Is it correct that Muslims are "required" to understand Arabic in order to be able to read the Koran?
Reality teaches us that you need a mixture of A & B. Love and compassion have to infuse a religion and I believe the three monotheistic faiths have that in-bedded. However there has to be some structure and order, otherwise left to people's interpretation you will have millions of different versions of the same thing. For example there are some Christians and Muslims who believe in self flagellation to a bloody mess or even self crucifixion as a means to seek closeness to God.
Knowing that you do not need to sacrifice your first born to please God, but simply pray, give alms to the poor and abstain from sin should and does weed out a lot of zealotry which again is the opposite extreme of having too little or very lax rules.
Maybe in the same way that Christians are required to understand Latin.
Most Christian lay people do not understand Latin and even mong priests and minsisters it's no longer something you can take for granted.
Furthermore, the Church has for many centuries controlled and run most schools and so controlled the meaning of Latin. So it's not just the translation that can be tainted to suit an agenda, but the language itself can be tainted, especially if it's an otherwise dead language or not in common or general use in your country and thus words with multiple meanings can be reduced to a single meaning.
The Koran has been translated and is available in practically every language of the world. But according to my Turkish friends, only the original Arabic version is considered authoritative.
Forgive my ignorance, but who's this Jesus dude that some of you mention?
Did he play baseball for the Tel Aviv Disciples?
Well the Bible was certainly not written in Latin- the Latin 'version' was possibly much manipulated to suit.
Semantics are important. A translation of the Quran is like a study guide to Hamlet. Its an aid to understand the core Arabic text, but its not the Quran.
All this talk is missing the point somewhat. Whether Muslims should or shouldn't eat pork is neither here nor there - what matters is that some dishonest bastard has been selling meat under the wrong label. This is fraudulent and illegal.
If I'd bought meat on the understanding that it was halal, then found out it wasn't, I'd be furious.
And vice-versa. I totally agree with you- however my rights as a non-religious person to choose not to eat some meats, or to be picky about culling methods, or not use palm oil, etc- is just as valid. All consumers have the right to know what they are being sold to eat, not just the religious ones.
Chunks of the Koran were lifted from the Old Testament (or Jewish scriptures) and must thus have been translated from Hebrew.
The Hebrew version in turn was written down some time previously from stories that had been passed down orally. So nobody can really say with any certainty how many errors slipped in and what the original versins really said.
Ideally, if you can meet A & B, so long as the laws being followed righteously by A. For example, some of the laws were implemented for the sake of community cohesion at that point in time it was given. It would be totally absurd to mindlessly follow that law at all cost today if it effectively upset community cohesion today. The law is followed, but the spirit of it is transgressed.
Let me provide an example of law and faith from a Christian perspective.....
The model for Christianity is Abraham. He was deemed righteous through faith, not by obedience to rules and regulations. In fact, Abraham precedes Moses, and the Laws of Moses did not exist during this time. Yet he had a relationship based on faith and obedience. When asked to do something, he did it no matter the cost. He was faithful. But he did not follow the Laws of Moses.
Jesus Hernandez was our gardener in California.
Has anybody suggested that they shouldn't?
As I understand it, any meat sold under the wrong label invites a visit from the city authorities. This kind of thing doesn't only affect religious people.
it's a bloody cheek if you ask me.
No. Muslims are required neither to read nor understand the Quran.
I think a fraudster won't be worried about controls as this story illustrates.
I was slightly surprised by your comment about CH and "strict controls" - are you talking about food or in general? Whilst CH may be cleaner than most I have my serious doubts about its food hygiene in restaurants and supermarkets:
Migros worker handling meat without gloves
Food Hygiene
strict controls are not the same as high standards.
you can have low standards but adhere to them rigidly, and you can have high standards but be lapse about them.
Exactly- and also to distinguish between erros, slippages and deliberate distortion (the history of the rib, and the original sin by the woman temptress, for instance- which is not at all the same as the original Hebrew according to classical hebrew specialists). And Mary Magdalen being a woman of ill repute, etc.
Except the BIGGEST difference that affects world politics today, and can do us all in: Who did Abraham almost sacrifice on Mt. Moriah?
Jews and Christians say it was Isaac, and the Jews are the children of the promise. Muslims say it was Ishmael, and that they are the children of the promise.
A minor detail that can potentially lead us to the apocalypse.
Are your serious doubts backed up by a higher percentage of food poisoning cases in Switzerland compared with other first world countries?
Or maybe you don't know.