Need some communication advice....

[YusufNoor]

for those of you who have English as a second language, Ken is the one who was upset because he didn't like the responses he was given.

i musta missed all those curse words flung at him.

he took advice as an insult, please find an insult before this post:

I haven't even explained my interpretation, and I've already offended quite a few people.

"you're not entitled to interpret the Qur'an. you probably don't even know Arabic, so you've never even read it."

The idea that you the Qur'an can't be read in any other language than Arabic makes absolutely no sense. If that were so, the Qur'an would've said as much itself, since the Qur'an is perfect and complete. To make matters worse for the people who put this idea forth, they say, "The Qur'an can be read in any language other than Arabic, it can only be interpreted." If words on a page can't be read, they can't be interpreted. If they can be interpreted, they can be read. You can't have one without the other. And if the Qur'an indeed can't be read in any language other than Arabic, what's the point of having different translations? Aren't these translations inherently corrupted? Why aren't Muslims of all types up in arms about this blatant corruption of the Qur'an? Of course, all of this is silly, but you get the point.

"If your interpretation of the Quran is 'radically different from the norm' you are interpreting the words of God / Allah incorrectly"

Logical fallacy. Different doesn't automatically mean incorrect.

"I'd advise you to take knowledge from Scholars who are able to interpret the Quran"

Why do I need Scholars to interpret the Qur'an for me? I have the Qur'an itself, I can just read it and go from there.

and i'll leave you with this one:

Bismillah.
عَنْ مَحْمُودِ بْنِ لَبِيدٍ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: “إِنَّ أَخْوَفَ مَا أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ الشِّرْكُ الْأَصْغَرُ“
قَالُوا: وَمَا الشِّرْكُ الْأَصْغَرُ يَا رَسُولَ اللهِ؟
قَالَ: “الرِّيَاءُ، يَقُولُ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ لَهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِذَا جُزِيَ النَّاسُ بِأَعْمَالِهِمْ اذْهَبُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ كُنْتُمْ تُرَاءُونَ فِي الدُّنْيَا فَانْظُرُوا هَلْ تَجِدُونَ عِنْدَهُمْ جَزَاءً“
أخرجه أحمد وصححه الألباني

It is narrated from Mahmood ibn Labeed [RA] that the Messenger of Allah [SAWS] said, “Indeed the thing that I fear most for you is the minor shirk.”
The companions asked, “And what is minor shirk, Oh Messenger of Allah [SAWS]?”
He [SAWS] said, “It is Ar-Riyaa. Allah will say to the people of riyaa on the Day of Judgement – when the people are being re-payed for their deeds – ‘Go to those who you showed off your deeds to in the worldly life then see if you can find any reward with them!’”

[Reported by Imam Ahmad and Authenticated by Shaikh Al-Albani]


Vocabulary from the Hadith:

الرِّيَاءُ – Ar-Riyaa
Linguistically, riyaa means showing, displaying something.
In the Shariah, riyaa means a good deed done with the intention that people may see it and praise the doer for the action.

Lessons from the Hadith:

“So you will see the person doing riyaa beautifying the deed in-front of people. And he does not intend obedience to Allah with this beautification of his action.

Truly, some of the most important reasons for riyaa are exhibitionism/pretentiousness, desiring position of significance and weakness of faith. Moreover, the most dangerous consequences of riyaa are deprivation of acceptance of deeds with Allah and the loss of trust/reliance between people.

Allah has certainly set two foundational conditions for the acceptance of deeds. They are:
1) The action is good, righteous action within the bounds of the Shariah and compliant with the Qur’an and Sunnah.
2) The action is done purely for the sake of Allah, far removed from every type of shirk, whether it is major shirk or minor shirk; and riyaa is a type of shirk.”

have a nice day!

wa salaam

 

[Futuwwa]

i musta missed all those curse words flung at him.

Straw man and non sequitur. The absence of curse words does not imply that your, or anyone else's, post is inoffensive.

He asked for advice in how to communicate his position better. You didn't give it, you flatly stated that his position is ignorant and wrong and he needs to abandon his position, and sarcastically asked him a totally irrelevant question about what "makes him a great moralist".

 

[YusufNoor]

Straw man and non sequitur. The absence of curse words does not imply that your, or anyone else's, post is inoffensive.

that was in reference to the post above yours

He asked for advice in how to communicate his position better. You didn't give it, you flatly stated that his position is ignorant and wrong and he needs to abandon his position, and sarcastically asked him a totally irrelevant question about what "makes him a great moralist".

no, i'm trying to explain to him that his position on his "interpreting the Qur'an" is based on ignorance, and tried to offer some reasons to back my position.

and sarcastically asked him a totally irrelevant question about what "makes him a great moralist

he started to remind me a dude in another thread (a recent one) where the guy kept asking a question and then listed the answers that he didn't want (which, iirc, were correct answers). so no matter what response is given, he got (or acted) offended. so, i figured why not try a different angle? he stated that he finds Islam and the Qur'an deficient morally. i may have been giving him more credit than he deserves, but i figured maybe that is what he really wants to discuss. he addressed on of my views before, so i was really hoping that he would tell me the basis for his train of thought on that.

oh, and what is it in your education, that in your opinion, makes you a great moralist?

if answers, which appear really relevant, are "predisposed" to set him off. why not probe an area that he didn't ask a direct question. rather than go after a particular view, why not tell us where he is coming from? i figured (at the time) that he really wants to debate morality, then let's set the parameters.

OK, now that i think he's about 12, maybe a little harsh. but i presume that someone comes to an Islamic site and insults the Qur'an that he is "itching for a fight" and prepared to debate. so, let's just get into it. if you are a moralist, then there must be a "school" of thought that you adhere to, which ones of the ancient philosophers are your guys. there used to be great debates on these issues. i'm assuming and older viewpoint because a modernists tends to find all religious opinions morally offensive, he didn't.

and it's only the "idolworshipping buffoon" comment that makes me think he's 12, if he ain't, then let's go. i'm ready to discuss moral issues.

but if i missed the mark and he's just some poor emotionally challenged kid who doesn't know how to talk to people. i rather hope not, then i would feel horrible. there should be a section for them. i wouldn't presume to know how to deal with them. where i come from, we debated morals issue all night long, past sunrise. it is our culture. the number 1 no-no is to talk down to someone. if you have a viewpoint, by all means bring it on! i'm ready! let's get right to the meat of the issue.

BUT, if you're 12...probably a good idea to let someone else talk to him. in which case, you'd be more right than me. but you gotta tell me up-front, cuz i hate it when i'm told i'm patronizing someone. (cuz they only way i know how to define it is: treating someone like a kid)

so Ken, if you're some young lad, i DO apologize, and you should try to talk to some of these other brothers. (gah! now all i can picture is Hanz & Franz saying "OK Ken, you can stay here and play with these girly men") so if you're not, then remember when Bruce Lee would extend his arm, turn his hand upside down and make that little "come on" gesture with his fingers? :alright: