Moderators: theropod, Blip, Spinozasgalt, Durro
zurina wrote:byfrocs,
Can you make a new Sura with a status that matched with the original Sura? The ones with finesse of Arabic poetry and truly evidence of yours, and can stand on its own merits?
None other Allah can make new Sura; the Quran itself is the completed revelation.



zurina wrote:Why do you joined Islam? And becoming a Shia, on top of that?
Just a curious question; I'm a Sunni and not very well-versed in Shia matters. They're quite different; i.e. in the term of conducting solat. But if you have any question (referring to Muslims life, that is), I'll try to answer some of it.

byofrcs wrote:
I asked how such new Sura could be judged. The other Muslims refused to answer this question. They just said that it cannot be done, but when asked to help, as per Sura 2:23 they are like cockroaches scuttling away from the light.
They do not want to help. It is my belief that sura can be produced by man and jinn (well actually machines) by using crowd-sourced feedback from Muslims. They just don't want to help though.
Juliuseizure wrote:
I think I explain quite well in the thread? The wisdom of fasting in Ramadan was a main reason, the sense of community...solidarity with the bombed of Iraq...lots of reasons.
However I have become convinced Islam isn't possible for me because of, again, lots of reasons, but mainly I oppose a global caliphate which the "no God but Allah" part necessitates. I also don't believe in the hereafter (heaven or hell) so people on an Islamic forum said I wasn't a muslim. You can be a Christian and not believe in Heaven + hell though...weird.
Welcome to the forum! Peaceout.
On the caliphates, it's mainly comes the lack of better examples. I mean- a caliphate that follows the Koran and as-Sunnah, implementing the sharia law as well as recognizes the rights of non-Muslims as their citizens is a rare thing. Believing in Hereafter is the fifth Pillar of Iman; most Muslims never really questioned about it since they don't have the courage to do it. I can understand their sentiments; but for the ones new to Islam, it is something to be wonder about. Don't worry about others, just take your time to understand on the concept of hereafter. No one is born all-knowingly.

zurina wrote:byofrcs wrote:
I asked how such new Sura could be judged. The other Muslims refused to answer this question. They just said that it cannot be done, but when asked to help, as per Sura 2:23 they are like cockroaches scuttling away from the light.
They do not want to help. It is my belief that sura can be produced by man and jinn (well actually machines) by using crowd-sourced feedback from Muslims. They just don't want to help though.
Haha, it's obvious that most would probably run away if you were to ask such questionUnfortunately such question should directed someone who have more knowledge than just ilm' tafsir, and such kind doesn't exist conveniently on Net (since they're type to shy away from anything 'modern').
I really wished I could help you, but I don't have the knowledge on it for now. How about if I try to ask my religious teachers about it? Maybe they could shed at least a little bit of light rather than none.

z8000783 wrote:It's beginning to sound like -
Angels exist because the Quran says so.
Jinn exists because the Quran says so.
Paradise and Hell exist because the Quran says so.
I would imagine there is is not much of a debate to be had with a Muslim about these things so perhaps the real discussion is about the divinity of the Quran and whether it's possible that it was written and assembled by men only.
BTW I would avoid sentence like your last one, although well intentioned they are assumed to be preaching. We know you are a Muslim now and that is fine. Any thoughts you have for us are best kept between you and your God.
John
To debate whether it is written and assembled by men, and its divinity is not one of my better fields; I pretty much feel regretful now for skipping religious classes during high school byofrcs wrote:
If you are in Malaysia then I would avoid doing that so obviously if I was you. It is too risky. Keep it anonymous. Don't use Sura 2:23 as your reference but use another sura (the one about all of man and the djinn). Malaysia is supposed to be secular but Islam is the official religion and it's too tied up with national identity.

zurina wrote:z8000783 wrote:It's beginning to sound like -
Angels exist because the Quran says so.
Jinn exists because the Quran says so.
Paradise and Hell exist because the Quran says so.
I would imagine there is is not much of a debate to be had with a Muslim about these things so perhaps the real discussion is about the divinity of the Quran and whether it's possible that it was written and assembled by men only.
BTW I would avoid sentence like your last one, although well intentioned they are assumed to be preaching. We know you are a Muslim now and that is fine. Any thoughts you have for us are best kept between you and your God.
John
Well, all Muslim's faith is literally based on the Al-Quran; so its common that most evidences should come form the book itself rightTo debate whether it is written and assembled by men, and its divinity is not one of my better fields; I pretty much feel regretful now for skipping religious classes during high school
Though its not that I'm running away from the debate, I just need time to do more research about it. Maybe not for now, maybe I'll get on it soon.
zurina wrote:Ah sorry for that. I didn't really meant to preach; but wishing good for others is rather a habit for me. Take it as a figurative speech then.

We discussed this quite a bit last year. You might find some interesting links in this thread: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/islam/qur-anic-origins-and-immutability-t3001.htmlzurina wrote:Well, all Muslim's faith is literally based on the Al-Quran; so its common that most evidences should come form the book itself rightTo debate whether it is written and assembled by men, and its divinity is not one of my better fields; I pretty much feel regretful now for skipping religious classes during high school
Though its not that I'm running away from the debate, I just need time to do more research about it. Maybe not for now, maybe I'll get on it soon.



z8000783 wrote:
Did you get a chance to see the video I posted about critical thinking and scepticism? I appreciate you may wish to do more research but the fact is you are not thinking of becalming a Muslim, you are one now, so presumably you have already accepted the the Quran is the literal word of God. I am just wondering what the arguments for this are that you currently accept . There must be something that maintains your belief in Allah otherwise you would stop believing this to be true.
Say : O Disbeliever! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine.
z8000783 wrote:
No problem for me with that but if you have good wishes for people here then they would be more appreciated if they came directly from yourself rather than asking Allah to do it for you.
Oeditor wrote:We discussed this quite a bit last year. You might find some interesting links in this thread: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/islam/qur-anic-origins-and-immutability-t3001.html
byofrcs wrote:Just remember that a trap is open and it is inviting. Walk in, trigger it, and clunk - you're dead.
Always poke a stick into an open mind as you would an open trap. If it is safe then walk in. If not then step back.
z8000783 wrote:Wise beyond his years this padwan is.
Que-gon John

zurina wrote:....
Well, I've managed to coax an answer from my religious teacher (and a close friend of mine). It seems that to verify a new Sura (the newly created ones; not the original), you need to examine the level of Arabic poetry in it. If it couldn't match the harmony of the original Suras, then it is considered invalid. More or less, you need to have a mad, inhumane skill in Arabic as well as in grammars, vocabs and obviously pure talent in Arabic poetry. The meaning and contents of the Sura itself must carry truth that can lasted forever and not be denied if there's newer discoveries to be made on it.
My friend said the alphabets and words in Quran itself have their own unique sequence. Some of the examples can be viewed here: http://www.kaheel7.com/eng/index.php/numeric-miracle/61-number-7-in-the-holy-quran
And besides, even if you DO managed to make a Sura that can equally matched with the current ones; it will be immediately rejected anyway since the Quran itself is the completed revelation by God. The source itself naturally protected by writings and the hafizs (people who fully memorize the Quran; derived from the verb 'hafaza' which literally means to protect).
.....


Surely, then, if there's no regular or typical structure to a sura, anything that doesn't copy an existing one will pass the structure test. Anyway, anything that did copy an existing structure would no doubt be struck out as unoriginal. Heads you lose, tails Allah wins, by the sound of it.zurina wrote:Apparently there's none; so to speak. Nobody even managed to pass the structure part; for every sura the structure is randomize and many researches to study whether there's exist a definite structure are unable to pin out if there is.

zurina wrote:Apparently there's none; so to speak. Nobody even managed to pass the structure part; for every sura the structure is randomize and many researches to study whether there's exist a definite structure are unable to pin out if there is. Even if it is possible to generate a new Sura by using machines and templates from the original, can the new sura would actually contain good meanings and values (since values are subjective)? And we're not talking about only science facts.
I can't really see it's plausible to be done; but if you or someone you know did pin out an actual formulaic structure, maybe it's possible then?


Oeditor wrote:Actually, the whole idea of it being written as poetry stinks a bit. Unless it's the most primitive doggerel, it's bound to be obscurantist to a greater or lesser degree. And in view of the vast amount of effort which has gone into trying to fathom its meaning, down the centuries, greater rather than lesser.

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest