h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I completely agree the question of creationism needs to be in there, and the current wording is much better.

"I'm sorry to tell you this, but I am a White guy, I have lived in England all my life. I did Shakespeare at school and I know what your saying."

Hmm. I'm not sure that you do. For a start, do you speak fluent Arabic? And for another, how do you judge the "expressiveness" of a language?

"But the truth is that English is not as expressive as Arabic and that is the honest truth."

It may well be your opinion, but you are hardly unbiased on this matter. Personally, I think you should leave any statements about how "expressive" one language is compared to another out of it. It's just likely to cause argument, and possibly offense.

"If you pick up a copy of the Qur'an and read it in English you will see at the bottom of the page you will find loads of footnotes on what it is actually saying and meaning, which are not in the Qur'anic version. This is because the words it uses actually explain every thing while the closest you can get in English can only give a rough idea."

This applies just as much to the Bible, the Tao Te Ching, or for that matter to Chaucer. It's simply a fact that word-for-word translation between ANY two languages is literally impossible, because every language has words which embody concepts which do not exist in others.

For instance - there's a German word, "weltschmerz", which has no direct translation into English. The nearest one can come is a clumsy definition, mental depression or apathy caused by comparison of the actual state of the world with an ideal state. Eighteen words in English, just the one in German. Is German "more expressive"? No. It simply expresses different things. One might infer that the Germans are an inherently more depressed and idealist people, if they have a short, two-syllable word for such a concept.

It is the highest cultural arrogance to suggest that the language of the Koran is in any way unique in its resistance to simple translation into English. !Xhosa, Japanese and Navajo would be at least as "expressive". Equally, I would challenge anyone to translate Hamlet into Arabic without needing extensive explanatory footnotes.

Best to just omit the comparison and save argument, don't you think? Or if you must mention it, it might be better to say that because the Koran deals with profound concepts, its meaning is closely woven into the original language in which it was written, and thus, like all great works of literature, it defies easy and literal translation into other languages. You might even point out that in their insistence on reading the Koran in its original language, Muslims avoid one of the commonest points of debate among Christians reading the Bible, i.e. which translation to use.

Actually I just tested a DVD that was delivered to us about Islam at my place of work and Ihave found a betterway of saying what I was trying to say that will not cause offense.

Arabic is an intricate language and many meanings can be derived from a single statement. No translation can get all these meanings expressed in the same way in one single statement in another language.

Is that better.

Adib

All I'm getting at is that Arabic is not unique in this. How about something like:

"Arabic, like many other languages, is intricate, and a single statement may have many layers of meaning. A translation to any other language, while it may be correct in its superficial meaning, could omit important subtleties. It is for this reason that translation is discouraged. This has the additional benefit of removing doubt about which "version" of the Koran one might be quoting - there is no "King James Version", only the original text.

Yeah there is only one version of he Quran.

I really do under stand what your saying but let me make this point, ho do you know Arabic is just like other languages if you do not speak it.

As for me yes I can speak Quranic Arabic a little but I am still learning as it is very vast.

<>

This does sound better I guess, you will find that a lot of english Qur'ans are actually labelled as 'interpretation of the meaning of the noble Quran'

Let me make an example, there is a common misconception that it says you can hit women in Islam as reading through the English one you find it says that a dissobidient wife can be hit.

But the actual arabic text does not mean that it is more closer to :

'a symbolic gesture of gently hitting the hand in away that doe no harm but symbalises your displeasure'

Even that is not that accurate.

I will change it to how you say to stop argument or offense over it though.

Adib

Indonesia was not primary islam state. It is now but they take islam not to much long ago like iran or irak. About Abisinia*Etiophia/thing were not so good(black and white) there and if they was why Etiophia and Eritrea went to war?They bouth are part of Abisinia-Etiophia, but Eritrea is moustly muslim and Ethiopia ortodox country right?Something Like India and Pakistan(well India is moustly hindy country)one nation 2 religions.
About creation/
some scientists thing that nothing is making emition of some sort of waves taht later transform into something else, something else is turnig later in diferent tipe of waves, that change and trasform into molekuls of matery. So think like this if nothing has trow up(literary) and after couple of zillion years we are here...what then.?????

"About creation/
some scientists thing that nothing is making emition of some sort of waves taht later transform into something else, something else is turnig later in diferent tipe of waves, that change and trasform into molekuls of matery. So think like this if nothing has trow up(literary) and after couple of zillion years we are here...what then.?????"

Leaving aside that I can't really tell what you're saying, I do think that it's best for this entry to take the minimal approach that Adib has agreed to. This is a FAQ about Islam, not Creationism. He could easily write a whole entry just about that, but that's not (I think) what he's aiming for. It's best to simply point out what Muslims believe (i.e. Creationism) and leave it at that. Anything more, I think, takes away from the rest.

I agree.

Adib

I am very sorry to chime in at this late date. This is a very minor matter.
At the very end of the FAQ, there is a paragraph that starts:
'This is in correct.'
I believe it should be 'This is incorrect.'

I found this entry terribly enlightening, as I have had no real introduction to the subject. This is one of the reasons why I have never held an opinion.

As one who is uneducated on the subject, I have to trust that the author has called on whatever other knowledgeable resources are in their company to review it for fairness, balance, and accuracy. The subject matter definetly belongs in the EG, as these seem to be precisely the kinds of questions the curious would ask.

So far as I can tell, Nicely Done!

Thanks, I will change the Spelling of the inaccurate part, thanks ,for pointing it out.

All the statements made are accurate as far as my knoledge goes, and aslo before I wrote it up on this site I made a draft and had a friend of mine, whom is a Islamic scholor, check it over, and he says it is all accurate.

Adib

Maybe it should be called ‘FAQs about Islam’? (Not sure.)

"Why do women pray behind men?

The ritual prayer requires concentration and complete devotion to the remembrance of God. Therefore, any thing that might cause a distraction for a Muslim in prayer is avoided. This is why men and women stand in separate rows. It is not considered appropriate for the dignity of Muslim women to pray in front of a men as garments can come loose in prayer and could reveal parts of her body which ordinarily are covered up. This would not only be embarrassing for the woman but would also distract men praying behind her, so the arrangement in Islam is that men pray in front of the women."

What happes if women get distracted by men, or if garments of the man come loose?

"Was Satan originally an angel?

No. We are told in the Qur’an (18:50) that he was one of the jinn, creatures made from flame of fire, while angels are made from light. Furthermore angels, by their nature, do not have free will meaning that they are unable to do any thing but obey God’s commands."

Maybe something in there that mentions *Muslims believe* Satan was not originally an angel. It comes across like an undisputed fact, which it isn't.

Niwt

I posted all of those comments without saying I think 'tis a fascinating entry that I shall finish reading later. Very interesting, well done.

Sorry - a lot of my previous comments seem rather stupid. I think you should ignore them.

However, I have a few nitpicks for you (and there are some more that I haven't mentioned)....

Sometimes you have written "Muslims" and sometimes "Muslim's".

"What is inside the Ka’bah(The black structure in Mekkah)?

Nothing"

Needs a fullstop. In fact, you've forgotten several.

"Does wearing the face cover (Niqaab) mean tat you are more religious?"

That, rather than tat.

"Is stem cell research aloud in Islam?"

Allowed.

"In the old days women where blamed if she had a female baby and not a male one, what does the Qur’an say about this?"

Where ---> were.

"What is an Ayatollah"

Needs ?.

That's enough for today. I hope you forgive me for being stupid earlier.

Just another point, sorry.

You've written about creationism/evolution (prompted by others in the thread) and have basically said that Muslims do not believe in the theory of evolution:
"If the theory of evolution is meant in terms that the universe and all life came in to existence not by an act of creation but through evolution then no. Muslim’s reject this completely. On the contrary, Muslims believe that the universe, with all its elements in it, is a creation of God."

However, not all Muslims think that. It may be a common idea, and it was very common in the past, but many Muslims nowadays (just like Christians, Jews etc.) are very scientific and believe in evolution (and other aspects of science). I know several Muslims studying science at university. They manage to fit their faith in nicely with recent scientific ideas such as the theory of evolution. I think you should add an extra sentence or footnote. Say that everybody (regardless of religion, race etc.) has different beliefs usually due to where they live, education and personal opinion, and although as a rule Muslims don't believe in the theory of evolution, individual Muslims can and do.

"Why can you spell Qur'an, as Koran or Kor'an etc?

Arabic, like many other languages, is intricate, and a single statement may have many layers of meaning. A translation to any other language, while it may be correct in its superficial meaning, could omit important subtleties. It is for this reason that translation is discouraged. This has the additional benefit of removing doubt about which "version" of the Koran one might be quoting - there is no "King James Version", only the original text. The reason for various spellings is that Arabic also has many more letters than most languages and so people tend to choose spellings on how it sounds in English making the various spellings of the Qur'an that we have around today."

You should be using single quotes, 'like this', rather than "double quotes". You've mentioned that Arabic has so many more letters than most languages, but maybe you should also say it uses a completely different alphabet to English, and that's a pretty important reason as to why spelling comes across differently! As far as I know, it's very similar to trying to put Chinese/Japanese/Tamil alphabet into English 26 letters.

I think the whole creation/evolution thing can be most easily summed up by saying that *fundamentalist* Muslims, like fundamentalist Christians, are creationists.

Anyone who *isn't* a Creationist is by definition not a "proper" Muslim (or Christian) because they're picking and choosing what to believe.

Salaam (Peace)

Hippies thought they where good saying peace to each other in the 70's but Muslim's have been doing it for 1400 years, joke.

Anyway thanks for your points, and I am glad to have such a good responce from people.

As for this question:

'What happes if women get distracted by men, or if garments of the man come loose?'

I'm sorry but I don't find it stupid, its actually a good question to ask.
Firstly Muslim women in Muslim countries have atendancy to wear Sari like cloths which are wrapped around the body and not stiched together like mens clothing is.
Meaning that the womans clothing can come undone where as generally what the man wears is more like a extended shirt that can't come undone.

Secondly I think a womens top slipping of, revealing her breasts is far more distracting that looking at a mans hairy back joke.

As I think I explained some where its also because generly women look after the babies and children etc, and so if the baby starts crying they have to go and feed him/her or change its nappy.
Now if it was mixed groups or women in front this could distract more people than neccecery and also the exits are generely at the back of the mosque hall.

So it is more conveniant for women to be at the back.
Though it is not supported in Islam some men can be come angry if there dinner is not served on time or some thing (It happens all ove the world) now also if a Muslim women is at the front she wont be able to leave as all the people behind her maybe praying or trying to get out, this could hold her up, and if she has a bad Husband and she can't get home in time to do his dinner it could make things hard for her.

Thers is thousands of reasons why Women pray behind Men but I only addressed a few in the entry, also the most inportant reason really is that we are told to by Muhaamad.


Moving on to ease arm aid office (suite, suite, them emery sioux gay for tomb ee) I can't put Anyone who *isn't* a Creationist is by definition not a "proper" Muslim (or Christian) because they're picking and choosing what to believe, because some Muslims do believe in evolution, as a process from God to inprove a species. Now it is not the duty of a Muslim to say he or she is not a Muslim because they do this and that.
Also it is ok to believe in Evolution as long as you don't follow the bits of some thing just coming from nothing and that a species class like dogs will evovle in to a new species class. Like dinosours turning in to birds.
As For a lion adapting to its enviroment and becoming a new type of lion that is allowed as it is not some thing happening from nothing.

I hope that all made sense.

Thanks for your input, and I hope to hear more soon.

Adib

Hi Adib,

I'm sorry, you seem to misunderstand. I didn't actually intend for you to put that thing about "proper" Muslims, that was just a sort of joke. Just the line about *fundamentalist* Muslims (and Christians) having to be creationists.

"Also it is ok to believe in Evolution as long as you don't follow the bits of some thing just coming from nothing and that a species class like dogs will evovle in to a new species class."

You might just as well say "it's OK to believe in light, only you're not allowed to believe in blue light - only red and green." I really think you're in danger of provoking the whole creation/evolution controversy. Much better to be clear, and say that Islam rejects evolution and is therefore creationist. Trying to have your cake and eat it by saying you are allowed to believe in evolution, but only conditionally, just sounds silly, and also defensive. It's as though you know deep down that you're wrong, and you're trying to convince yourself that you're right.

There's nothing inherently, morally *wrong* about being a creationist. After all, until about 200 years ago, EVERYBODY was.

I really think you should just state clearly that fundamentalist Muslims are required to be creationists, and let the reader draw their own conclusions. I'm sure most intelligent readers will realise that not every Muslim is a fundamentalist, and therefore not every Muslim will reject 200 years of science to the same extent.

I'm curious - there are plenty of Christians (a creationist religion) who managed to ignore their faith *completely* when it comes to science - Christians who reject completely the word of their Bible and the creation it describes. They don't pick and choose which bits of science are compatible with Christianity, they pick which bits of Christianity are compatible with science. Is there an equivalent in Islam? Or would such a person not be properly called a Muslim?

A rather less specific critique now:

The entry starts off well, seeming well structured. It's clear what is a question and what is an answer - at first.

I have a problem with this Q&A though:
"Do Muslims believe all Christians will go to Hell?"

The "answer" given is not an answer, perhaps because of the way the question is phrased. Try answering this question instead: do Muslims believe it possible for non-Muslims to go to heaven? That can be answered with a simple yes or no, then perhaps explained a little.

Another problematical question is: "Why can you not conceive of Jesus as God?"

This is a leading question. It would be better to answer the question "What do Muslims believe with regard to Jesus?" - and give the information that he is recognised as a prophet, but not as the son of god, then say why.

A lot of this comes down to what a FAQ is. Try reading some - the best ones are usually short, to the point, and only answer questions people really want or need answered.

Moving on...

The question "Do Muslims believe in the theory of evolution? " is redundant, as the answer to the previous question has already made it clear that the answer is "No."

Once you get into this section, it all starts to get a bit rambling and non-FAQ-like. For instance, the answer to the question "Is stem cell research allowed?" - this could be a simpe yes or no. Instead there are long paragraphs, including quotes from the Koran. Try to shorten it a bit.

Now, a little further down there seems to be a question:
"And when the female infant buried alive is questioned - for what crime was she killed. Qur?an"

Obviously this isn't a question, but it looks like one. Try to keep your formatting consistent, it will help the reader concentrate.

I still think the question "why do birds fly?" has nothing whatever to do with Islam, or any other religion, and is thus completely out of place.

I think the question about convincing people that god exists is superfluous. This is a FAQ about Islam. Is it not a given that a Muslim believes in god?

In the answer to the question about Jihad, the formatting goes a bit haywire, with bold text all over the place. Try to tidy this bit up and cut it down a bit.

I hope this is of help.

I see you've added some stuff. Well done. There are still heaps of errors though, mainly spurious apostrophes.

I understand the whole loose clothes/slipping off thing, but I'm not sure I completely agree with it. However.

In some mosques I've actually seen women have a small, roped off secluded area for them to pray in, whereas men get the rest (this particular one was in Indonesia).

I agree with 'Member ease arm aid office' and think some of the questions are superfluous. "How long does it take to read the whole Qur&#8217;an?" is a rather useless question, as it obviously depends quite a lot on one's reading speed, as well as what you mentioned (amount of time free in a day). Maybe it would be better to say "About how long is the Qur'an?" or leave out the question entirely.

Also, you seem to have avoided some issues with "How do you get Muslim teenagers to pray 5 times a day?". It's not so much about whether teenagers are used to praying 5 times a day, it's more how they can fit it in with school (takes up about 8/9 hours a day for teenagers) plus sport, etc. In fact, the same goes for Muslims working in offices and busy during the day. (I know some people just take short breaks. I also know some offices have banned this.)

"Muslim men are not under a obligation to marry more than one wife, but when the need arises then they can, under the conditions prescribed."
Well, they can't actually. Is that what "under the conditions prescribed mean"? Muslim men in America, Australia, Britain, most of Europe and many other countries can't marry more than one woman, because bigamy is illegal in those countries and the laws apply equally to everyone, even Muslims.

"If a couple divorces, who gets custody of the children?

It depends on the age of the children. If they are too young, the mother takes custody, until they can decide which of he parents they want to live with. Which ever of the parents take custody of the children must facilitate contact with and visit the other parent."
I would've thought that's basically the same with all religions, and happens in normal life anyway. In some countries it is actually decided by the state court, not the parents. Maybe that should be mentioned.

I think there are some very frequently asked questions about Islam that arose recently in the media with the whole terrorism thing, and haven't been addressed in this entry. There are also a lot of urban myths floating around (well, I think they're urban myths. I haven't read all the Qur'an yet. They could be true).

For example:
Why do you have to face Mecca when you pray?
Is it true that if you kill a non-believer you go to paradise?
(I'm sure there are heaps more, but can't seem to remember them!)

I'm sure there are some other edited entries about Islam in the guide that you can link to.

Niwt

Salaam,

Ok then let’s get started firstly about the Evo thing.
What it is, is this all Muslim’s believe we are created and all animal types i.e. Dogs, cats, whales, bears, apes, Humans etc are created but as for the different species in each type we are not told about it in the Qur’an, meaning the idea of a creature life a Beagle slowly turning in to say a Alsatian (for sake of argument) can be accepted as we are not told about it in the Qur’an. Though there is plenty of evidence of creatures in a group evolving in to a new type of that group there is no conclusive proof that dinos turned in to birds for example.
But as said before by someone it comes down to the individual, if you look at Harun Yahya you see that he says all evolution is false, an if you look at another Muslim he might say well differently, but all Muslims have to believe that Life and the universe was created by God.

Saying that we came together by chance from life less molecules is not accepted by Muslims, and it has no part in evolution either really.

I think basically the best thing I could do is change it to say, as a whole Muslims do not believe in Evolution but there are parts in the theory that are felt to be acceptable to some Muslims.

As for fundamentalist Muslims, all Muslims are fundamentalist, as a Muslim it is obligatory to believe in all the basic facts of the faith. Meaning all that is said in the Qur’an, if someone starts saying oh that bit is wrong etc, then they are actually moving away from there faith.
As Islam basis not only faith but the way you should lead your life on the Holy Book which Muslims believe as the words of God. Meaning they can not be wrong.

It’s not like the bible were none of it is written by God or Jesus but rather inspired to people, it is the true word of God, and so it can’t contain errors.

But some Muslims do argue that we are created and he did so via evolution, no one knows which group is right or wrong. As it simply says He created all life.

Moving on to the second new post.

The do Muslims go to heaven or hell we Muslims do not know. It is actually a sin for a Muslim to say: that person is going to go to Hell.
In the Qur’an we are told that other than those whom believe in one God all will forgive who ever he wants. Meaning that Allah knows best and we should not try to judge people on that level.

I think I will change it to what is suggested though.

The Jesus question, I wanted to keep it short as I don’t want to annoy any Christians about that issue.

This is because it brings in not only the question of Jesus but the authority of the Bible as well. I will explain only a short bit about why we don’t believe in the Jesus is God thing below:

Muslims believe, that Jesus was one of the mightiest messengers of God, that he was the Christ, That he was born miraculously – without any male intervention. That he Gave live to the dead by God’s permission and that he healed the blind, the leper with God’s permission. In fact no Muslim is a Muslim if he does not believe in Jesus.

But as far as Christ being Jesus, that is not accepted.
Jesus himself never says in the bible worship me or that I am God, He says in many places lines such as “Never did I say to them anything other than what I was commanded to say that is Worship God, who is my lord and your lord.
Muslim’s responses to the claim of Jesus being God is were in the whole Bible does Jesus say himself that I am God or Worship me.

Of course they quote John chapter 10 verse 30 which read: I and the farther are one.

And so Muslim’s say but what is the context, that’s the words, but what’s the context.

Let me explain what I mean, I hope you understand what I saying here:

John chapter 10 verse 23:

23) And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s porch.
24) Then came the Jews round about him. And said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
25) Jesus answered them, I told you, and you believed not: the words that I do in my Fathers name, they bear witness of me.
26) But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27) My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28) And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man PLUCK THEM OUT OF MY HAND.
29)My Farther which gave them to me, is greater than all, and no man is able to PLUCK THEM OUT OF MY FARTHERS HAND>
30) I and my Farther are one.

One in what? In there Omniscience, there nature? There Omnipotence? No! They are one in purpose. Once a believe has accepted faith, the messenger sees to it that he remains in faith and God also sees to it that he remains in faith.

That is only one point why Muslims don’t believe Jesus is God, plus that we are told he is not in the Qur’an.

“And when the female infant buried alive is questioned – for what crime was she killed?” Qur’an. It is a question and a quote.

It is in the Qur’an is aimed at saying on the day of judgement the farther who killed her is going to go to hell, by his daughters answer to the question for what crime was she killed.

It’s simply a quote from the Qur’an.

What I have tried to do with the bold text is to have quotes from the Qur’an and Hadith in bold.

Actually in most Mosques they either have a separate hall to pray in, or a balcony above the men’s or a section at the back roped of for women.

But the actual ruling is that they can pray behind the men.

As for the marriage thing let me clarify. The Holy Qur’an in Sura 4 ayaah 3it reads

Wa ‘in khiftum ‘allaa tuq-situu fil-yataamaa fan-kihuu maataaba lakum-minan-nisaaa-‘I masnaa wa sulaasa wa rubaa’.Fa-‘in khiftum ‘allaa ta’-diluu fawaa-hidatan ‘aw maa malakat ‘aymaanukm. Zaalika ‘adnaaa ‘allaa ta –‘uu-luu.

If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, then marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; But if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, Then marry only one, or that your right hand possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

This was revealed shortly after a war, and so the ruling in Shari a is this. If there is a lot of orphans and/or widows (Most likely due to war, as most armies are made up of men as the majority) then if you are single and have the means then you should marry, or if you have a wife and she does not mind, you don’t mind, you have the means then you can marry another women up to four.
This is so you can help support widows and orphans due to war, I.e. adopt orphans who can be looked after by the husband and wife/s. This is because if you are very wealthy you could take on 10 orphans lets say, but that might be to much for one man and women.

But there is a clause which is if you can’t deal justly with them then marry only one. Meaning that if you can’t love, treat and give to them equally then only marry one person. For instance you can’t send one on a 1000 pound cruise and send the other to butlins, you have to do it equal.
Which is as every one knows nearly impossible which is why hardly anyone marries more than one women.
Just let it be noted that Islam has the only religious BOOK that says in it marry only one.

As for the divorce thing, well I am saying what is Islamic law and not what other countries do for law. So it is not an issue I don’t think what the other countries system is.

I will add the other questions to the list.

Thanks, if you disagree with any of my statements just say so.

Adib