kind and most merciful, we know that he does things with a purpose. Saying that pedophilia, lust, and rape is a sin makes sense because these are all bad things that hurt others. I struggle to understand why Allah would ban relationships between people of the same gender when they pose no threat to others and can actually be quite beneficial in that same-gender couples often adopt or take care of children. 

Currently, many Islamic leaders are quite conservative, and that has more to do with geopolitical forces than religious ones, so I think that also contributes to the fact that most of the people re-examining homosexuality in Islam are queer. Additionally, many Muslim-majority countries are very conservative and the leaders are very oppressive, and hence any major scholars who challenge the “traditional” interpretation of the text may be silenced.

Sorry for the long response - I’m still trying to figure all this out too. All I know is that I have a hard time imagining Allah casting someone down into Hell if they spent their whole life helping others but unapologetically loved someone of the same gender. 

Peace be upon you,

River

[katherinehillierillustration]

Over the xmas break I found the sketches I did for that Fruits of Our Culture series back in 2019, aaand decided to finally get round to properly drawing some of them! 

So....here is FIGS*! *(The type of figs prevalent around the Mediterranean and Middle East, not the kind of figs in south and east asia, I’ll get to those another time hopefully) 

Now considered a symbol of the womb, figs have been cultivated since the VERY OLD TIMES.

Fig leaves were iconically worn by Adam and Eve, who in some non western translations of the Bible, ate the forbidden FIGS, not apples. Figs are also from heaven, according to the Quran.

Long before that, fig wood was used by the ancient Egyptians for mummy ‘coffins’, while the fruit was a symbol of the Earth goddess Hathor. 

In ancient greece, figs were a major symbol of the wine god Dionysus, and he and his followers wore wreaths made of fig leaves. Dionysus, who was also worshipped as a fertility god, was likely associated with figs because they look kinda like testicles; in ancient greek, the word for ‘fig’ is the same as the word for ‘testicle’. Necklaces of dried figs were also worn by the castrated priests of Attis.

Fast-forward many centuries to Romulus and Remus, the Rome-founding twins of Roman myth. They were nursed by a wolf, after being born under the shade of a fig tree.

Something fascinating and also Actually Real Science Fact about Figs is their relationship with the tiny fig wasps, on which they are entirely dependant. Over the millennia they have evolved to require only these wasps for their peculiar method of pollination. The fig flower-reproductive parts are inside the unripe fig bud, which the queen burrows into to lay her eggs - then die. The males hatch, mate with the unborn sisters, then also die. The pregnant females hatch and in all this process, the fig is pollinated. The females then burrow OUT of the fig to go lay eggs in another fig. The dead wasps are absorbed into the flesh of the ripening fig.

So there’s some cool stuff about delicious wasp-fleshed FIGS that I made into a picture.

Check my blog for the others in the series....Apple, Strawberry, Orange, Pomegranate, Pear, and Grapes. Olive and Cherry coming asap! 

You can buy the original of this artwork here

And the whole series as prints, here! 

PS I’m also going to release the line-work from this series as colouring pages. Would you prefer a downloadable digital file, or to buy an actual print? Please let me know! 

_

LINKS - instagram - KoFi - my NEW store - my Etsy store - Redbubble - webcomic - portfolio - behance -

[haruatori]

Common list of misconceptions

Had great fun learning about these, maybe now I will remember it better:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

Fortune cookies, despite being associated with Chinese cuisine in the United States, were invented in Japan and introduced to the US by the Japanese.[11] The cookies are extremely rare in China, where they are seen as symbols of American cuisine.[12]

The United States does not require police officers to identify themselves as police in the case of a sting or other undercover work, and police officers may lie when engaged in such work.[25] Claiming entrapment as a defense instead focuses on whether the defendant was induced by undue pressure (such as threats) or deception from law enforcement to commit crimes they would not have otherwise committed.[26]

Parody singer "Weird Al" Yankovic did not write or perform most of the songs and comedy sketches attributed to him or "Weird Al Yankovich" on the Internet.[48]

The forbidden fruit mentioned in the Book of Genesis is never identified as an apple,[51] a misconception widely depicted in Western art.The original Hebrew texts mention only tree and fruit. Early Latin translations use the word mali, which can mean either "evil" or "apple" depending on if the A is short or long respectively, although the difference in vowel length had already vanished from speech in Latin at the time. In early Germanic languages the word "apple" and its cognates usually simply meant "fruit". German and French artists commonly depict the fruit as an apple from the 12th century onwards, and John Milton's Areopagitica from 1644 explicitly mentions the fruit as an apple.[52] Jewish scholars have suggested that the fruit could have been a grape, a fig, an apricot, or an etrog.[53]

The Bible does not say that exactly three magi came to visit the baby Jesus, nor that they were kings, or rode on camels, or that their names were Casper, Melchior, and Balthazar, nor what color their skin was. Three magi are inferred because three gifts are described, but we only know that they were plural (at least 2); there could have been many more and probably an entourage accompanied them on their journey. The artistic depictions of the nativity have almost always depicted three magi since the 3rd century.[57] The Bible only specifies an upper limit of 2 years for the interval between the birth and the visit (Matthew 2:16), and artistic depictions and the closeness of the traditional dates of December 25 and January 6 encourage the popular assumption that the visit took place in the same season as the birth, but later traditions varied, with the visit taken as occurring up to two years later. The association of magi with kings comes from efforts to tie the visit to prophecies in the Book of Isaiah.[58]

No Biblical or historical evidence supports Mary Magdalene having been a prostitute.[59]

The idea that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute before she met Jesus is not found in the Bible or in any of the other earliest Christian writings. The misconception likely arose due to a conflation between Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany (who anoints Jesus's feet in John 11:1–12), and the unnamed "sinful woman" who anoints Jesus's feet in Luke 7:36–50.[59]

The Quran does not promise martyrs 72 virgins in heaven. It does mention companions, houri, to all people—martyr or not—in heaven, but no number is specified. The source for the 72 virgins is a hadith in Sunan al-Tirmidhi by Imam Tirmidhi.[74][75] Hadiths are sayings and acts of the prophet Muhammad as reported by others, and as such they are not part of the Quran itself. Muslims are not meant to necessarily believe all hadiths, and that applies particularly to those hadiths that are weakly sourced, such as this one.[76] Furthermore, the correct translation of this particular hadith is a matter of debate.[74] In the same collection of Sunni hadiths, however, the following is judged strong (hasan sahih): "There are six things with Allah for the martyr. He is forgiven with the first flow of blood (he suffers), he is shown his place in Paradise, he is protected from punishment in the grave, secured from the greatest terror, the crown of dignity is placed upon his head—and its gems are better than the world and what is in it—he is married to seventy two wives among wide-eyed houris (Al-Huril-'Ayn) of Paradise, and he may intercede for seventy of his close relatives."[77]

Ancient Greek and Roman sculptures were originally painted bright colors; they only appear white today because the original pigments have deteriorated. Some well-preserved statues still bear traces of their original coloration.[127][128]

The accused at the Salem witch trials in North America were not burned at the stake; about 15 died in prison, 19 were hanged and one was pressed to death.[172]

Marie Antoinette did not say "let them eat cake" when she heard that the French peasantry were starving due to a shortage of bread. The phrase was first published in Rousseau's Confessions when Marie was only nine years old and most scholars believe that Rousseau coined it himself, or that it was said by Maria Theresa, the wife of Louis XIV. Even Rousseau (or Maria Theresa) did not use the exact words but actually Qu'ils mangent de la brioche, meaning "Let them eat brioche" (a rich type of bread). Marie Antoinette was a target of attacks from radical jacobins; therefore, political activists attributed the phrase "let them eat cake" to her, to promulgate an image of her as disconnected from her subjects.[173]

Napoleon Bonaparte was not short. He was actually slightly taller than the average Frenchman of his time.[180] After his death in 1821, the French emperor's height was recorded as 5 feet 2 inches in French feet, which in English measurements is 5 feet 7 inches (1.70 m).[181] He was actually nicknamed le Petit Caporal (The Little Corporal) as a term of endearment.[182] Napoleon was often accompanied by his imperial guard, who were selected for their height[183]—this may have contributed to a perception that he was comparatively short.

There was no widespread outbreak of panic across the United States in response to Orson Welles's 1938 radio adaptation of H.G. Wells's The War of the Worlds. Only a very small share of the radio audience was even listening to it, and isolated reports of scattered incidents and increased call volume to emergency services were played up the next day by newspapers, eager to discredit radio as a competitor for advertising. Both Welles and CBS, which had initially reacted apologetically, later came to realize that the myth benefited them and actively embraced it in later years.[200]

Rosa Parks was not sitting in the front ("white") section of the bus during the event that made her famous and incited the Montgomery bus boycott. Rather, she was sitting in the front of the back ("colored") section of the bus, where African Americans were expected to sit, but refused to give up her seat to a white man who asked for it (which was also the expected action of African Americans at the time).

Although popularly known as the "red telephone", the Moscow–Washington hotline was never a telephone line, nor were red phones used. The first implementation of the hotline used teletype equipment, which was replaced by facsimile (fax) machines in 1988. Since 2008, the hotline has been a secure computer link over which the two countries exchange emails.[220] Moreover, the hotline links the Kremlin to the Pentagon, not the White House.[221]

Bulls are not enraged by the color red, used in capes by professional matadors. Cattle are dichromats, so red does not stand out as a bright color. It is not the color of the cape, but the perceived threat by the matador that incites it to charge.[238]

Dogs do not sweat by salivating[239] Dogs actually do have sweat glands and not only on their tongues; they sweat mainly through their footpads. However, dogs do primarily regulate their body temperature through panting.[240] (See also: Dog anatomy).

Bats are not blind. While about 70 percent of bat species, mainly in the microbat family, use echolocation to navigate, all bat species have eyes and are capable of sight. In addition, almost all bats in the megabat or fruit bat family cannot echolocate and have excellent night vision.[244]

The notion that goldfish have a memory span of just a few seconds is false.[250][251] It is much longer, counted in months.

There is no such thing as an "alpha" in a wolf pack. An early study that coined the term "alpha wolf" had only observed unrelated adult wolves living in captivity. In the wild, wolf packs operate more like human families: there is no defined sense of rank, parents are in charge until the young grow up and start their own families, younger wolves do not overthrow an "alpha" to become the new leader, and social dominance fights are situational.[254][255]

Mice do not have a special appetite for cheese, and will eat it only for lack of better options. Mice actually favor sweet, sugary foods. It is unclear where the myth came from.[260]

Sunflowers do not always point to the sun. Flowering sunflowers face a fixed direction (often east) all day long, but not necessarily the sun.[287] However, in an earlier developmental stage, before the appearance of flower heads, the immature buds do track the sun (a phenomenon called phototropism) and the fixed alignment of the mature flowers toward a certain direction is often the result.[288]

Petroleum does not originate from dinosaurs but rather bacteria and algae.[308]

No human genome (nor any mammalian genome for that matter) has ever been completely sequenced. As of 2017, by some estimates, between 4% to 9% of the human genome had not been sequenced.[311]

Trickle-down theory of economics does not work.[325]

Waking sleepwalkers does not harm them. While it is true that a person may be confused or disoriented for a short time after awakening, this does not cause them further harm. In contrast, sleepwalkers may injure themselves if they trip over objects or lose their balance while sleepwalking.[332]

Stretching before or after exercise does not reduce muscle soreness.[338]

Exercise-induced muscle soreness is not caused by lactic acid buildup.[339] Muscular lactic acid levels during and after exercise do not correlate with soreness;[340] exercise-induced muscle soreness is thought to be due to microtrauma from an unaccustomed or strenuous exercise, against which the body adapts with repeated bouts of the same exercise.[341]

Shaving does not cause terminal hair to grow back thicker (more dense) or darker. This belief is due to hair that has never been cut having a tapered end, whereas, after cutting, the edge is blunt and therefore thicker than the tapered ends; the sharper, unworn edges make the cut hair appear thicker and feel coarser. That short hairs are less flexible than longer hairs also contributes to this effect.[355]

A person's hair and fingernails do not continue to grow after death. Rather, the skin dries and shrinks away from the bases of hairs and nails, giving the appearance of growth.[356]

Acne is mostly caused by genetics, rather than lack of hygiene, eating fatty food, or other personal habits.[360]

The order in which different types of alcoholic beverages are consumed ("Grape or grain but never the twain" and "Beer before liquor never sicker; liquor before beer in the clear") does not affect intoxication or create adverse side effects.[381]

Hand size does not predict human penis size,[385] but finger length ratio may.[386]

There is no physiological basis for the belief that having sex in the days leading up to a sporting event or contest is detrimental to performance.[390] In fact it has been suggested that sex prior to sports activity can elevate male testosterone level, which could potentially enhance performance.[391]

Glass does not flow at room temperature as a high-viscosity liquid.[442] Although glass shares some molecular properties found in liquids, glass at room temperature is an amorphous solid that only begins to flow above the glass transition temperature,[443] though the exact nature of the glass transition is not considered settled among scientists.[444] Panes of stained glass windows are often thicker at the bottom than at the top, and this has been cited as an example of the slow flow of glass over centuries. However, this unevenness is due to the window manufacturing processes used at the time.[443][444] No such distortion is observed in other glass objects, such as sculptures or optical instruments, that are of similar or even greater age.[443][444][445]

Most diamonds are not formed from highly compressed coal. More than 99 percent of diamonds ever mined have formed in the conditions of extreme heat and pressure about 140 kilometers (87 mi) below the earth's surface. Coal is formed from prehistoric plants buried much closer to the surface, and is unlikely to migrate below 3.2 kilometers (2.0 mi) through common geological processes. Most diamonds that have been dated are older than the first land plants, and are therefore older than coal. It is possible that diamonds can form from coal in subduction zones and in meteoroid impacts, but diamonds formed in this way are rare and the carbon source is more likely carbonate rocks and organic carbon in sediments, rather than coal.[446]

Although the Greek philosopher Pythagoras is most famous today for his alleged mathematical discoveries,[452][453] classical historians dispute whether he himself ever actually made any significant contributions to the field.[450][451] He cannot have been the first to discover his famous theorem, because it was known and used by the Babylonians and Indians centuries before Pythagoras,[454][455][456][457] but it is possible that he may have been the first one to introduce it to the Greeks.[458][456]

There is no scientific evidence for the existence of "photographic" memory in adults (the ability to remember images with so high a precision as to mimic a camera),[478] but some young children have eidetic memory.[479] Many people have claimed to have a photographic memory, but those people have been shown to have good memories as a result of mnemonic devices rather than a natural capacity for detailed memory encoding.[480] There are rare cases of individuals with exceptional memory, but none of them has a memory that mimics that of a camera.

[foggynightdonut]

Etymology

Hebrew

Netzer

One view holds that "Nazareth" is derived from one of the Hebrew words for 'branch', namely ne·ṣer, ‏נֵ֫צֶר‎,[8] and alludes to the prophetic, messianic words in Book of Isaiah 11:1, 'from (Jesse's) roots a Branch (netzer) will bear fruit'. One view suggests this toponym might be an example of a tribal name used by resettling groups on their return from exile.[9] Alternatively, the name may derive from the verb na·ṣar, נָצַר, "watch, guard, keep,"[10] and understood either in the sense of "watchtower" or "guard place", implying the early town was perched on or near the brow of the hill, or, in the passive sense as 'preserved, protected' in reference to its secluded position.[11] The negative references to Nazareth in the Gospel of John suggest that ancient Jews did not connect the town's name to prophecy.[12]

Another theory holds that the Greek form Ναζαρά (Nazará), used in Matthew and Luke, may derive from an earlier Aramaic form of the name, or from another Semitic language form.[13] If there were a tsade (צ) in the original Semitic form, as in the later Hebrew forms, it would normally have been transcribed in Greek with a sigma (σ) instead of a zeta (ζ).[14] This has led some scholars to question whether "Nazareth" and its cognates in the New Testament actually refer to the settlement known traditionally as Nazareth in Lower Galilee.[15] Such linguistic discrepancies may be explained, however, by "a peculiarity of the 'Palestinian' Aramaic dialect wherein a sade (ṣ) between two voiced (sonant) consonants tended to be partially assimilated by taking on a zayin (z) sound".[14]

Arabic

an-Nāṣira

The Arabic name for Nazareth is an-Nāṣira, and Jesus (Arabic: يَسُوع‎, Yasū`) is also called an-Nāṣirī, reflecting the Arab tradition of according people an attribution, a name denoting whence a person comes in either geographical or tribal terms. In the Qur'an, Christians are referred to as naṣārā, meaning "followers of an-Nāṣirī", or "those who follow Jesus of Nazareth".[16]

New Testament references

In Luke's Gospel, Nazareth is first described as 'a town of Galilee' and home of Mary (Luke 1:26). Following the birth and early epiphanial events of chapter 2 of Luke's Gospel, Mary, Joseph and Jesus "returned to Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth".[17]

In English translations of the New Testament, the phrase "Jesus of Nazareth" appears seventeen times whereas the Greek has the form "Jesus the Nazarēnos" or "Jesus the Nazōraios."[18] One plausible view is that Nazōraean (Ναζωραῖος) is a normal Greek adaptation of a reconstructed, hypothetical term in Jewish Aramaic for the word later used in Rabbinical sources to refer to Jesus.[19] "Nazaréth" is named twelve times in surviving Greek manuscript versions of the New Testament, 10 times as Nazaréth or Nazarét,[20] and twice as Nazará.[14] The former two may retain the 'feminine' endings common in Galilean toponyms.[14] The minor variants, Nazarat and Nazarath are also attested.[21]Nazara (Ναζαρά) might be the earliest form of the name in Greek, going back to the putative Q document. It is found in Matthew 4:13 and Luke 4:16.[14][dubious – discuss] However, the Textus Receptus clearly translates all passages as Nazara leaving little room for debate there.[22]

Many scholars have questioned a link between "Nazareth" and the terms "Nazarene" and "Nazoraean" on linguistic grounds,[23] while some affirm the possibility of etymological relation "given the idiosyncrasies of Galilean Aramaic."[24]

Extrabiblical references

Nazareth as depicted on a

Byzantine

mosaic (

Chora Church

,

Constantinople

)

The form Nazara is also found in the earliest non-scriptural reference to the town, a citation by Sextus Julius Africanus dated about 221 AD[25] (see "Middle Roman to Byzantine Periods" below). The Church Father Origen (c. 185 to 254 AD) knows the forms Nazará and Nazarét.[26] Later, Eusebius in his Onomasticon (translated by St. Jerome) also refers to the settlement as Nazara.[27] The nașirutha of the scriptures of the Mandeans refers to "priestly craft", not to Nazareth, which they identified with Qom.[28]

The first non-Christian reference to Nazareth is an inscription on a marble fragment from a synagogue found in Caesarea Maritima in 1962.[29] This fragment gives the town's name in Hebrew as נצרת (n-ṣ-r-t). The inscription dates to c. AD 300 and chronicles the assignment of priests that took place at some time after the Bar Kokhba revolt, AD 132–35.[30] (See "Middle Roman to Byzantine Periods" below.) An 8th-century AD Hebrew inscription, which was the earliest known Hebrew reference to Nazareth prior to the discovery of the inscription above, uses the same form.[14]

Nazarenes, Nasranis,

Notzrim,

ChristiansMain article:

Nazarene (title)

Around 331, Eusebius records that from the name Nazareth Christ was called a Nazoraean, and that in earlier centuries Christians, were once called Nazarenes.[31]Tertullian (Against Marcion 4:8) records that "for this reason the Jews call us 'Nazarenes'." In the New Testament Christians are called "Christians" three times by Paul in Romans, and "Nazarenes" once by Tertullus, a Jewish lawyer. The Rabbinic and modern Hebrew name for Christians, notzrim, is also thought to derive from Nazareth, and be connected with Tertullus' charge against Paul of being a member of the sect of the Nazarenes, Nazoraioi, "men of Nazareth" in Acts. Against this some medieval Jewish polemical texts connect notzrim with the netsarim "watchmen" of Ephraim in Jeremiah 31:6. In Syriac Aramaic Nasrath (ܢܨܪܬ) is used for Nazareth, while "Nazarenes" (Acts 24:5) and "of Nazareth" are both Nasrani or Nasraya (ܕܢܨܪܝܐ) an adjectival form.[32][33][34]Nasrani is used in the Quran for Christians, and in Modern Standard Arabic may refer more widely to Western people.[35]Saint Thomas Christians, an ancient community of Jewish Christians in India who trace their origins to evangelistic activity of Thomas the Apostle in the 1st century, are sometimes known by the name "Nasrani" even today.[36][37]

History

Stone Age

Archaeological researchers[who?] have revealed that a funerary and cult center at Kfar HaHoresh, about two miles (3.2 km) from current Nazareth, dates back roughly 9000 years to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B era.[38] The remains of some 65 individuals were found, buried under huge horizontal headstone structures, some of which consisted of up to 3 tons of locally produced white plaster. Decorated human skulls uncovered there have led archaeologists to identify Kfar HaHoresh as a major cult centre in that era.[39]

Bronze and Iron Age

The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC) which indicated substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time.

Roman period

Historic photo of

Mary's Well

Archaeological evidence shows the Nazareth was occupied during the late Hellenistic period, through the Roman period and into the Byzantine period.[40]

According to the Gospel of Luke, Nazareth was the home village of Mary as well as the site of the Annunciation (when the angel Gabriel informed Mary that she would give birth to Jesus). According to the Gospel of Matthew, Joseph and Mary resettled in Nazareth after returning from the flight from Bethlehem to Egypt. According to the Bible, Jesus grew up in Nazareth from some point in his childhood. However, some modern scholars also regard Nazareth as the birthplace of Jesus.[41]

A Hebrew inscription found in Caesarea dating to the late 3rd or early 4th century mentions Nazareth as the home of the priestly Hapizzez/Hafizaz family after the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–135 AD).[42][43] From the three fragments that have been found, the inscription seems to be a list of the twenty-four priestly courses (cf. Books of Chronicles - 1 Chronicles 24:7–19 and Book of Nehemiah - Nehemiah 11;12), with each course (or family) assigned its proper order and the name of each town or village in Galilee where it settled. Nazareth is not spelled with the "z" sound but with the Hebrew tsade (thus "Nasareth" or "Natsareth").[44]Eleazar Kalir (a Hebrew Galilean poet variously dated from the 6th to 10th century) mentions a locality clearly in the Nazareth region bearing the name Nazareth נצרת (in this case vocalized "Nitzrat"), which was home to the descendants of the 18th Kohen family Happitzetz (הפצץ), for at least several centuries after the Bar Kochva revolt.[citation needed]

Although it is mentioned in the New Testament gospels, there are no extant non-biblical references to Nazareth until around 200 CE, when Sextus Julius Africanus, cited by Eusebius (Church History 1.7.14), speaks of Nazara as a village in Judea and locates it near an as-yet unidentified "Cochaba".[45] In the same passage Africanus writes of desposunoi – relatives of Jesus – who he claims kept the records of their descent with great care. Ken Dark describes the view that Nazareth did not exist in Jesus's time as "archaeologically unsupportable".[46]

The

Basilica of the Annunciation

James F. Strange, Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Southern Florida,[47] notes: "Nazareth is not mentioned in ancient Jewish sources earlier than the third century CE. This likely reflects its lack of prominence both in Galilee and in Judaea."[48] Strange originally calculated the population of Nazareth at the time of Christ as "roughly 1,600 to 2,000 people" but, in a subsequent publication that followed more than a decade of additional research, revised this figure down to "a maximum of about 480."[49] In 2009, Israeli archaeologist Yardenna Alexandre excavated archaeological remains in Nazareth that date to the time of Jesus in the early Roman period. Alexandre told reporters, "The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth."[50][51][40]

Other sources state that during Jesus' time, Nazareth had a population of 400 and one public bath, which was important for civic and religious purposes, as a mikva.[52]

Crusader-era carving in Nazareth

A tablet at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, dating to 50 CE, was sent from Nazareth to Paris in 1878. It contains an inscription known as the "Ordinance of Caesar" that outlines the penalty of death for those who violate tombs or graves. However, it is suspected that this inscription came to Nazareth from somewhere else (possibly Sepphoris). Bagatti writes: "we are not certain that it was found in Nazareth, even though it came from Nazareth to Paris. At Nazareth there lived various vendors of antiquities who got ancient material from several places."[53] C. Kopp is more definite: "It must be accepted with certainty that [the Ordinance of Caesar]… was brought to the Nazareth market by outside merchants."[54]Princeton University archaeologist Jack Finnegan describes additional archaeological evidence related to settlement in the Nazareth basin during the Bronze and Iron Ages, and states that "Nazareth was a strongly Jewish settlement in the Roman period."[55]

[you-are-another-me]

"ORIGINS OF THE WORD "CUNT"

"Cuneiform", the most ancient form of writing, derives from "kunta" meaning "female genitalia" in Sumerian of ancient Iraq. "Kunta" is "woman" in several Near Eastern and African languages and a Mother Tongue that is being compiled by linguists today. It was also spelled "quna," which is the root of "queen." Since priestesses were known to be accountants/administrators of Temple of Inanna in Sumeria c.3100 B.C. when Cuneiform was first used, it is highly likely that cuneiform was "the sign of the kunta" who kept the books (clay tablets) for the temple economy/redistribution of wealth that evolved from communal economics of ancient mother-cultures.

So when an abuser calls a woman a "cunt" he is actually calling her a "queen who invented writing and numerals." Girls and women can thus reclaim the words in our language that have been used as weapons against us in emotionally explosive situations. The word "prostitute" (law giver of the temple) and "whore" (houri, Persian, which means a gorgeous semi-divine female that awaits men in the 7th Heaven) are some of the finest compliments a woman can be given.

Many ancient languages did not have huge vocabularies as we do and the same word had many meanings, according to the context in which it was used. "Kunta" is also the root of kundalini (energy), khan (highest leader of the Eurasian steppe nomads, whose society was originally matriarchal and who still have remnants of a matriarchate), quantity, any words that start with "kw", qu, or kh. Examples: Cunda, mother of Buddha according to Japanese; Cunti-Devi, Goddess of kundalini energy, India; Kunta, means literally one who has female genitalia, and describes a priestess, ancient Sumeria; Kun, Goddess of Mercy, India; Quani, Korean goddess; Qudshu, female priestess of ancient Canaan & Phoenicia, which became the Roman province of Palestine after they conquered it; Quadesha, Sumerian word for a type of priestess. Qu' can also mean love, sensuality, sexuality, the divinity present in all females.

So, the most interesting conclusion is that the Quran, is actually the book of love for females. Female sensuality is probably the literal translation, but Muslims translate it as "reading or lection", which is also flattering to females because the mothers of Arabs were always their only teachers before Mohammad dictated the Koran. Now they have Koranic schools called "Madrasas", the mother-schools, although they now teach only boys and denigrate women. Almost every value word in the Muslim religion, including "Muslim" is a mother-word, derived from the mother root: Mohammad, mufti, mosque, madrasa, Makka (Mecca), Madina, mukhtar, mujahadeem, mezes, and many, many more.

Another variation is "quern," a hand-mill used by ancient women to grind grain into flour. The etymology points to housewives of ancient Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq and parts of Iran, Palestine, & Syria, where agriculture began, as the ones who invented bread out of flour by adding a liquid and letting the dough sit for while until air-borne yeasts raised it. When baked in their clay ovens, it resulted in the most remarkable invention of the human race, the staff of life, bread. It was also baked quickly, without waiting for the yeasts to lighten it, and is known today as pita.

~Gloria Bertonis, M.Ed. with Carol Miranda, Stone Age Divas: Their Mystery and Their Magic

[ramrodd]

Was the Bible Edited? Yes. COMMENTARY:

History, for me, is a subset of literature and literature begins as narrative.

As a literature major (well, actually, I was an ROTC major, but I had to do another 13 hours a semester to make it a legitimate field of study, even if Indiana University didn't offer a degree in the military arts and sciences. When it comes to process theology, that's what I was doing at IU), I studied a lot of history, especially around the Romantic poets around the time the American revolution fulfilled Romans 13:1 - 7 with the US Constitution. George Washington was the 2nd Coming in the eyes of Europe, especially as it translated to the imaginations of people like Lord Byron and his squad. I wasn't interested in how History was put together because I could study how the Bible is put together and transfer the processes to the facts-based reconstruction of measurable events.

Here's the thing:  I have had a working relationship with the Holy Spirit since 1954 and, as it regards the existential nature of Jesus as a validation of the God Hypothesis, it's not open to argument. I mean, the parachute is an illustration of the difference between faith and trust. When you leave a perfectly good airplane before it has been chocked up at the loading gate, you have perfect trust based on experiential knowledge that gravity is going to work. In the real world, there is a 99% chance that the parachute is going to work, but the nature of the universe is that the connection between "Free Will" and "Probability" is absolute, so, there must always be the 1% "Titanic" Factor. It is always a leap of faith when you have the choice to not leap that the coincidence of that 1% and Murphy's Law will not occur just because you are such a wonderful person and God won't let it happen.

When it comes to Probability, God doesn't have a vote. That's the observable metric reflecting the absolute nature of Free Will in the dynamics of the human condition.  There is absolutely no apriori knowledge of The One in the individual human conscious and unconscious. There is no god-sized hole in the human psyche. My experience with the Soviets has convinced me they were the only true Athiests in History: if there was a god-sized hole in their indiviudual and collective unconscious, they filled it with Marx because they fell in love with his ideas. Marxists, universally, have been heart-broken at the manifest failure of Marxism as a rational response to Romans 13:1 - 7. As Putin observes, Marxism is a fairytale.

One of the substitutes for the mind of God in Marxism is the operation of Probability, because it may not be a "material" element of human enterprise, but it has a measurable and material effect on the outcomes from its operation. In the final analysis, Probability is as reliable an existential anchor as a north seeking arrow.

So, when I study the literature of the Bible not as history but as the mind of the God at work, history is a useful tool to understand how what history is lining up, nice and neat, is actually playing in the culture. For me, reading or listening to Biblical scripture being read is like pulling divine dental floss through my mind, removing the rot of the carnal nature of the human condition. This is not true of the Quran. The difference between the Bible and the Quran is that the Bible can be translated into virtually any language and the music will emerge from the narrative. The music of the Quran is entirely in Arabic.  I presume that just letting the Arabic flow through your consciousness as it is read by a lover of the Arabic will have the same dental floss effect but without the deep data qualities of the meaning conveyed by the narrative of the Bible. My guess is that the sounds of the Arabic have the same elegance as the caligraphy of the written word, but I'm not convinced there is the coherent epistemology of the Biblical narrative.

Which brings us back to Free Will. From the perspective of the author of The Gospel According to Mark, the Jewish notion of sin originating in women didn't clash with their cultural expectations, but it was hardly central to their thinking. "Free Will" is the central issue of the Stoics and the play ground of the Epicurians, but both of them as essential aspects of Duty as the singular source of Honor. In the Ranger School, there was a motivational sign in the bayonet obstacle course that defines the Ranger ethic: Instant Obedience and Self-Discipline, the Stoic/Epicurian paradox of the republican servant leader.

The thing is, "Free Will" can be an intellectual cul-de-sac if the individual will not or cannot voluntarily allow the boundaries of consciousness to become sufficiently porous to let the Holy Spirit contribute directly to your welfare as an on-going relationship.

I mean, when I study the Bible as an object like you study recorded facts, it's impossible to not see the Holy Ghost in operation. But when I study the Bible as history in the manner you present, I can understand how anti-theists get their traction and why Bart Ehrman might been authentically atheist as opposed to apostate: he never had an experience of The One for reasons I can't imagine.

The paradox of Free Will is that we do, in fact, have a great deal of a priori data, especially Number and Topology. In the Beginning of human society, there was The Word, but, before the Word was, Number IS. And Topology is the mathematics of both the unconscious and the mind of God. It's the whole basis of process theology and applied epistemology. And Number and Topology allow the psyche to acquire data from beyond the horizons of the personal Free Will, with or without the reliance upon the Holy Spirit or the existence of The One. Marxism proves that and Marxism has demonstrated, historically, that Atheism is a barren universe.

Just as an aside, Marxism can be understood as an attack on Locke's formulation of life, liberty and property as a legitimate social engineering if property is understood as being theft. Marxism is actually a creature of the American Revolution (Washington as Heroic in the Lord Byron Romantic Ideal of the Elgin Marbles) and he basically adopts Jefferson's Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness as the antidote to Locke but with a rigidly anti-entrepreneurial system of social norms: The People, the State and Revolution of the Worker-Hero as Lord Byron Romantic Ideal.

When someone like Richard Carrier claims to examine Jesus by scientific methods, he is announcing his embrace of a Marxist Dialectic wholly dependent upon Probability as Universal Truth and Free Will as a bastion of Reason and rational inquiry. The Jesus Seminar is basically Marxist Dialetic misapplied to the deconstruction of the Roman experience of the totally unexpected supernatural phenomena of resurrection. Cornelius and Pilate didn't have the Gospel According to Mark to refer to when Jesus rose from the dead. What they did have was the basic core intelligence portfolio of what was to become as massive covert library on Jesus and the resulting Jesus movement of the Q source.

It was Yaweh, Queen of Battle, who ordered Abraham to bind Isaac and it was God the Father, who walked in the Garden of Eden in the evening twilight who provided the substitute sacrifice. The binding of Isaac is a study in the nature of Duty when Free Will is submitted to the Will of The One and Probability is suspended. It is the source of the dramtic tension in A Man for All Seasons. -

Cornelius recognized that in Jesus, that submission to authority. Jesus was surprised to discover it in Cornelius when He was having trouble finding it in His closest associates to say nothing of Israel, generally. In the final analysis, The Gospel According to Mark is a polemic promoting the Holy Spirit as the key to transforming the intellectual prison of the impermeable boundaries of Free Will to the infinite horizons and cosmic Tabula Rasa of the mind of The One.

History can't take you there. The music of narrative is your ticket to paradise

[ruminativerabbi]

More Light!

I first read The Lives of the Caesars by Suetonius, the famously gossipy and endlessly amusing historian of the first twelve Roman emperors, when I was in graduate school. Lots of the book stays with me still, but among those anecdotes he relates that I could cite in a letter that might possibly fall into the hands of children my favorite has to do, I think, with the death of Vespasian—the archenemy of the Jews of his day and the Roman most responsible for the brutal defeat of the rebellion that left Jerusalem in ruins and the Temple razed. He was dying of terminal diarrhea (which detail appeals to me for some reason) and sensed that his end was near, when, so Suetonius, he looked at the people assembled by his bedside and archly said, “Vae, puto deus fio,” which translates loosely as “Vay iz mir, I think I’m turning into a god.”  Okay, the vay iz mir part I just made up. (Although vae in Latin means roughly the same thing as that longer Yiddish expression that oddly starts with the same word.) But the rest is slightly funny, slightly pathetic: since the Romans in his day liked to imagine their deceased Caesars turning into minor gods, Vespasian apparently though he could announce his imminent demise in an amusing way by forecasting his posthumous deification. Hardy-har-har!

That story came back to me over the last week as I received email after email about my last letter, the one in which I quoted Leonard Cohen’s song about light coming into the world because everything, somewhere, has a crack in it through which light can seep. I used that image to frame some of the good things I perceived as having happened lately, incidents or events that reminded me—in a particularly dark, distressing couple of months—that where there is darkness there can also be light…if you know where to look for it!

One writer asked me, I think seriously, if I was turning—not into a Roman god—but, in some ways even less probably, into an optimist. My regular readers know that optimism is hardly a hallmark of my worldview. Just to the contrary, I think, is the case: I have read too much—way too much—history, and particularly Jewish history, to see things other than clearly. And, at least for me, that means understanding mindless anti-Israelism not as a momentary aberration but as an integral plank of Western culture, as merely the latest iteration of the anti-Judaic sentiment that underlies too much of Western culture to be removed or even removable other than by the cultural version of a tectonic plate shift. So, no, I don’t think I’m ready to look out at the world and declare myself even a non-cockeyed optimist. And yet there have been just lately some positive, encouraging events that I omitted to discuss last week. And so, at risk of being accused of abandoning my systemic pessimism about the universe, I thought I’d risk writing about them this week. Why not? I’m on a roll!

I am thinking of two recent events principally.

The first is the conference that took place just last month in London that brought together Arab intellectuals and leaders from fifteen different Arab countries: Morocco, Sudan, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, and nine Persian Gulf states, all of whom were apparently of the mind that the best way to bring peace to the Middle East would be for Arab states, as well as the Palestinians, to engage with Israel, to abandon the decades-long boycott of the Jewish State, and to welcome Israel as a partner-in-dialogue. Even casual students of the Middle East will understand easily how surprising—or rather, shocking—a development this was. And yet, there they were: journalists, artists, scholars, politicians, and scholars (including scholars of the Quran) sitting together and saying clearly that the refusal to acknowledge the reality of Israel’s existence has mostly cost the Palestinians what could otherwise have been the opportunity to build their own state with the willing, even eager, support of their Israeli neighbors.

The group has a name: The Arab Council for Regional Integration. And they have a leader too in one Mustafa el-Dessouki, an Egyptian who edits an influential Arabic-language news magazine called Majalla. More recognizable will be the name of Anwar el-Sadat, not the assassinated Egyptian leader (obviously) but a namesake and nephew whose major claim to fame—at least so far—lies in his having been expelled from the Egyptian Parliament in 2017 for not being sufficiently obsequious to Egyptian President (and strongman) Abdel el-Sisi.

I’ve read several accounts of this meeting. (To sample some, click here, here, here, and here. To hear former P.M. Tony Blair’s address to the group, click here.) All seem in agreement that these people are sincere and that they represent a real sentiment among many in the Arab world—albeit one rarely expressed in public—to the effect that the real way to pave a path into the future for the Palestinians is for Israel to be made to feel secure, thus less inclined to act solely defensively, and to foster an atmosphere of mutual undertaking and endeavor that will make Israelis into real people for their Palestinian neighbors and, in some ways even more dauntingly, vice versa. This is something I’ve hoped would happen, basically, forever—the sudden appearance of a block of respected thinkers prepared to enter into sustained, respectful dialogue with Israeli leaders that is not “about” Israel’s right to exist but rather about the ideal way for Israel and its neighbors to relate to each other, to work together on projects of mutual benefit, and to create the kind of peaceful setting in the Middle East that would benefit all concerned parties.

It’s just a beginning. It’s not even that much of a beginning. But it is something…and, as far as I can see, it actually is real. I feel buoyed, almost encouraged, slightly hopeful, marginally less pessimistic—all highly unlikely developments for someone who prides himself on the sobriety and realisticism of his worldview. And yet…here we are! Something new has happened. Where we go from here, none can say. But all can hope!

So that was the first event I wanted to bring to your attention. The second has to do with a visit just last week by some senior journalists from Iraq, Egypt, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia who came to visit Israel for a five-day visit. Organized by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the guests all came from countries without diplomatic ties to Israel. But they came anyway, and this too represents a kind of sea-change—or at least the intimation of the possibility of that kind of sea-change—in the intransigency and obstinacy that has characterized even relatively liberal Arab writers when it came down to accepting the reality of Israel and understanding that the path to peace in the Middle East is through dialogue rather than violence. Yes, it’s true that these journalists, apparently fearing repercussions at home if it became known that they had been in Israel, retained their anonymity during the trip. But that only makes their visit more, not less, remarkable: here were people with everything to lose. And yet they came, partially (I’m sure) out of curiosity, but apparently also to take a principled stance against the mindless rejectionism that has led exactly nowhere in more than seventy years.

Their visit was not totally unprecedented. Last summer, a group of bloggers and journalists from Iraq and the Gulf States who came to Israel also last month as guests of the Israeli Foreign Ministry. In some ways, it was a normal trip: visits to Yad Vashem, the Temple Mount, the Knesset, etc. But this too was something we hadn’t ever seen: young writers, particularly bloggers, from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and some Gulf States traveling around Israel, seeing the people not as a faceless enemy but as actual individual men and women, attempting to understand the culture of the place and its sense of self. (To get the idea, click here for a picture of a young Saudi blogger named Mohammed Saud and Yair Netanyahu, Bibi’s son, sitting side by side and apparently getting along just fine.)

None of this is going to matter in the long run if the participants are doomed to be outliers who represent no one but themselves. But I have long hoped—even prayed—for something like this, for people on the other side to realize that the great hope for a future for the Palestinian people lies in dialogue and cooperation, not in violence fueled by self-generated despair.

Yes, it isn’t much. In some ways, it’s hardly anything at all. But you know how it works with cracks and light: even the narrowest crack has the capacity to let in enough light to change everything! As Chanukah, the Festival of Lights, approaches, that seems like a positive notion to keep in mind.

[wisdomrays]

HOW DOES THE QURAN REGARD “KNOWLEDGE”?

What are the differences between the Islamic and the modern scientific points of view on knowledge (ilm)? How does the Qur'an regard knowledge?

Genuine knowledge (ilm) is a source of infinite light covered with truth, which leads enlightened people toward the righteous path. Modern science is built and developed upon existing information gained through experimentation and correcting previous errors. In general, science represents theories and hypotheses that we devise and pursue in order to acquire knowledge. From this point of view, knowledge and science are not the same and must not be considered as synonyms. For example, sometimes ilm is mistranslated as science, because the translators do not take into consideration the genuine meanings of the words. This mistake can be excused when it is made by the general population, who might not be aware of the difference; however, we expect scientists and professionals to use these terms correctly, according to their core meanings, so that their different meanings become obvious and clear.

Knowledge is born and developed between our hearts and minds. On the contrary, science is totally material, belongs to this world and all physical beings, and depends fully upon Earth's natural rules. Science is born through theories, and its continued development always engenders doubt. Initially, science was built on rationalism and developed through positivism. It sprouts in the world of the five senses, and continues its life with reference to the theoretical mind. Most of the time, science rejects things that cannot be seen or heard. In fact, its eyes are blind to the concealed meaning of existence, and its ears cannot hear it. Modern science accepts only those objects and events that can be perceived by the five senses.

Scientific developments in the classical Islamic world have had a tremendous influence upon the achievements of modern science. Several Western scholars and writers, among them Maurice Bucaille, Jacques Cousteau, Alex Carrel, Thomas Carlyle, and Roger Garaudy agree with this fact, and state that the West totally owes all its achievements to the East. Andalusia, a Muslim state in Spain, was a perfect example of this process. In some cases, Western scientists considered the roots of the knowledge derived from the East to be abstract theories, and so they did not consider what they had given to humanity and upon what basics and pillars they had been built.

The West has mixed its materialistic ideas in the development of these ideas and sciences, and by restricting their analysis only to subjectivity, they alienated the roots from their origins. As a result, religion in the West was confined to the church and people could learn about their religion only when they came to the church to participate in religious ceremonies. Thus religion could not enter fully into the people's lives. In fact, after Constantine, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, proclaimed Christianity to be the empire's official religion in 315, the government strictly controlled its all relations with life. This approach toward religion was a bad luck for Christianity. The first 3 centuries of Christianity was the best time for this religion, despite the severe pressure that it faced, for it was a time of blossoming and purity. After became the official religion, Christians no longer faced oppression. However, the religion fell under the control of the government and was corrupted. According to the state, religion belonged in the church, and while people occasionally would come to the church to practice their religion, they could not make it an intimate part of their life. As a result, Christianity was divorced from everyday life, society had to accept that there was life without religion, and that there was religion without life. Given this reality, scientific research and implications had nothing to do with Christianity, and that religion became a moral institution whose only responsibility and activities were the ceremonies connected to birth and death.

The West's scientific roots lie in the classical Greek and Roman civilizations. This knowledge was incorporated into the Islamic civilization, whose scholars and scientists developed it, made original contributions to it, and passed it on to the West. Unfortunately, Western scientists developed modern science as an independent enterprise completely separate from religion. Thus, its scientific development was built of unbelief and differs dramatically from the understanding of science and knowledge in the East.

On the other hand, knowledge and science flourished for centuries in the Islamic world. Some of its luminaries are Jabir, Ibn al-Haytham, al-Khawarizmi, al-Zahrawi, Ibn Sina, and al-Farabi. Ancient Greek scholars claimed that the smallest particle of being is an atom. However, theologian Ibrahim al-Nazzam (d. 835/845) said that substance could be divided into pieces an infinite number of times, and spoke as a modern scientist who would say the same thing today. If we look at this from the theory of particles, it would be clear that al-Nazzam's statements are true.

Muslim scholars never rejected or separated their inventions and discoveries from religion. Rather, knowledge and science reinforced their belief and understanding of religion. Even though they argued about various scientific matters, their attitude toward religion never differed from one another. For example, a Muslim physician-scholar like al-Razi had mystically spiritual intellect. Muslim scholars explored the universe in the name of The Creator, and every single discovery and invention brought a new passion, a new enthusiasm, and a spirit of new devotion. That is why they always traveled in the horizons of is there any more? and they lived in a state of continual passion of searching for the truth.

It is true that Muslim scholars understanding of knowledge developed their understanding of religion and created metaphysical tension in their lives. Several Qur'anic verses, such as: Behold! In the creation of the heavens and Earth, and the alternation of night and day, are Signs for men of understanding(3:190), always attracted Muslim scholars. Using such verses to inspire them, they devised their theories with a feeling of prayer toward God and built their knowledge upon a foundation of such an understanding and approach. Muslim scientists explored the heavens and Earth in the light of such verses, and learned and researched the relationship between the universe and Earth, such as the connection between a flower and the sun, the association of the smallest animals and living things to the sunlight, and so on. As a result of this approach, and by reciting the Qur'n while studying the universe (the Book of Existence), Muslim scholars strengthened their faith in and closeness to God.

However, due to today's materialistic theories, Western scientists will never be free of the fear, anxiety, and unexpected surprises that might arise in their fields even though they reach the heavens and continue to solve the mysteries of the universe. On the contrary, Muslims believe that they can build castles even in the center of black holes, for: God's Existence, Divine Beauty, and Power are behind everything. Perhaps black holes are no more than dark hallways toward brightness and light. As we enter the grave and come out of it toward Paradise, these undesired and unwanted black holes just might be bridges between the heavens and this world.

Western society, confined within the limits of discoveries and scientific inventions, cannot see the true beauty of the material world. But Muslim scholars and scientists, while learning and exploring life by means of Divine guidance and assistance, could read the wisdom and hidden purposes behind the things and events occurring in the material world and see God's Divine Power behind everything in the universe. For example, consider the Islamic point of view toward the human face and appearance. Muslims never attributed such things to nature, which is unconscious and blind, but rather saw in that wonderfully beautiful human complexion the reflection of The Most Merciful and The Most Compassionate God. By seeking to increase their limited understanding, they made the limited unlimited and decorated simple mirrors with the most beautiful crafts and designs. From this point of view, Muslim scientists had the chance to see hidden wisdom and knowledge side by side, and could observe and witness clearly the things and events that were taking place in the material world.

The following Qur'anic verse describes such people: He grants wisdom to whomever He wills, and the one to whom wisdom is granted receives a benefit overflowing. However, none will grasp the Message but men of understanding (2:269). Such people with intellect can see the concealed wisdom. People who look to the universe without the glasses of wisdom and concealed truth see and observe things as unreasonable and useless.

Islam understands ilm to be that knowledge that was built and developed upon these fundamental basis. As a matter of fact, Islam considers the purpose of knowledge as bound to knowledge about God, His Divine Power, and His All-Mighty Wisdom. The result of knowing God is love for God, and the result of this love is spiritual happiness. Given this reality, Muslim scholars and scientists do not feel anxiety and hopelessness, for as they pursue their studies, they discover new existences, feel closer to God, and varying degrees of spiritual peace. For those who study the universe from such perspectives, knowledge is the way to reach material and spiritual happiness; for those who follow the path of materialism, knowledge can become the way to see the undesired consequences of existence and the final end of the universe. Such knowledge will cause them to be in a state of constant unhappiness.

For those who do not know The Most Merciful and The Most Compassionate Lord of the universe, the sun will burn out in 5 billion years. Such knowledge will spread fear into their hearts, for they will think that œafter the sun burns out, the horrible end of the worlds will begin and we will dissolve into atomic pieces and face non-existence. They will suffer from being a part of this universe. In short, following a materialistic approach to science results in hopelessness, fear, and disappointment. At this point, knowledge (in the Islamic context of this world and the Hereafter) gives confidence, and science (in the materialistic context of being limited to what the five senses can perceive) gives hopelessness. Thus, the two contradict each other. Those who follow the path of knowledge, by His help and guidance, always will walk in enlightenment and will never be disappointed or have doubts about the future.

In order for such things to happen, all of the aspects of knowledge (ilm) and science must be taken into consideration. That is why many modern scholars and scientists are trying to change and direct existing materialistic theories and approaches toward the Islamic understanding of knowledge and science. A number of them are convinced that the contemporary Western approaches are based upon unbelief and that they cannot be changed. If materialistic science makes no effort to find God, and if it does not strive to become a mirror showing His Divine Beauty, humanity's future may be unexpectedly dramatic.