The final Renovation of the Universe

2 responses to “islam – one true religion?”

1. 

   Kamal Alipour

   juli 1, 2026

   I completely understand where your critique is coming from. You are targetting the mainstream, fossilized version of Islam that we see practiced today—and on that, I completely agree with you. However, to truly deconstruct this, we need to understand that language is shaped by social realities, not the other way around. The text of the Quran has been heavily distorted by later legalists and patriarchs to fit their worldly desires.

   ​Take the terminology itself:

   • ​‘Rijal’ comes from the root Rijl (leg). It originally referred to those who stood on their own feet—the self-sufficient providers. In that ancient society, those were exclusively men.
   • ​‘Nisa’ comes from the root Nasy (the forgotten/marginalized ones). It referred to the socially invisible and neglected class, which back then, were women and orphans.
   • ​‘Nikah’ is vastly different from Azwaj (marriage/pairing). In classical Arabic, they used to say ‘Nikah al-ard’ when the rain saturates and sustains the dry earth. Nikah means to provide full sustenance, financial cover, and shelter.

   ​When the text talks about ‘mathna, thulatha, ruba’a’ (in twos, threes, and fours) regarding Nisa (the forgotten/vulnerable), it is not giving men permission to marry four wives for sexual pleasure. It is a strict social and economic directive: to take the forgotten, vulnerable orphans under financial custody and provide full sustenance (Nikah) for them in organized groups so that justice is maintained. It has absolutely nothing to do with polygamy as a marital system.

   ​Now, regarding your deeply philosophical points about the infinite nature of God and the history of human wisdom—from Zarathustra and Plato to Einstein and Rumi—the original text actually aligns with your view.

   ​First, the Quran never claims a monopoly on truth. It explicitly validates all previous messengers, thinkers, and guides of humanity, stating: ‘We make no distinction between any of them.’ Muhammad didn’t claim to be a unique or first source of wisdom; he is described as the ‘seal’ (the chronicler of that specific Semitic lineage), while God’s inspiration has always manifested across different eras and civilizations—whether through the invention of the wheel, Greek philosophy, or the civil rights movement.

   ​Second, about the verse you mentioned (‘If he had forged this, We would have cut his aorta’), your critique is logically flawless from an outside perspective. However, contextually, this is an intra-theological argument, not an external proof of authenticity. It wasn’t written to convince a skeptic or an outsider. It was a severe warning directed strictly to an internal audience who already believed the words were from an infinite Source. It was a stylistic way of telling the believers: ‘Even the messenger has zero authority to alter a single syllable of this cosmic law; if he tries, the system itself will eliminate him.’

   ​The problem is exactly what you hinted at: mainstream religious institutions have frozen a dynamic text into an oppressive, ahistorical cage to protect their personal and political goals.

   LikerLiker

   Reply
2. 

   Armin Bahrami

   juli 1, 2026

   Thank you for your comment. Saving the orphans by marrying them is totally for selfish desires and. NOt zoroastrian:

   n Ancient Persia, formal, state-run orphanages did not exist. Instead, child welfare was handled by the community through strict cultural and religious practices. Under Zoroastrianism, the care of vulnerable children was considered a profound religious duty, and it was primarily the extended family, the local community, and pious endowments that prevented children from becoming destitute.Specific practices for raising and caring for these children included:Family and Community Obligation: According to ancient Zoroastrian legal texts, extended families were required to absorb and care for children who lost their parents (referred to as being «fatherless»). If a father abandoned or neglected his children, he was heavily penalized by the state.Charitable Endowments: During the Sasanian Empire (224–651 CE), wealthy individuals established religious and charitable foundations called ruwānagān. These endowments were funded to ensure ongoing care, food, and education for the vulnerable, including widows and children who had no surviving family.Religious Exhortation: High priests of the Sasanian era taught that «giving without being asked» was one of the highest virtues. Taking care of the poor and helpless was considered a direct act of devotion to God.Because of these deep-seated cultural traditions, orphaned children were integrated into the community structure rather than isolated in large institutional orphanages.

   LikerLiker

   Reply