What new revelation does the holy Koran contain?

[SyroMalankara]

Beautiful Techno.

Everything. It was God Who sent Jesus and Abraham and Moses and taught us truth.

God has taught man everything. All the revelations of the past. And Gabriel was saying to Muhammad that the same God Who Has taught man everything is teaching Muhammad to read.

You realize the absurdity of the argument? Those who can read and know the words of already recognized Divine Revelation, recognized as divine revelation even by Muhammad, disagree with the illiterate one among them and have a completely different take on what God said. Therefore the claim is that we should reject the literate People of the Book that the illiterate one accepts as legitimate, except in parts where he was taught from self understood divine. Except those People of the Book reject the claims and the understanding that the illiterate one presents since he himself acknowledged his lack of reading and comprehension to discern that which he was told is accurate

 

[worldcitizen]

Wasn’t recorded? You mean like digitally? Because Christians would consider the Bible an accurate record of the event.

Using the same standard of not recorded digitally, neither the Qur’an nor anything spoken of the Bab or Baha’u’llah is to be trusted

I meant that everything may not have been written down. We were given only the Quran. Each successive Revelation from God reveals different aspects of truth, claims previously held notions and prophecies future events to occur.

The Quran was written sheepskins and things like that and carefully preserved in its original form. The Writings of the Bab and Baha’u’llah were handwritten and bear their seals so they are fully authenticated as is the Quran.

 

[arthra]

Recently there was a thread about whether we can understand Islam by studying the holy Koran alone. We probably cannot, but I would still like to understand the Koran better.

I have not studied the Koran that much, I have read parts of it, but I don’t see anything unique or special about it (other than apparently being a great piece of literature). Rather than adding to our knowledge of divinity, it seems to be like a step backwards - it denies the trinitarian nature of God and also has some silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women.

It would be great if our Muslim friends (or anyone else who knows) could explain to me what unique knowledge of divinity and the purpose of life/salvation etc is contained in the Koran (which is not already there in the Bible).

The Bahai are of course welcome to contribute also but lets stick to the Koran and not talk about Bahaullah. (Also please no talk about the violence in the Koran, I think there is just as much violence in the OT).

Open mind admitted in the opening post -

*“I have not studied the Koran that much, I have read parts of it, but I don’t see anything unique or special about it”
*

and then posts the following…

" it denies the trinitarian nature of God and also has some silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women."

I would suggest that the Qur’an does not have a “silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women.”

Symbols are used in the passage in question…“Gardens of Bliss”; “Encrusted Thrones”; “Goblets”; “Companions”, etc.

From the widely known translation of A. Yusuf Ali…

Surih Al-Waqi’ah (The Inevitable) 56:

1. And those Foremost (in Faith) will be Foremost (in the Hereafter).
2. These will be those Nearest to Allah:
3. In Gardens of Bliss:
4. A number of people from those of old,
5. And a few from those of later times.
6. (They will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones).
7. Reclining on them, facing each other.
8. Round about them will (serve) youths of perpetual (freshness).
9. With goblets, (shining) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flowing fountains:
10. No after-ache will they receive therefrom, nor will they suffer intoxication:
11. And with fruits, any that they may select;
12. And the flesh of fowls, any that they may desire.
13. And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes –
14. Like unto Pearls well-guarded.
15. A Reward for the Deeds of their past (Life).

25.** No frivolity will they hear therein nor any taint of ill –
**
26. Only the saying, “Peace! Peace.”

You’ll note the above has no frivolity or intoxication as you seem to allege in your post.

An important study of the Qur’an also requires some knowledge and study of Arabic so you are not solely dependent on some translator and can check the meanings of the words yourself and learn from that experience.

 

[meltzerboy]

Open mind admitted in the opening post -

*“I have not studied the Koran that much, I have read parts of it, but I don’t see anything unique or special about it”
*

and then posts the following…

" it denies the trinitarian nature of God and also has some silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women."

I would suggest that the Qur’an does not have a “silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women.”

Symbols are used in the passage in question…“Gardens of Bliss”; “Encrusted Thrones”; “Goblets”; “Companions”, etc.

From the widely known translation of A. Yusuf Ali…

Surih Al-Waqi’ah (The Inevitable) 56:

1. And those Foremost (in Faith) will be Foremost (in the Hereafter).
2. These will be those Nearest to Allah:
3. In Gardens of Bliss:
4. A number of people from those of old,
5. And a few from those of later times.
6. (They will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones).
7. Reclining on them, facing each other.
8. Round about them will (serve) youths of perpetual (freshness).
9. With goblets, (shining) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flowing fountains:
10. No after-ache will they receive therefrom, nor will they suffer intoxication:
11. And with fruits, any that they may select;
12. And the flesh of fowls, any that they may desire.
13. And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes –
14. Like unto Pearls well-guarded.
15. A Reward for the Deeds of their past (Life).

25.** No frivolity will they hear therein nor any taint of ill –
**
26. Only the saying, “Peace! Peace.”

You’ll note the above has no frivolity or intoxication as you seem to allege in your post.

An important study of the Qur’an also requires some knowledge and study of Arabic so you are not solely dependent on some translator and can check the meanings of the words yourself and learn from that experience.

Thank you for this information, which is often distorted by some of those who did not study the Qur’an.

 

[arthra]

Prophet Muhammad was in solitude in the cave on Mount Hira. He was startled by the Angel of Revelation, Gabriel, the same who had come to Mary, the mother of Jesus, who seized him in a close embrace. A single word of command burst upon him: ‘Iqra’ - ‘Read! He said: ‘I am not able to read!’ but the command was issued twice more, each with the same response from the Prophet. Finally, he was grasped with overwhelming force by the angel. Gabriel released him, and the first ‘recitation’ of the Quran was revealed to him:

“Read in the name of your Lord who created -created man from a clot. Read: for your Lord is Most Bountiful, who teaches by the pen, teaches man that which he knew not.” (Quran 96:1-5)
islamreligion.com/articles/183/muhammad-s-biography-part-3/

What was it that man …“knew not.” ???

I would suggest it refers to the beginnings of the revelation from God…which man “knew not”. As you know Prophet Muhammad was secluded in the cave of Mount Hira… this cave overlooked the city of Mecca and all it’s human foibles and issues that people are involved in…

 

[openmind77]

Open mind admitted in the opening post -

*“I have not studied the Koran that much, I have read parts of it, but I don’t see anything unique or special about it”
*

and then posts the following…

" it denies the trinitarian nature of God and also has some silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women."

This is not true? It does deny the Trinity and is there no mention of wine and women?

I would suggest that the Qur’an does not have a “silly description of heaven with plenty of wine and freely available women.”

Symbols are used in the passage in question…“Gardens of Bliss”; “Encrusted Thrones”; “Goblets”; “Companions”, etc.

From the widely known translation of A. Yusuf Ali…

Surih Al-Waqi’ah (The Inevitable) 56:

1. And those Foremost (in Faith) will be Foremost (in the Hereafter).
2. These will be those Nearest to Allah:
3. In Gardens of Bliss:
4. A number of people from those of old,
5. And a few from those of later times.
6. (They will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones).
7. Reclining on them, facing each other.
8. Round about them will (serve) youths of perpetual (freshness).
9. With goblets, (shining) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flowing fountains:
10. No after-ache will they receive therefrom, nor will they suffer intoxication:
11. And with fruits, any that they may select;
12. And the flesh of fowls, any that they may desire.
13. And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes –
14. Like unto Pearls well-guarded.
15. A Reward for the Deeds of their past (Life).

25.** No frivolity will they hear therein nor any taint of ill –
**
26. Only the saying, “Peace! Peace.”

You’ll note the above has no frivolity or intoxication as you seem to allege in your post.

An important study of the Qur’an also requires some knowledge and study of Arabic so you are not solely dependent on some translator and can check the meanings of the words yourself and learn from that experience.

So you are saying the wine is not really wine or it is really wine but it is not silly because you don’t get intoxicated? A soul drinking wine seems very silly to me and then it starts eating fruits and fowl - all very non-frivolously. And who are these fresh boys? Why does Muhammad mention them?

How does this translation of 56:10-26 make it any better.

 

[TonyBS]

This is not true? It does deny the Trinity and is there no mention of wine and women?

So you are saying the wine is not really wine or it is really wine but it is not silly because you don’t get intoxicated? A soul drinking wine seems very silly to me and then it starts eating fruits and fowl - all very non-frivolously. And who are these fresh boys? Why does Muhammad mention them?

How does this translation of 56:10-26 make it any better.

You are reading Gods Word with mens thoughts.

All these pleasures mentioned are spiritual conditions. a material word has been used to explain the spiritual state or condition of the Soul by external means.

This is the way man explains the Spiritual. Look for the Spiritual story not a material conclusion.

My heart is on Fire with the Love of God, is the heart actually on fire or is it describing the Love and Longing the heart feels for this love etc etc.

Wine is the being intoxicated by the Love and Service to God. Not material Drunkenness.

Regards Tony

 

[SyroMalankara]

You are reading Gods Word with mens thoughts.

All these pleasures mentioned are spiritual conditions. a material word has been used to explain the spiritual state or condition of the Soul by external means.

This is the way man explains the Spiritual. Look for the Spiritual story not a material conclusion.

My heart is on Fire with the Love of God, is the heart actually on fire or is it describing the Love and Longing the heart feels for this love etc etc.

Wine is the being intoxicated by the Love and Service to God. Not material Drunkenness.

Regards Tony

Is this the Bahai take or the Islamic take on the Quran?

 

[Servant19]

This is not true? It does deny the Trinity and is there no mention of wine and women?

So you are saying the wine is not really wine or it is really wine but it is not silly because you don’t get intoxicated? A soul drinking wine seems very silly to me and then it starts eating fruits and fowl - all very non-frivolously. And who are these fresh boys? Why does Muhammad mention them?

How does this translation of 56:10-26 make it any better.

Hi openmind,

Would you mind showing us where the word “wine” or “boys” is mentioned in the passage arthra quoted please?

Sometimes I wonder if I need reading glasses, my apologies…

.

 

[TonyBS]

Is this the Bahai take or the Islamic take on the Quran?

It is the one that is needed. As it is with all the Holy Words of God.

And their hearts are sealed so that they do not understand.

• Surah at-Tawbah, 9:87

Allah has sealed their hearts so that they do not know.

• Surah at-Tawhab, 9:93

We seal their hearts so they cannot hear (the Truth).

• Surah al-A’raf, 7:100

22.46. Do they never travel about the earth (and view all these scenes with an eye to learn lessons), so that they may have hearts with which to reason (and arrive at truth), or ears with which to hear (God’s call)? For indeed, it is not the eyes that have become blind; it is rather the hearts in the breasts that are blind.

Regards Tony

 

[SyroMalankara]

It is the one that is needed. As it is with all the Holy Words of God.

This is quite presumptuous. If Muslims believed as you do about the Quran, then potentially, the argument could be made that it was effective for 1.6billion to further humanities progress toward God. However, most read it in a much different way, have since the beginning of the religion until today. The Bahai view is such a tiny percentage of those that believe in the Quran’s divine status (.03%), that its virtually insignificant. This means either the Quran, it’s author, and/or its message failed to reach humanity as you deem it.

 

[TonyBS]

This is quite presumptuous. If Muslims believed as you do about the Quran, then potentially, the argument could be made that it was effective for 1.6billion to further humanities progress toward God. However, most read it in a much different way, have since the beginning of the religion until today. The Bahai view is such a tiny percentage of those that believe in the Quran’s divine status (.03%), that its virtually insignificant. This means either the Quran, it’s author, and/or its message failed to reach humanity as you deem it.

Not at all as this is an accepted method of Interpretation - There are obvious passages that do not need this interpretation and there are many that do.

Here is but one link to consider;

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_interpretation_of_the_Quran

Regards Tony

 

[SyroMalankara]

Not at all as this is an accepted method of Interpretation - There are obvious passages that do not need this interpretation and there are many that do.

Here is but one link to consider;

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_interpretation_of_the_Quran

Regards Tony

Regardless, Sufis are not Bahais and Bahai are not Sufis.

Even your link states:
Validity of esoteric interpretations[edit]
There is almost no dispute among Muslims that the Quran has concealed meanings. However, this does not mean that every esoteric interpretation of the Quran is necessarily valid. Some interpreters are known to have overplayed the allegorical aspects of the Quran, claiming privileged understanding of its contents and distorting its meaning.[18] The authority of the person who extracts these meanings is also a matter of debate. Mainstream theologians, were willing to accept these interpretations if certain conditions were met.[19] [One of the most important criteria is that the interpretation should not conflict with the literal meaning of the Quran. Suyuti (d. 1505CE) believed that exegesis should be rigorous because non-rigorous methods cause misunderstanding. Taftazani (d. 1390CE) believed that pure gnosis and perfection of faith can be achieved when the subtle allusions of the Quran are harmonized with the literal sense.[20]

 

[Servant19]

This is quite presumptuous. If Muslims believed as you do about the Quran, then potentially, the argument could be made that it was effective for 1.6billion to further humanities progress toward God. However, most read it in a much different way, have since the beginning of the religion until today. The Bahai view is such a tiny percentage of those that believe in the Quran’s divine status (.03%), that its virtually insignificant. This means either the Quran, it’s author, and/or its message failed to reach humanity as you deem it.

I think the quotations Tony gave are not presumptuous Syro. They are clear for all to read and understand.

I also think that outlining the smallness of the number of Baha’is in the world at this juncture in history is a weak argument for the validity of the Truth it is asserting.

Christianity was once only .03% also, however the validity of its Truth was undeniable when the numbers were so small

.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I think the quotations Tony gave are not presumptuous Syro. They are clear for all to read and understand.

I also think that outlining the smallness of the number of Baha’is in the world at this juncture in history is a weak argument for the validity of the Truth it is asserting.

I’m not arguing the validity of its Truth claims (which I personally do not buy), however, a part of the Bahai claim is that the Quran -as interpreted according to Bahai-was put forth by the divine to further human understanding. As it is, since the majority of humans that consider the Quranic texts divinely revealed to not agree with the Bahai view - does it not stand that this attempt was a failure? There is no evidence that the majority or even a substantial minority of Muslims will become Bahai any time soon - there’s not even a inkling that even some of the Bahai interpretations of the Quran will become mainstream.

 

[Servant19]

I’m not arguing the validity of its Truth claims (which I personally do not buy), however, a part of the Bahai claim is that the Quran -as interpreted according to Bahai-was put forth by the divine to further human understanding. As it is, since the majority of humans that consider the Quranic texts divinely revealed to not agree with the Bahai view - does it not stand that this attempt was a failure? There is no evidence that the majority or even a substantial minority of Muslims will become Bahai any time soon - there’s not even a inkling that even some of the Bahai interpretations of the Quran will become mainstream.

To further peoples understanding in an environment of polytheism and idol worship, I think it did a pretty amazing job.

To further people’s understanding towards an era of wonderful societal advancement and the establishment of universities, it did an amazing job!

.

 

[SyroMalankara]

To further peoples understanding in an environment of polytheism ad idol worship, I think it did a pretty amazing job.

I’m not certain, it did some good and some extremes, in my opinion.

To further people’s understanding towards an era of wonderful societal advancement and the establishment of universities, it did an amazing job!

.

Not sure I agree with this either, but if divine revelation was needed for the establishment of universities, then yeah sure it did that. I guess Harvard, Oxford, Yale, Stanford and Princeton are the 5 sacraments of this revelation.

Whoops, even that divine revelation was found in Christianity first, wiki says:

European higher education took place for hundreds of years in Christian cathedral schools or monastic schools (scholae monasticae), in which monks and nuns taught classes; evidence of these immediate forerunners of the later university at many places dates back to the 6th century.[10] The earliest universities were developed under the aegis of the Latin Church by papal bull as studia generalia and perhaps from cathedral schools. It is possible, however, that the development of cathedral schools into universities was quite rare, with the University of Paris being an exception.[11] Later they were also founded by Kings (University of Naples Federico II, Charles University in Prague, Jagiellonian University in Kraków) or municipal administrations (University of Cologne, University of Erfurt). In the early medieval period, most new universities were founded from pre-existing schools, usually when these schools were deemed to have become primarily sites of higher education. Many historians state that universities and cathedral schools were a continuation of the interest in learning promoted by monasteries.[12]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University

 

[Servant19]

I’m not certain, it did some good and some extremes, in my opinion.

Not sure I agree with this either, but if divine revelation was needed for the establishment of universities, then yeah sure it did that. I guess Harvard, Oxford, Yale, Stanford and Princeton are the 5 sacraments of this revelation.

I’m not sure I understand, what is the extremes of monotheism?

The first university on the planet was an Islamic university. It is universities and education which form the foundation of Truth and the use of that Truth for the creation of an ever-advancing civilization, which is the forerunner to the Kingdom of God on earth.

.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I’m not sure I understand, what is the extremes of monotheism?

The idea that monotheism means no religious iconography, no praying with saints, no shrines or prayers for the dead, etc.

The first university on the planet was an Islamic university.

This is obviously disputed

 

[Servant19]

Not sure I agree with this either, but if divine revelation was needed for the establishment of universities, then yeah sure it did that. I guess Harvard, Oxford, Yale, Stanford and Princeton are the 5 sacraments of this revelation.

Whoops, even that divine revelation was found in Christianity first, wiki says:

European higher education took place for hundreds of years in Christian cathedral schools or monastic schools (scholae monasticae), in which monks and nuns taught classes; evidence of these immediate forerunners of the later university at many places dates back to the 6th century.[10] The earliest universities were developed under the aegis of the Latin Church by papal bull as studia generalia and perhaps from cathedral schools. It is possible, however, that the development of cathedral schools into universities was quite rare, with the University of Paris being an exception.[11] Later they were also founded by Kings (University of Naples Federico II, Charles University in Prague, Jagiellonian University in Kraków) or municipal administrations (University of Cologne, University of Erfurt). In the early medieval period, most new universities were founded from pre-existing schools, usually when these schools were deemed to have become primarily sites of higher education. Many historians state that universities and cathedral schools were a continuation of the interest in learning promoted by monasteries.[12]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University

Yes it seems clear that divine revelation was a necessity for the establishment of universities.

Well done to the Christian Divine Revelation for developing Harvard and Yale, (and lets not forget Bologna) and well done to the Islamic Divine Revelation for establishing the University of Al Karueen, Al Azhar among many others.

.