Islamic History, Doctrine... & Questions

Hello Everyone/F(R)IEND(S)

My goal is to discuss Islam in more detail. I have seen a few threads that frankly are stupid since they typically spiral into insulting, derogatory, or ignorant comments about Muslims/Islam. If your goal is to post that you think Islam is rooted in hatred please GO AWAY and do not post. I am interested in learning/debating/understanding Islam and not in reading conjecture.

AVICENNA A.D. pointed out some errors and misconceptions of mine with regards to Islam–thanks for your insight AVI, now on to the details: I am familiar with Islam’s rejection of anthropomorphication; however, I have always struggled to understand the logic behind this. Could someone with knowlege of Islamic traditions/beliefs please answer a few questions or provide some corrections?

To start below is a short narrative of how I developed my understanding/beliefs on Islam:

Islam is a religion with its formation beginning around 1500 years ago. Allow me to present you with this short story: The protagonist finds that his people are under severe persecution and are in danger of losing their land, their way of life, and their very existence is also in danger. The protagonist must unite his people under one cause and aid them to focus. The protagonist needs to give his people what they need most: hope + direction. Unity is important because his people are, in actuality, tribes that are held together by various beliefs. So, the protagonist decides to start a religion that will accomplish his aims.

The protagonist chooses to base his foundation on a religion that many tribe members respect, honor, believe. This religion, namely Judaism, also has credibility and birthed a very successful branch–Christianity. Now, since it is the Christians that are, very much the persecuters, they cannot accept this religion–especially since by now (circa 600 C.E.) Christianity has so many hypocrites, false prophets, and false doctrines. The protagonist is a righteous man and develops his notion of god interspersed with some of the Christian notions and Jewish notions.

The result is Islam which will accomplish the aims of the protagonist:
b[/b] The protagonist’s vision of god is furthered and he truly believes that god is glorified
b[/b] The religion has near instant credibility since it is based on the Abrahamic traditions.
b[/b] The notions of god that that protagonists has developed will allow his people to pick and choose which doctrines found in the gospels and the Torah will actually benefit his people.
b[/b] Unites his people under one cause which as we is a strength.
b[/b] The religion takes advantage (just as all religions do) of the zealots and the fact that mankind is willing to justify ANYTHING for their notion of god–which benefits the early followers.
b[/b] The religion will lead his people to freedom.

Now, there is nothing wrong with the above… Christianity has done it and Judaism did it way before either religion, and nearly all religions stem from the notion of god–a creation of mankind’s primitive mind–which stands to reason that all religions will borrow from each other the great ideas that develop/further the notion of god.

Below is AVICENNA’s post, in relevant part:

Is my narrative completely inaccurate? If so, please explain. If only partially inaccurate, please detail.

Now, how has Islam chosen which doctrines or “mistakes” are unreliable?

Do Muslim scholars truly believe that the Qu’ran (is it spelled Qur’an?) is in the precise form that the Prophet Muhammad (spelled Mohammed?) recited to the early followers? How has the veracity of this been challenged/proven?

As an outsider looking in, it seems pretty arbitrary to choose and accept only the teachings that prove and/or do not challenge the notion of god developed by the Prophet Muhammad? Note: I believe this applies to all religions, primarily Christianity.

Although I understand that Islam does not accept god as man how do Muslims explain the possibly valid scriptures from the Torah? Wouldn’t one, as a logical person, agree that there are instances in the Torah where it is intimated that god was as a man? Think of Jacob wrestling with a man all night concluded by Jacob saying he saw god face to face where the man/god gave Jacob his new name of Israel (Genesis 32) or the story of Abraham and Sarah and the three men/god (Genesis 18 ). These would be pretty significant changes. Essentially, does Islam propose that the Jews screwed up or made up these stories? If so, do you question the method?

Islam denies that man was created with the charectiristics of god? Namely: the concepts of free will, choice, the capacity for good, et al? I am not talking about the physical, just the spiritual… Please expand.

OK, I don’t know much about Islam, but I have talked to many friends about it. So I’m just going to state as much as I know, and I will admit that I could be wrong with some points (so feel free to inform me of my mistakes)

Islam is about submission, i.e submission to God (a.k.a Allah, which is usually followed by the words Most Gracious, Most Merciful). From that you can see that man can not be the same as God. Obviously there is omnipotence in God, that man lacks but that he must acknowledge.

Free Will: Since Islam is about Submission, one is required to live their life in submission to God. (I guess in that way, you don’t have the will to question if Allah should be worshipped). I guess the idea of free will isn’t accepted in Islam (I’m not sure but you said that) because although people have lives, their lives is pretty much dependent on God. So even if you make right or wrong decisions, the result is up to God. I guess that is what is meant by no free will.

The Capacity for Good: Well I guess since man was not made with characteristics of God, they can be led astray. I believe my friend said that Muslims can pray for forgivness and follow the right path, and God may forgive them.

Choice: I don’t know what that means. Are you referring to the strict rules Muslims must follow? I guess if Islam or Submission is your way of life, well you wont have any problems abiding by the rules for submission (after all it is a religion of submission). I’ll ask my friend, I really don’t know. When it comes to Hijab wearing and females, there are some social issues around it. Some have said it is more a social practice, rather than a religious practice. I always figured since, Islam branched out of Christianity, then the covering of the hair was religious since nuns covered their heads. But I was wrong.

The Qur’an is never to be translated to any other languages because it is believed that the meaning is lost. The Qur’an should be read in it’s original language. I think this is why Muslims belief that their version of the holy text is real. Well so I’ve heard. There are questions about how it was recorded. That I don’t know much about.

Peace

thirstformetal, try going to a valid edu site for English translations of the hadiths and Qu’ran. I would provide the USC one, but a Muslim said it was not necessarily valid.

The main problem I have with Islam stems from the fact that a valid Islamic web site state that God’s laws supercede man’s laws, hence they do not agree with secularism.

For example, why should employers provide break times for prayer outside of the regular breaks. Ditto for our secular schools providing prayer breaks for Muslims. Hum, teachers and the schools are legally responsible for all students and if a students leaves class unsupervised, falls down or commits acts of vandalism the school is responsible. Plus, other students resent these prayer breaks and the class is interrupted for student prayer breaks.

When I stated that perhaps this individual should go and live in an Islamic theocracy if he did not agree with many US laws, he resorted to ad hominem attacks.

Yikes, I’ll stop right here now, and say sorry to whom ever I have offended. Here are the correction : Muslims do believe in Free will, and that human nature is good. I should have listened to my conscience and stay away from topics I have no clue about .

Here is a link re: free will:
http://www.islamonline.net/askaboutislam/display.asp?hquestionID=3345

re: Human Nature is Good:
http://www.islamic.org.uk/I4WM/gensin.htm

Peace

At my old high school, muslim students were allowed to pray. Infact, they were given an empty classroom, in which they could gather and pray. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Of course, it was the students’ responsibilty to get notes they missed via friends or visiting the teacher after school. We had a sign out and sign in system during the prayer hours. There were specific rules, that students were not allowed to leave the school premises during the times they signed out of a class to pray, unless they notify the office. In fact everyone (regardless of religion) had to notify the office when they left school during school hours.
Aspacia, if your school organized a proper system, you’ll see that everything works out well. It doesn’t matter what ever religion kids are of, they will always try to skip school. So, in my opinion, that is a sad excuse.

Peace

First, my thanks to thirst4metal for bringing up such an important topic and exhibiting his true nature as a real philosopher who is interested in the truth, not swayed by emotion, ad hominem arguments. In my time here, this is the first real inquiry to Islam while all others seem to be concerned with the refutation of Islam in whole with a few posts on this website, free from supervision and contributions from any real experts on the matter.

Due to 2 big papers this week, and due to my intense desire to make well thought out, true, and informative posts, I must return with replies in a few days, but I must take up a comment by curious-rina below, and a clarification to something cited by thirst4metal. In the meantime however, I encourage all to utilize 2 very good sources of information on Islam:

1. islamicity.com

2. (877) WHY-ISLAM launched by Islamic Relief. You can call anytime and talk to a live person about your questions on Islam. They have people in almost every major language in the world staffed. When calling, attempt to substantiate their views and be sure to ask them to cite which school of Islamic thought they are professing. Don’t be so relaxed to accept their views as necessarily true to Islam per se. Challenge them as you would challenge me here as far as citations, etc.

curious_rina wrote:

Humans have free will. Free will is so essential to Islam, since accountability is. Human have total free will. We are the dictators of our destiny, unless as other schools of thought contend, God wills otherwise. In that case, it would not follow that a Good God would hold us accountable for something we could not control, more, what he made us do. There is nearly unanimous consensus among the Muslim schools of thought that we have free will.

Humans have a good nature and are born innocent, in divergence to Xianity’s notion of original sin, and the recurring theme of guilt for the death of Christ, and in my opinion unnatural repression of human desires such as sex. One might quickly rebut, ‘look at Saudi Arabia, they kill women for infidelity for example,’ to which I would reply, ‘look at Ireland, Protestants and Catholics killing eachother in the name of God.’ It’s humans, not the book.

With regard to free will, there is diversity of opinion as you all must acknowledge…yes, even amongst Muslims. Muslim philosophers in antiquity debated tirelessly regarding divine intervention which has an important relationship in the debate with free will. Religious people, and believers who are not so religious often rattle off about divine intervention as if there are no severe consequences on the nature of God. Avicenna and Imam Ghazali have opposing views on the matter pertaining to philosophy of time. Divine intervention will be a big problem for anyone who believes in God because it has serious consequences. I encourage all, atheists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, agnostics, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. to engage in the issue raised above, it is of utmost importance in our notion of God, universally applicable to especially Judaism, Xianity, and Islam. There are other issues that relate as well worth looking into e.g. causal determinism and necessitarianism. St. Anselm’s notions on a dual oriented human will is essential to free will as well. Point being, while there will be great benefit and value in this thread, there are some important essential theories that we should all try to grapple with that theologians and philosophers (Christian and Muslim alike) have for centuries that will help us much more in understanding these issues.

My apologies, I missed the (non physically) part. Seeing that now, I will concede that I can not answer that question. This is a very complicated issue as I realized when I asked a friend who is a religious studies junky who happens to be Muslim. Check out islamicity.com and the number above and I’ll try to come up with what I can as well. Be back in a few days.

I will check this site, thanks

curious_rina wrote:

Yes, many Islamic scholars make this claim, but most, and I do mean most of their religious text argue for submission and making all submit to Allah.

No, the Irish conflict is economic. The Protestants occupying North Ireland horribly discriminating against Irish Catholics. My mom holds dual citizenship and I have been there, researched this and the numerous conflicts Europenans and England have engaged in.

After indulging in world religions and religions in America classes, the competing philosophies, etc., they all tend to be wanting, often violent and misogynistic. Granted, there are gems in these texts, the parables regarding life’s rewards and troubles, reveal a deep understanding regarding human nature.

Yes, this is true.

Good luck with your studies. Been there, done that.

Okay, the secular school provides a room for prayer, this occurs in many schools during lunch time and supervsion is provided by a credentialed volunteer. Legally, there must be a credentialed person supervising students at all times. What if no volunteer is available?

Also, Muslims leaving the class for prayer causes resentment from many other students as many have argued “Why are they given special treatment?”

If students leave school to pray off campus, the school is still responsible until that child enters his or her home.

I believe the point is made.

I am a teacher and only after teaching did I become aware regarding the many laws regarding teachers and students. This is especially true in the k-12 system, and somewhat true in the college and university system.

Hi Aspacia,
I shall start a new thread, because I still have a few comments about what you stated. I think this thread is for discussion about Islamic texts and stuff. I’ll post my thoughts in the Mundane Babble section. Please do respond.

Thanks,
Rina

AVICENNA wrote:

Aspacia wrote:

Yes but what does this have to do with free will. Submission to God means to obey God and make your deeds aligned with God’s will decreed in the Qur’an. Because God asks us to obey laws, this does not negate free will. Because the Qur’an commands us to refrain from oppressing others does not mean that we do not have free will.

AVICENNA wrote:

Aspacia wrote:

Durant argued we can reduce human conflicts in terms of perceived self interest and describes all modern problems as economic. While one can debate this view, we should not discount the complexities involved in the Muslim world and be so quick to paint them in a way that would equate us with the minds of yellow press subscribers. Aspacia, I understand that you would like to cite radical Islam as the cause of the problem rather than the effect of a preceding cause. You are not the only one, people seem to feel that Islam has a monopoly on some unique evil based purely in the religion. Sorry, Muslims did not invent murder and heinous crimes. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka are not Muslim and are the leaders of suicide bombing. Look at today in a global light, before there was religion people were killing eachother. Are we to cite the Bible and Jesus for the atrocities committed by the Christian crusaders? I say it’s humans who commit these crimes, not a book that preaches peace…read it.

AVICENNA wrote:

Aspacia wrote:

The works I encouraged all to study above e.g. causal determinism, necessitarianism, Anselm on the Fall of the Angel, have nothing to do with gender or violence and are philosophical works on the nature of the human will and if we are restricted to act or not. Whenever there is a thread on Islam you show up and say the same thing over and over. Instead of engaging in the topics at hand, you revert to your same claim you post all over this site and wherever else about Islam being so terrible, and so on. Stick to the issues of the thread. If you want to talk about women and Islam, start your own thread, if you want to bash Islam without having to argue for it, go to the rant house.

Aspacia wrote:

Yes, we do have free will and I mean to keep my will to be free. The problem I have are the many Islamic texts like this:Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah’s Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

You get the drift? I have a similar problem with all faiths.

AVICENNA wrote:

Yes, it is humans using religion to gain power, prestige and wealth. Hence, I reject all formal religions as they all appear to be violent and misogynistic. Islam is my recent target as this faith appears to be stuck in the 7th century and has not evolved yet, as did Christianity after the nasty Protestant Reformation. You know, lets burn the heretic.

Aspacia wrote:

Yes, I tend to agree with Durant, and many others who claim that economics are the main cause of violence and aggression. War is blood for real estate and wealth.

Actually, I have read many religious texts and found them all wanting, violent and misogynistic. They are used to gain power. Mohammed broke his own laws for gain. Okay, one example, he had eleven wives, not the four prescribed. Yes, I have much more. Do not feel that I have singled out Islam, I am an equal opportunity religious critic and a feminist.

AVICENNA wrote:

Yes, I acknowledge this, but many Muslims believe that God’s laws supercede the laws of the land.

First, the only thing I must do, as is true for all humans, is to die. Hedge your bets and perhaps use words like might, perhaps, may. Absolutes tend to alienate your audience.

Can you provide a valid link regarding St. Anselm? I have read St. Augustine, Martin Luther and many others, but I do not believe I have perused St. Anselm.

Aspacia wrote:

It is an open board, if you do not like my posts, do not respond to them. I believe this is free will. I will bash Islam, or any other faith, person, idea, if I please. GET IT! I am the last person to tell what to do, you are not my parents, and they never could control me either.

[/b]

AVICENNA, you discussed St. Anslem. I am perusing some site regarding him. So far he declared absolute papal authority. I disagree with this as well as most Catholic doctrine. I will return when more insight appears.

Do you really want me to start regarding Catholicism?

Anselm claims “Had the Theist merely to face a blank Atheistic denial of God’s existence, his task would he comparatively a light one. Formal dogmatic Atheism is self-refuting, and has never de facto won the reasoned assent of any considerable number of men. Nor can Polytheism, however easily it may take hold of the popular imagination, ever satisfy the mind of a philosopher. But there are several varieties of what may be described as virtual Atheism which cannot be dismissed so summarily.”

Does anyone else on this board have a problem with this logic besides me? If a concept is popular does not make it valid. If Bush win the popular election, or for that matter any person, does this make their views valid. NO.

Perhaps I will find a Anselm view that is credible? I hope he is not as bad as Augustine, let us kill the Jews

From Anslem’s writings: "Pantheism
(From Greek pan, all; theos, god).

The view according to which God and the world are one. The name pantheist was introduced by John Toland (1670-1722) in his “Socinianism truly Stated” (1705), while pantheism was first used by his opponent Fay in “Defensio Religionis” (1709). Toland published his “Pantheisticon” in 1732. The doctrine itself goes back to the early Indian philosophy; it appears during the course of history in a great variety of forms, and it enters into or draws support from so many other systems that, as Professor Flint says (“Antitheistic Theories”, 334), “there is probably no pure pantheism”. Taken in the strictest sense, i.e. as identifying God and the world, Pantheism is simply Atheism. In any of its forms it involves Monism, but the latter is not necessarily pantheistic. Emanationism may easily take on a pantheistic meaning and as pointed out in the Encyclical “Pascendi dominici gregis”, the same is true of the modern doctrine of immanence.
[/quote]

Now I know why I never heard of this “philosopher.”

Many describe pantheism is many ways, but talk to a true pantheist who believes God surrounds all life and inatimate objects. God is in the air, rocks, water, trees, critters, etc., and all God’s creations need respect even in death. When humans destroy rocks to create buildings we should thank God for providing the rocks to build with. When we kill a critter for substinace, we should thank the critter and God for the substinance.

I am really disappointed in this philosopher, but what the hell, Nietzche disappoints me too.

I SAY HELL(O) TO YOU, F(R)IEND(S)

This could not be a more accurate depiction of Aspacia’s posts. As I stated in my FIRST POST, I have read a lot of threads here that are stupid because they spiral into non-informative conjecture. It is no coincidence that Aspacia has been on so many of those threads.

Aspacia, no offense but your “knowledge” isn’t very helpful. Why don’t we allow Muslims and scholars to present the information I requested. If you want to start a thread about how you think that Islam preaches only submission and mysogyny please do so… I haven’t wanted to say this before but your understanding of Islam is no better than my own. Why don’t you sit back and learn from Islamic scholars and Muslims with true knowledge.

BELOW IS A REPOST OF THE INITIAL QUESTIONS I ASKED FOR ANSWERS:

Catholicism is not the point of this thread NOR is the point to argue if Islam is bad or good.

Okay, I am not a theologian. I know this, but have been to "ask Moses.com and the BBC Religion and Ethics sites and asked similar questions of Muslims and Jews. Are you getting the picture. This is not a gut reaction, but a reaction to the many hours and months spent researching Islam. I had already discounted Judaism and Christianity, but wanted insight into Islam. I found it, and most of it is not any more pleasant than any other religion. I have read much of the Qu’ran and found it a jumble, and not or chronological order. The response from a valid Islamic web site was “God does not view time as humans do.” Okay, but can you explain why the Ka’aba is black. “A menstrating woman touched it.” There is some debate regarding this, but I never receive a really illuminating response to why Muslims must make a pilgirmage to walk around a meterorite. I can provide much more.

usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html
usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html

Look, I believe in a similarly regarding the many pagan Christinan rituals.

Probably not any more understanding, I still do not understand much of Islam as my questions were not clearly responded to by scholars, and I do mean scholars.

I have been researching this faith since 2004 for insight, I am off work during summers and have this time. What I found is not a kindly tolerant faith, yes many Muslims are tolerant and kind. What I found is a prophet who waged a regligous crusade and forced pagans to submit or die, and relegated all Jews and Christians to second class citizenship. What I found was a militant who broke his own rules for power and women.

Trust me, I have only touched on a few points regarding Islam, you have not really heard a true rant yet. Try reading Rushdies Satanic Versus sometime for insight.

My knowledge stems from valid edu scholarly sites.

From what I have read, Islam does indeed claim the the Jews and Christians messed the message. Didn’t you know that Moses was Muslim as was Jesus. Odd, but they would probably disagree.

I SAY HELL(O) TO YOU, F(R)IEND(S)

Yes, I get the picture: your knowledge is not first hand…

How is the dogmatic doctrine you present here relevant to this thread (THE QUESTIONS I ASKED)? You do not need to answer this…

How is this different from the infallible Popes of the Crusades? You do not need to answer this… Also, how is this relevant to the questions I asked… do you not understand that I have asked specific questions and this thread is not intended to devolve into a discussion of opinions about the faith itself? You do not need to answer this… When you start this thread please post as much as you can… I will read it and comment as is appropriate.

So your point is that you want to rant about Islam? Please do so in the Rant House. That is not the intention of this thread. Also, is Rushdie a representative of the religion itself or is it representative of his view? You do not need to answer this…

This does not mean that your interpretation is necessarily valid… would you agree? Seriously, this is not an attempt to insult you but wouldn’t you agree that people can misinterpret information? You do not need to answer these…

Also, telling me that your knowledge stems from valid sites is not the same as telling me that your knowledge is valid. You can only show me, through your posts, that your information is valid. Still, please post according to the intent/purpose of this thread.

Thanks for answering one of my questions. Please cite your sources and provide more detail. It would help if you provided detail, then interpretation–which would allow me to make up my own mind.

Finally, I put this “You do not need to answer this…” at the end of the questions for these reasons. (1) You can show me that you are willing to keep this thread in line (2) It shows you understand or that you accept that I do not want to discuss these issues in this thread (3) Some of these questions were rhetorical in nature.

PLEASE, LET US FOCUS ON THE INITIAL POINT OF THE THREAD

Okay, you are discussing Abraham and his beginnings in Ur.

Actually, the early Christians were the persecuted? I do not understand your point. You discuss Judaism, then Christiansity, and the many Christian hypocrits. Are you stating that the Christians cannot accept Judaism? Now we have the protagaonist again, how many centuries later. What are you on about? Abraham, Jesus, Moses? Your logic jumbs around similar to that in the Qu’ran.

Okay, now we are in 600 or 700 C.E. right, the time of Mohammed. You are discussing Mohammed right? The protagonist is Mohammed???/

Which protagonist, they are not all the same?

Actually, Mohammed picked the doctrines not “his people.”

And justifies taking 1/4 the booty for Mohammed. Have you read the history of his life??? I doubt it

Yes, all religions did do this and still do, but you do not find "nothing wrong with this?

Below is AVICENNA’s post, in relevant part:

Is my narrative completely inaccurate? If so, please explain. If only partially inaccurate, please detail.
[/quote]
The Qu’ran completely changes the Torah and the New Testament. Have your read it? Again the links:
usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html
usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html

Yes, and much more. Carefully read the texts and do not rely on scholars to interpret.

The Qu’ran was handed down by oral tradition for more than a hundred years before put in writing. The New Testament was put into writing within 70 years after the crucifiction. Jews have always valued literacy and their literacy and knowledge of the Torah dates back thousands of years. Think about this fact. Mohammed was illiterate as were most of his brethren and wifes.

Mohammed changed the book because Allah told him it was wrong and the Jews and Christians muddled it.

It is quite explicit in Genesis 2:26 and God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,[…] This is rejected by Islam.

There is much more.

Islam denies that man was created with the charectiristics of god? Namely: the concepts of free will, choice, the capacity for good, et al? I am not talking about the physical, just the spiritual… Please expand.
[/quote]

Yes.

Did this answer the questions. I am not expert, but have read extensively for nearly a year regarding Islam. You ask for scholars to answer. Okay, do you want input from Ph.D.'s and theologians. There are plenty on line with valid credentials, I have checked are are much more scathing than I am regarding Islam.

Just remember that they have suffered similar rebuke from me regarding Christianity and Judaism.

I make mistakes, to be human is to err, but I have found few with similar credentials to mine on this board except Tab

Aspacia, if I only had the time and patience to easily rebut so many of your unrelated, skewed and irresponsible charges, e.g. Mohammad’s 11 wives…it was over a lifetime, not all at once. On Anselm, why are posting totally irrelevant aspects of his philosophy? I made note of his notion of free will, again, from Fall of the Angel, why do you bring up these unrelated things you have minute knowledge of (as evidenced by the manner which you display the theories) and make irresponsible and totally unthought out charges? I’m not Catholic, I’m not defending Catholicism, but Anselm was a genius who came up with a very important theory in Fall of the Angel that I regard as almost holy for its contribution to theology and philosophy.

Please slow down, relax, lay back, and watch me go to work on your nearly valueless posts like a prostitute in Amsterdam. You seem to really presume you understand these notions enough, firstly, to even attempt a rebuttal. Enjoy the ride, its a comin’. Be back after my papers tomorrow.

AVICENNA A.D., my last post was directed to thirstmetal’s first analagous query.