100 replies to this topic

[Yamato]

This video should be required viewing, under the circumstances this country has put itself in.

[rimbaudelaire]

Okay, please explain why this video should be required viewing, and to which country do you refer?

[hetrodoxly]

I don't get it? i assume your a Muslim and you're trying to promote Islam?

[Yamato]

rimbaudelaire, on 06 June 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

Okay, please explain why this video should be required viewing, and to which country do you refer?

When you understand something it's far less likely you will fear it.  And there's no reason to fear Islam.  

There's good reason to fear the lies that get circulated about the Qu'ran however.  Is there a good reason not to expose them?

Why refer to a country, sir?

[Yamato]

hetrodoxly, on 06 June 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

I don't get it? i assume your a Muslim and you're trying to promote Islam?

I'm Catholic and I'm exposing the Qu'ran so we can conclude together that there's no reason to burn it, among other things.

[eight bits]

Quote

Why refer to a country, sir?

Because you said in the OP, "... under the circumstances this country has put itself in."

I was curious about that, too. The question is easy to answer. Please do so.

Quote

There's good reason to fear the lies that get circulated about the Qu'ran however.  Is there a good reason not to expose them?

What "lies" did you have in mind? Your video (which I watched a long time ago) shows a writer who reports some disagreement among translations of poetic sermons from a late ancient language to a modern language that didn't exist when the sermons were recited. That's not surprising, and it isn't evidence that anybody lied about anything.

By the way, do you have an independent source that confirms she has resolved the translation diffciulties correctly? Also, I didn't catch the relevance of your identification of her as an "agnostic Jew." I'd  think her being a writer with some literary reputation would have been much more relevant.

Quote

I'm exposing the Qu'ran so we can conclude together that there's no reason to burn it, among other things.

I doubt that there's anybody here at UM who's ever burned a Koran, nor anybody who aspires to. What were the "other things" that you were trying to do?

Finally, I don't read Arabic, and even if I did, the language of the forum is English. Could you translate into English what it says in your picture of the glowing book? Thank you.

[Yamato]

eight bits, on 07 June 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

Because you said in the OP, "... under the circumstances this country has put itself in."

I was curious about that, too. The question is easy to answer. Please do so.


What "lies" did you have in mind? Your video (which I watched a long time ago) shows a writer who reports some disagreement among translations of poetic sermons from a late ancient language to a modern language that didn't exist when the sermons were recited. That's not surprising, and it isn't evidence that anybody lied about anything.

By the way, do you have an independent source that confirms she has resolved the translation diffciulties correctly? Also, I didn't catch the relevance of your identification of her as an "agnostic Jew." I'd  think her being a writer with some literary reputation would have been much more relevant.


I doubt that there's anybody here at UM who's ever burned a Koran, nor anybody who aspires to. What were the "other things" that you were trying to do?

Finally, I don't read Arabic, and even if I did, the language of the forum is English. Could you translate into English what it says in your picture of the glowing book? Thank you.

Oh my Americanism is showing.   I'm sure that the Xenophobia responsible for so many pop culture myths about the Qu'ran extends beyond my country's borders so this is really for everyone.

There are Arab board members, one of whom has already liked my post above.  They are bilingual and capable of helping you with all of your translating needs.

What lies?  There are no lies about what's lost in translation that I'm aware of.   At the same time, you'd have to be pretty isolated from US culture not to already know about the lies being circulated around about Islam.   We can have a protracted discussion about precisely that anytime you're ready because that's the reason this thread exists.  The lies are exposed by the particulars Lesley paid an inordinate attention to in the video, that it promises 72 virgins in paradise for example.

Hazleton's translation is subjective (and whose isn't?) yet after you watch the video, obviously very well read, cross referenced across several versions of the Holy Qu'ran, and studied/interpreted over a three month period.  I didn't describe her as an agnostic, she described herself as an agnostic and I repeated it.  Did you even watch the video again?  I suggest you watch it again because it might have avoided the need for most of these questions, and will certainly avoid the need for further questions answered by the video if we're going to discuss this further.  

If you have something you'd like to debate about this, please frame your debate and identify its framework so we're not just bantering, presuming it's debate-worthy.

I'd also like to apologize in advance, that your doubts about what you think of anyone on the UM message board's opinion of the Qu'ran isn't going to nullify or blemish this thread.

And I wouldn't describe Hazleton as a writer of some literary reputation because I'm not aware to what extent that's true, and I wasn't interested in promoting her personal qualifications other than to point out that she is an agnostic Jew, thus she's not biased by her religion or lack thereof when interpreting this book.  I would still be interested in this video if she'd never written a book at all.  I'm sure that Hazleton is in the encyclopedia and she probably does have some literary repute.  Nevertheless, if you have any evidence or reason to believe that something is inaccurate here, you're more than welcome to present your case.

Edited by Yamato, 07 June 2012 - 10:14 AM.

[eight bits]

So, "this country" is the United States? What are the circumstances that the United States has put itself in that concern you?

Quote

There are Arab board members, one of whom has already liked my post above.  They are bilingual and capable of helping you with all of your translating needs.

Once again, you were asked a simple question, and once again, you're taling about the question instead of answering it. What does the text in the picture you posted say in English? If you don't know, then that will do for an answer.

Quote

At the same time, you'd have to be pretty isolated from US culture not to already know about the lies being circulated around about Islam.

Then please help me out. We now seem to be in agreement that translation problems aren't examples of "lies," so what did you have in mind? Something like this?

Quote

... promises 72 virgins ....

Do you dispute that the Koran describes its afterlife-paradise in sensual terms? That this sensual description includes houris?

[44.54] Thus (shall it be), and We will wed them with Houris pure, beautiful ones.

see also 55: 36 and following.

So, we are down to the quantity 72 being mentioned only in hadith, and not in the Koran. OK. The number 72 is from Muslims commenting on the Koran rather than the Koran itself..

So, who in the United States lied about that, in your view? Are you sure that this unnamed American person didn't say "Islam promises ...," or "Islamic scripture promises...?" If so, then are you sure that the unnamed American didn't simply make a mistake, rather than telling a lie?

Finally for now on this issue, what difference do you think it makes that the Koran promises virgins, but not specifically 72 of them, when some Muslims, at least the hadith authors who claim to be interpreting the Koran, evidently believe that the right number actually is 72?

Quote

We can have a protracted discussion about precisely that anytime you're ready because that's the reason this thread exists.

OK, I'm ready. I don't how much "protracted discussion" is needed to answer a few simple questions, but I'm game.

Quote

I  suggest you watch it again because it might have avoided the need for most of these questions, and will certainly avoid the need for further questions answered by the video if we're going to discuss this further.

Thank you for your suggestion, but nowhere in the video does she address my question, which was why you chose to describe her only as an agnostic Jew, and not to mention her occupation, or anything else about her. I wasn't disputing that you had a source for what you said, I was asking why you chose to tell us that, and only that, instead of something more plausibly relevant to her qualifications to interpret the Koran.

[Yamato]

eight bits, on 07 June 2012 - 11:02 AM, said:

So, "this country" is the United States? What are the circumstances that the United States has put itself in that concern you?


Once again, you were asked a simple question, and once again, you're taling about the question instead of answering it. What does the text in the picture you posted say in English? If you don't know, then that will do for an answer.


Then please help me out. We now seem to be in agreement that translation problems aren't examples of "lies," so what did you have in mind? Something like this?


Do you dispute that the Koran describes its afterlife-paradise in sensual terms? That this sensual description includes houris?

[44.54] Thus (shall it be), and We will wed them with Houris pure, beautiful ones.

see also 55: 36 and following.

So, we are down to the quantity 72 being mentioned only in hadith, and not in the Koran. OK. The number 72 is from Muslims commenting on the Koran rather than the Koran itself..

So, who in the United States lied about that, in your view? Are you sure that this unnamed American person didn't say "Islam promises ...," or "Islamic scripture promises...?" If so, then are you sure that the unnamed American didn't simply make a mistake, rather than telling a lie?

Finally for now on this issue, what difference do you think it makes that the Koran promises virgins, but not specifically 72 of them, when some Muslims, at least the hadith authors who claim to be interpreting the Koran, evidently believe that the right number actually is 72?


OK, I'm ready. I don't how much "protracted discussion" is needed to answer a few simple questions, but I'm game.


Thank you for your suggestion, but nowhere in the video does she address my question, which was why you chose to describe her only as an agnostic Jew, and not to mention her occupation, or anything else about her. I wasn't disputing that you had a source for what you said, I was asking why you chose to tell us that, and only that, instead of something more plausibly relevant to her qualifications to interpret the Koran.

Again, I'm not bilingual so I have no idea what it says.  The picture says more to us pictorially than just the writing under it.  But let us get that translation from our Middle Eastern board members if it's important to you, and then freely decide together whether or not to use it in our own subjective interpretations, shall we?

Describing Hazleton as anything more than an Agnostic Jew wasn't relevant to me because I saw the video from a blank slate, having no prior knowledge about the speaker, and from that beginning I viewed this video as interesting enough to post here.  

"Virgins" and "pure beautiful ones" is addressed in the video and that interpretation is laughable based on the audience's reaction in the video as well as my own.   If you beg to disagree yourself I see nothing worthy of debate about it.   I do know that Islam's preferences for purity, such as they are, aren't a trait exclusive to Islam by any stretch.

I'm not sure what questions you think you have that aren't getting answered.

Qualifying the nature of untruths as to whether they're deliberate lies or merely wrongful assertions isn't that interesting an exercise to me.  They are similar enough to be rejected outright, don't you agree?

But you can't be this oblivious to the anti-Muslim backlash seen throughout the US since 9/11.   Why don't you try Google dot com and see if you can find any traces of it?  I don't care about rhetoric, and I don't care about the million micro-arguments that going through that maze will result from, especially with people as unwilling to agree on anything as you seem to be.

[Yamato]

I'm going to guess ahead of time what is written under my picture of the Qu'ran before one of our board friends beats me to it.  I'm going to guess it says the "Holy Qu'ran", more or less.   I'm really reaching there, I know.  

[eight bits]

I make a distinction between deliberate lies and simple misstatements. And no, I do not "reject outright" every simple misstatement that stays close to the truth. I'll propose a correction or a refinement instead. Thus,

"The Koran promises 72 virgins."

becomes

"The Koran promises virgins, and some Muslim commentators think there will be 72 of them."

There's an underlying idea common to both that has not been affected by the correction. If, further, a professional writer who has looked deeply into the question comes along and says

"Virgins isn't the idea I get from my reading. Pure and beautiful feminine beings is what I get."

OK, another opinion is noted. But, then, other serious people have interpreted their reading as virgins. Nobody's lying here, they're just honestly reading the same poem differently. It's nice to know that different readings are possible, but it's not news about poetic speech.

What is our interpretive objective anyway? To recover the poet's original intention? To explain the behavior of selected modern readers? That pair doesn't exhaust the possibilities, but does illustrate how either "pure and beautiful feminine beings" or "virgins" might be the true, correct and relevant answer to our actual inquiry.

And if, for any reason, I thought about trying to resolve the difference of opinion, I can scarcely think of a less useuful piece of information than that one of the interpreters is an agnostic Jew.

I am aware that there are Americans who are bigotted about all sorts of innocent human distinctions. I don't see how reading a poem one way rather than another reflects bigotry.

Quote

I'm going to guess ahead of time what is written under my picture of the Qu'ran before one of our board friends beats me to it.  I'm going to guess it says the "Holy Qu'ran", more or less.

In other words, you don't know. That's all you had to say.

[Yamato]

eight bits, on 07 June 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

I make a distinction between deliberate lies and simple misstatements. And no, I do not "reject outright" every simple misstatement that stays close to the truth. I'll propose a correction or a refinement instead. Thus,

"The Koran promises 72 virgins."

becomes

"The Koran promises virgins, and some Muslim commentators think there will be 72 of them."

There's an underlying idea common to both that has not been affected by the correction. If, further, a professional writer who has looked deeply into the question comes along and says

"Virgins isn't the idea I get from my reading. Pure and beautiful feminine beings is what I get."

OK, another opinion is noted. But, then, other serious people have interpreted their reading as virgins. Nobody's lying here, they're just honestly reading the same poem differently. It's nice to know that different readings are possible, but it's not news about poetic speech.

What is our interpretive objective anyway? To recover the poet's original intention? To explain the behavior of selected modern readers? That pair doesn't exhaust the possibilities, but does illustrate how either "pure and beautiful feminine beings" or "virgins" might be the true, correct and relevant answer to our actual inquiry.

And if, for any reason, I thought about trying to resolve the difference of opinion, I can scarcely think of a less useuful piece of information than that one of the interpreters is an agnostic Jew.

I am aware that there are Americans who are bigotted about all sorts of innocent human distinctions. I don't see how reading a poem one way rather than another reflects bigotry.


In other words, you don't know. That's all you had to say.

I'm not convinced the Qu'ran promises virgins after reviewing the video above.

Yes, in other words than "I have no idea" you can make it clear that you preferred me to say "I don't know" instead, but since I didn't use your word choice you chided me for it.  I guessed what it says and if you want to wager against my guess and come up with your own guess you're more than welcome.

Why are you calling the Qu'ran a poem?   It's poetic; it's not a poem.   If this video wasn't useful to you, then that's too bad.  I think an agnostic Jew or an agnostic period, is precisely the interpretation I was looking for.   If you want selection bias in your data to find usefulness, that's your bag.

[and then]

Yamato, on 06 June 2012 - 10:03 PM, said:

When you understand something it's far less likely you will fear it.  And there's no reason to fear Islam.  

There's good reason to fear the lies that get circulated about the Qu'ran however.  Is there a good reason not to expose them?

Why refer to a country, sir?

I think I've been as intense on this subject , maybe more so, than anyone else here at UM.  I have not attacked the Qur'an per se.  I HAVE repeatedly spoken of the fact that Islam is a religio/political system of subjugation.  The Qur'an and Hadith are the foundations of what Muslims believe and motivation for how many act.  The book repeatedly calls for violence against non believers.  It calls all Muslims to jihad against the infidel and has as it's ultimate goal the removal of ALL other religions on earth in deference to Islam.
http://www.thereligi...23-violence.htm

[hetrodoxly]

Yamato, on 06 June 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

I'm Catholic and I'm exposing the Qu'ran so we can conclude together that there's no reason to burn it, among other things.

Do you honestly believe this woman's twittering's are of any significance? she completely ignores hadiths how can she be taken seriously, she reads the Quran for three months (wow) and she now a Imam who can reveal the truth to the world, i'll take notice when she's been studying it for a lifetime or half as long as me.

[Yamato]

and then, on 07 June 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

I think I've been as intense on this subject , maybe more so, than anyone else here at UM.  I have not attacked the Qur'an per se.  I HAVE repeatedly spoken of the fact that Islam is a religio/political system of subjugation.

Except that when you awaken someone's spirit, you liberate them in ways far greater than the examples of subjugation of which you speak.  It's a huge net positive for a lot of individuals and if you're not a religious person you might find that difficult to understand.

If Islam is so bad, let the market decide.  Not governments and certainly not foreign governments 6,000 miles away.  

As for governing ourselves domestically, let's hear about this rash of burqa-wearing Muslim women robbing banks in this country before we're so wet and ready to step all over our Bill of Rights.