> On 02-Jun-2014, at 12:05 am, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 01 Jun 2014, at 00:25, Samiya Illias wrote: >> >> >>> On 01-Jun-2014, at 12:14 am, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 30 May 2014, at 05:43, Samiya Illias wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 30-May-2014, at 7:35 am, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 30 May 2014 14:26, Samiya Illias <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> These are people who are committing crimes in the name of religion. You, >>>>>> on the outside, are horrified by such acts in the name of Islam, and are >>>>>> terrified of it, rightly so. We, on the other hand, live in midst of >>>>>> this blatant violation of the guidance in the Quran! What these elements >>>>>> have not been able to find or insert in the Quran, they have created >>>>> >>>>> Some of the people involved are priests, and some are students of Islam - >>>>> do you think that these are people who are committing crimes in the name >>>>> of religion? Again this is a straight question, I'm not drawing any >>>>> conclusions at the moment. >>>> >>>> What's wrong is wrong. They may think they're doing right and may feel it >>>> to be their pious duty, however it is still wrong. How God will judge them >>>> is another matter, let God do that. However, it is important to speak up >>>> and point out that it's incorrect and inhumane. >>>> >>>> Please also bear in mind that all religions have suffered the tragedy of >>>> deviation from the original message, misunderstood and convoluted it into >>>> something terrible. Islam has also suffered thus. However, the arabic >>>> Quran is preserved in written form and in the minds of millions of people >>>> since it was revealed. That is the criteria that I apply to evaluate >>>> whether something is correct or not. >>> >>> Hmm.... Because you take as axioms that those word are divine. >>> The Quran seems to contain threats for those departing of the text, but >>> that is an authoritative argument. >>> It can be true that departing from Truth is a problem, but I am not sure >>> that this can be said. >>> >>> >>> >>>> You may have noticed that I present Quranic verses to answer or explain my >>>> point, which I believe is divinely revealed, >>> >>> Is that not a problem? >> >> No, because (a) the questions being asked are about the contrast between >> core beliefs of Islam and the practical implementation (b) to show that >> Quranic guidance is far from the ideas people have developed about the >> religion > > All right (although we might discuss the "responsibility" of a text for his > possible misinterpretation).
Fair enough. The Quran claims that there is it is clear guidance and there is no crookedness in it, and that it is protected from changes. I think there are mainly two sources of misinterpretation: 1) insertion of words in translation which are not in the original text 2) lack of knowledge of the translator of a particular subject, mostly apparent in verses of scientific significance. > >>> >>> Is that not a warning for anybody to not criticize any point in the text. >> >> No. I have not taken offence to the so many things said in this and other >> threads, and politely tried to answer the points raised. The reason I quote >> is so that people can verify for themselves, instead of just accepting my >> words > > Nice. > >> >>> >>> Most mystics text fall easily in the theological trap, where true >>> proposition becomes false, as they were unassertable. It is like a machine >>> picking up a proposition in its own G* \ G, and asserting it. They are true >>> about them, but cannot be asserted. >>> >>> Let me ask you a question. Imagine we agree on some terms of comparison, >>> and decide to compare G* (the main root of machine's theology) with the >>> Quran, and imagine that the G* interpretation of the Quran appears much >>> closer to the Sufi interpretation than the "mainstream" one, with more >>> symbolics and less literalism, would you conclude that computationalism is >>> false or that the Sufi are right? >> >> You will have to explain comp in more detail in plain English, or teach me >> how to interpret your mathematical notation. Also, I need to understand your >> machine theology better before I can start commenting on it. As far as >> Sufism is concerned, what I've read of it and about it, I'm not convinced >> about their beliefs. > > Fair enough. > > So let me be straight and naive on this. And short. There has been a big > discovery: the discovery of the universal machine, or number. It is an > arithmetical notion. > > We can compare the discourse of the religious people with the discourse of an > ideally correct universal number. > > It looks like the discourse of the mystics, notably the rationalist mystics > like the Neoplatonists, and Plato itself (arguably), is closer than the > Aristotelian theologies. > > At the start, I am not sure, but current of platonism were strong among > christians (like most students of Hypatia), and similarly with the Jewish and > the Muslims. > > Unfortunately in 523 Plato's academy is closed, and "free pagan or non > confessional theology" judged heretic and banished (in the best case). > So (neo)platonism will not survive in occident at that date, and it will > survive somehow up to the 11th century in the middle east. > > To put it simply, there is a one, the many are the internal modes of that > one. > There is repeated emphasis in the Quran that there is only one deity: The Deity, the word for which in Arabic is Al Ilah concatenated and pronounced as Allah. The opening passage of the Quran are seven verses which Muslims repeat in prayer at least 17 times daily. The second verse speaks of Rabb il Aalameen, mostly translated as Lord / Sustainer of the Worlds. The root letters of aalameen are a-l-m which is also the root for knowledge. Repeatedly across the Quran, it is stated the God is the One with Complete Knowledge of everything and everyone. Considering the recent theories regarding everything being knowledge or numbers, I'm really curious and would like to understand it in greater depth. I suppose all these ideas will eventually lead towards a single unified theory. > >> >>> >>> Suppose, or imagine if you can, that we find an error in the Quran, would >>> you abandon the idea that it is a literal text by God, or would you abandon >>> the idea that God is perfect? >> >> I would abandon the idea that it is the protected literal text of God. I >> believe that we can verify this by examining the verses that can be examined >> in the light of scientific knowledge. I have started a humble effort in a >> new blog: signsandscience.blogspot.com It'll be helpful if you can have a >> look at it from time to time and comment on the scientific content. > > In my humble opinion, you can't nitpick with the sacred. Agree. Based on my current beliefs, as I find in the Quran, all scriptures were revealed by divine decree and it is an article of faith for Muslims to believe in all prophets and scriptures. We also believe that though the previous scriptures have suffered human interpolation and may have errors, the Quran ( Arabic text) is protected, and we cannot nitpick with the it. > > Hmm... It is delicate as I see you have some emotional attachment to a > literal reading of a sacred text, Yes, I'm emotionally attached to the literal reading, as I think, if it's revealed by the divine, it must be perfectly accurate, free from any mistakes. Science is the only tool that can be employed to check that and that's what I'm trying to do. > but well, buddhist thinks that we have to kill all buddhas at some point (of > course: not literally). We believe there is no intermediary between us and God, so that each one can and should pray only to God > > It can be problematical with the literalist of the other religion, and with > all the non literalists. > > We think god cannot be named, which really implies that you can't identify it > with anything, and specifically invoke in the human affair. We read that God is not like anything we can imagine, and so we have no form or image or idol. We are also told that all beautiful names belong to Allah, the Deity, and we can call God by any name / attribute such as The Compasionate, The Merciful, The Irresistable, The Loving, The All Hearing, The All Seeing, and the list goes on. There are many such names / attributes mentioned in the Quran. > > For a neoplatonist the Quran can be a mean toward truth only if it is well > distinguished with the truth itself. > > > > > > >> >>> >>> Would you develop the idea that such a text might be not that easy to >>> interpret? >> >> If God has sent it for humanity's guidance, it has to be easy enough for >> different intellects to understand it. > > > But here is a problem: the text is prose, in fact even a poem. It is not a > treatise in physics, nor even in theology (where notions of god(s) are > discussed and questioned). The Quran is a guidance for those who believe in resurrection and an accountability, and who wish to keep their duty to God. And it's a warning to those who reject as this life is the time given to us to prepare for the Day of Accountability. The Quran is not a treatise in Physics, but wherever it refers to physical phenomenon, it's very accurate on it. > >> Of course, a child would read it differently than an adult, a non-scientist >> would read it differently than a scientist, a philosopher would evaluate it >> on a different criteria and so on. Since it's for all humans, it should be >> able to satisfy all branches of honest intellectual inquiry. >> >>> >>> You show that you are open to reason, and I can't grant that the Quran >>> deserves respect, but only as long as we have the right to doubt each verse >>> OK? You can't use the argument "it is from God, so it has to be true" OK? >> >> Of course you have every right to doubt and question. Is that why my simple >> statement that I wouldn't be surprised if a total of 11 or 12 planets were >> found in Solar System did not get a scientific response of whether it is or >> not plausible and instead got flared up into a debate about actions done by >> Muslims, Islamic law and it's application around the world? The same thing >> happened with the Crows have intelligence thread. > > I can argue that in "Alice is Wonderland" you have everything: the theory of > relativity, Gödel, Löb, quantum mechanics, even the EPR-bell experience (poor > Alice!). But is everything mentioned perfectly accurate or are some of the ideas also falsifiable? > > Do I take this as an evidence that Lewis Carroll met God? Oh well, most > plausibly, but there is no need to make a fuss about that. It is more common > than you might think, especially with good artist and poet, or with some > technic (fasting, plants, sleep-yoga, body yoga, etc.). > > Truth is in yourself, not in any books. I think. Despite the immense help > books can provide, they are obstacle if you confuse the book(s) with the > truth. Yes, faith is seated in us. Books are a means for guidance. Which book we take for guidance? I would take the one which is not falsifiable. Samiya > > Bruno > > >> >> Samiya >> >>> >>> Bruno >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> and not Hadith which I believe are human efforts at compiling history and >>>> thus are replete with human shortcomings. >>>> >>>> Samiya >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30-May-2014, at 5:28 am, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> So which lot is it who does this sort of thing? Honest question. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27614359 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10850212/Iranian-actress-Leila-Hatami-faces-public-flogging.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://m.inquirer.net/newsinfo/?id=606058 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "Everything List" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>>> email to [email protected]. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "Everything List" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to [email protected]. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
