Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: 3:7 Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 3 Next >>
Author Message
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 11 April 2016 at 1:13pm
Originally posted by Waheed

There are people who do in fact offer opinions as to their meanings, but even if we don't know the meaning of certain things, that does not mean we reject it, or that we make that our life goal. That which is clear and useful should be our immediate interest, not things that we may or may not [usually not] be able to handle currently.

You are subtly changing things here. You initially said there were things that the meaning of was “not immediately clear” and you cited the disjointed letters as an example. However after 1400 years of deep scholarship no one knows their meaning of the disjointed letters to this day!!! That does not fall under the ‘not immediately clear’ category but rather ‘completely unknown.’
You then switched things to say that some people have theories on this but that is a different argument. A theory is exactly that… a theory. It is not clear but some people have made guesses in the absence of clarity.
Originally posted by Waheed

When people get caught up on fringe things, they tend to go astray.

So why include those fringe areas? Allah has purposely included parts of the Quran that are unknowable whilst admitting that some people will follow them with ill-intention. It seems these areas have no benefit to the true believer but serve only to give ammunition to the deviants.
Originally posted by Waheed

There are those among us who do have strong views as to their meanings, however those views do not become foundational for our Islamic existence. The Muhkamaat, that which is clear and decisive, that serves as our foundation.

Surely your ‘strong views’ must by very definition be incorrect since the Quran says of these verses (or of the whole Quran) And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. Your ‘strong views as to their meaning must be wrong or untrue.


Edited by Mad Cat - 11 April 2016 at 1:13pm
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 21 April 2016 at 5:10pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Originally posted by Waheed

There are people who do in fact offer opinions as to their meanings, but even if we don't know the meaning of certain things, that does not mean we reject it, or that we make that our life goal. That which is clear and useful should be our immediate interest, not things that we may or may not [usually not] be able to handle currently.

You are subtly changing things here. You initially said there were things that the meaning of was “not immediately clear” and you cited the disjointed letters as an example. However after 1400 years of deep scholarship no one knows their meaning of the disjointed letters to this day!!! That does not fall under the ‘not immediately clear’ category but rather ‘completely unknown.’
You then switched things to say that some people have theories on this but that is a different argument. A theory is exactly that… a theory. It is not clear but some people have made guesses in the absence of clarity.
Originally posted by Waheed

When people get caught up on fringe things, they tend to go astray.

So why include those fringe areas? Allah has purposely included parts of the Quran that are unknowable whilst admitting that some people will follow them with ill-intention. It seems these areas have no benefit to the true believer but serve only to give ammunition to the deviants.
Originally posted by Waheed

There are those among us who do have strong views as to their meanings, however those views do not become foundational for our Islamic existence. The Muhkamaat, that which is clear and decisive, that serves as our foundation.

Surely your ‘strong views’ must by very definition be incorrect since the Quran says of these verses (or of the whole Quran) And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. Your ‘strong views as to their meaning must be wrong or untrue.



You are subtly changing things here. You initially said there were things that the meaning of was “not immediately clear” and you cited the disjointed letters as an example. However after 1400 years of deep scholarship no one knows their meaning of the disjointed letters to this day!!! That does not fall under the ‘not immediately clear’ category but rather ‘completely unknown.’
You then switched things to say that some people have theories on this but that is a different argument. A theory is exactly that… a theory. It is not clear but some people have made guesses in the absence of clarity.


In any field, be it science, philosophy, literature, and religious study, one will find some topics or details that are disputed. That does not suggest that the entire subject is lost to us, only that scholars studying the issue have come to different conclusions.

So, while it can be argued that we don't know precisely what the disjointed letters mean, nonetheless the Qur'an is accessible to man, as is the faith and teachings delivered through that scripture and in the person of Muhammad, God's universal messenger [Peace be upon him].

So why include those fringe areas? Allah has purposely included parts of the Quran that are unknowable whilst admitting that some people will follow them with ill-intention. It seems these areas have no benefit to the true believer but serve only to give ammunition to the deviants.


That's like asking "why does bad things happen to good people" [a title of a famous book by the  Jewish writer Harold Kushner]. We come up with theories and speculations, even if such are well-thought out and reasoned, ultimately God is the one who knows for sure.

But to pursue, to make going after such things life's goal, can lead a person astray, making his life a terrible existence.

Surely your ‘strong views’ must by very definition be incorrect since the Quran says of these verses (or of the whole Quran) And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. Your ‘strong views as to their meaning must be wrong or untrue.


The truth of any matter is ultimately known to God. The Bible says that, and the Qur'an says the same thing. The latter says so many times.

Scholastic speculation can be good, just as debate can be good. It sharpens the mind and allows the student to develop, however we are not to get bogged down in such things. I have attempted to convey this point above.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 22 April 2016 at 9:49am
Originally posted by Waheed

In any field, be it science, philosophy, literature, and religious study, one will find some topics or details that are disputed. That does not suggest that the entire subject is lost to us, only that scholars studying the issue have come to different conclusions.

So, while it can be argued that we don't know precisely what the disjointed letters mean, nonetheless the Qur'an is accessible to man, as is the faith and teachings delivered through that scripture and in the person of Muhammad, God's universal messenger [Peace be upon him].


Waheed you are doing it again! Not only do you not know “precisely”, you don’t know at all. All you have is different people’s theories. I think this was a bad example on your part.
Originally posted by Waheed

That's like asking "why does bad things happen to good people" [a title of a famous book by the Jewish writer Harold Kushner]. We come up with theories and speculations, even if such are well-thought out and reasoned, ultimately God is the one who knows for sure.

But to pursue, to make going after such things life's goal, can lead a person astray, making his life a terrible existence.

Free will is one thing but this is like Allah is actively trying to trip people up. Reveal stuff that is unknowable but don’t tell people which bits are unknowable.
It makes no sense!
Why reveal unknowable revelations? – Its an oxymoron!
Why not be clear on which parts are unknowable to prevent people wasting their time and unknowingly risking hell?
Bad things will still happen to good people without Allah’s deceptions.
Originally posted by Waheed

The truth of any matter is ultimately known to God. The Bible says that, and the Qur'an says the same thing. The latter says so many times.

God knowing the truth is one thing. I do not dispute that.

Man knowing some truth is something else. If God goes to the effort of sending revelation down to man then it is fair to believe that God wants Man to know some truth.

Man being in a position where they cannot, by very definition be correct (especially if they think they are right) is something very different again. It is pure nonsense. You have strong views but those views must be wrong because what you claim to have strong views on is unknowable.


Edited by Mad Cat - 22 April 2016 at 9:51am
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 25 April 2016 at 10:17pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Originally posted by Waheed

In any field, be it science, philosophy, literature, and religious study, one will find some topics or details that are disputed. That does not suggest that the entire subject is lost to us, only that scholars studying the issue have come to different conclusions.

So, while it can be argued that we don't know precisely what the disjointed letters mean, nonetheless the Qur'an is accessible to man, as is the faith and teachings delivered through that scripture and in the person of Muhammad, God's universal messenger [Peace be upon him].


Waheed you are doing it again! Not only do you not know “precisely”, you don’t know at all. All you have is different people’s theories. I think this was a bad example on your part.
Originally posted by Waheed

That's like asking "why does bad things happen to good people" [a title of a famous book by the Jewish writer Harold Kushner]. We come up with theories and speculations, even if such are well-thought out and reasoned, ultimately God is the one who knows for sure.

But to pursue, to make going after such things life's goal, can lead a person astray, making his life a terrible existence.

Free will is one thing but this is like Allah is actively trying to trip people up. Reveal stuff that is unknowable but don’t tell people which bits are unknowable.
It makes no sense!
Why reveal unknowable revelations? – Its an oxymoron!
Why not be clear on which parts are unknowable to prevent people wasting their time and unknowingly risking hell?
Bad things will still happen to good people without Allah’s deceptions.
Originally posted by Waheed

The truth of any matter is ultimately known to God. The Bible says that, and the Qur'an says the same thing. The latter says so many times.

God knowing the truth is one thing. I do not dispute that.

Man knowing some truth is something else. If God goes to the effort of sending revelation down to man then it is fair to believe that God wants Man to know some truth.

Man being in a position where they cannot, by very definition be correct (especially if they think they are right) is something very different again. It is pure nonsense. You have strong views but those views must be wrong because what you claim to have strong views on is unknowable.


Waheed you are doing it again! Not only do you not know “precisely”, you don’t know at all. All you have is different people’s theories. I think this was a bad example on your part


If you feel that way then ignore what I have said about the disjointed letters and address the other part of my response to your query, in which I said that the Qur'an is still accessible nonetheless.


Free will is one thing but this is like Allah is actively trying to trip people up. Reveal stuff that is unknowable but don’t tell people which bits are unknowable.
It makes no sense!
Why reveal unknowable revelations? – Its an oxymoron!


You pretty much ignore what has been said already about this, but God is not trying to trip people up.

The verse [3:7] is only saying don't get caught up in things whose implication is not immediately clear.

When that happens, and one happens to not be established on the fundamentals, one will get tripped up.

Thus, there are people in Christendom who get poisoned and die from snake bites, because they read [of all the things to read] and focused on the texts asserting Christian immunity from poison.


Why not be clear on which parts are unknowable to prevent people wasting their time and unknowingly risking hell?
Bad things will still happen to good people without Allah’s deceptions.


I have attempted to answer this already. See previous posts.

Bad things happen because of , as Qur'an says "because of what they hands brought forth".

So- yes- we are to be upon that which is concise, start there. If we eventually get to a level where we can see the Mutashabihaat, so be it, but that should not necessarily be the goal anyways.

The believer is to accept all of the revelation, even that which he does not immediately understand, as being from the Divine presence.

Man knowing some truth is something else. If God goes to the effort of sending revelation down to man then it is fair to believe that God wants Man to know some truth.


Essentially that is the argument of Shaikh  Sha'rawi and others when it comes to the mutashabihaat. 

Man being in a position where they cannot, by very definition be correct (especially if they think they are right) is something very different again. It is pure nonsense. You have strong views but those views must be wrong because what you claim to have strong views on is unknowable.


The theories or ideas out there on certain aspects of revelation, they can be right, they can be wrong.

But our focus as a whole is not to be on these issues. That is what the verse is warning us about.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 29 April 2016 at 10:51am
You pretty much ignore what has been said already about this, but God is not trying to trip people up.

I don’t ignore it, rather I engage with it. My conclusion is it is nonsense. I feel your responses to different elements of this verse contradict each other.
You claim to have strong views about parts of the Quran but the Quran itself says they are unknowable. Therefore your strong views are by definition wrong or else the Quran would be wrong when it says they are unknowable.
Also when you say you have strong views, that suggests that you have spent a significant amount of time pondering them and yet this verses says that it is the deviants who seek an interpretation. So by having strong views on them, does that not mean you are a deviant in the eyes of the Quran?

I feel it is you who ignore the points I raise.
The theories or ideas out there on certain aspects of revelation, they can be right, they can be wrong.

But our focus as a whole is not to be on these issues. That is what the verse is warning us about.

But my question is – Why include unknowable verses at all?!? Why not just leave them out if they are unknowable?
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 30 April 2016 at 2:06pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

You pretty much ignore what has been said already about this, but God is not trying to trip people up.

I don’t ignore it, rather I engage with it. My conclusion is it is nonsense. I feel your responses to different elements of this verse contradict each other.
You claim to have strong views about parts of the Quran but the Quran itself says they are unknowable. Therefore your strong views are by definition wrong or else the Quran would be wrong when it says they are unknowable.
Also when you say you have strong views, that suggests that you have spent a significant amount of time pondering them and yet this verses says that it is the deviants who seek an interpretation. So by having strong views on them, does that not mean you are a deviant in the eyes of the Quran?

I feel it is you who ignore the points I raise.
The theories or ideas out there on certain aspects of revelation, they can be right, they can be wrong.

But our focus as a whole is not to be on these issues. That is what the verse is warning us about.

But my question is – Why include unknowable verses at all?!? Why not just leave them out if they are unknowable?



I feel your responses to different elements of this verse contradict each other.
You claim to have strong views about parts of the Quran but the Quran itself says they are unknowable. Therefore your strong views are by definition wrong or else the Quran would be wrong when it says they are unknowable.
Also when you say you have strong views, that suggests that you have spent a significant amount of time pondering them and yet this verses says that it is the deviants who seek an interpretation. So by having strong views on them, does that not mean you are a deviant in the eyes of the Quran?


Muslim scholars, whenever they comment or write about the Qur'an or Hadeeth, will say in their discourse "God knows best".

That's a recognition that anything that is said or written can be true or false, and- in the end- the totality of truth is with God, the all-knowing, all aware.

Yes, I do ponder these type of things, and have studied and given much time to these sort of elements, and continue to do so.

Yet that does not take me away from the main body of teachings, ethics and theology. I still pray and fast and follow the Qur'an and Sunnah as best as possible.

It is when getting obsessed on these issues, that is when problems have a higher probability to emerge. Two or three times in this thread I have mentioned that the Bible says Christians are immune from poison and snake bites.

Is there an interpretation of this? I;m sure there is. However there does exist people who will take this text and run with it. That is because they have become obsessed over such things. There has been cases where people handling poisonous snakes have died, allowing themselves to be bitten because they thought that God would save them from death.

But my question is – Why include unknowable verses at all?!? Why not just leave them out if they are unknowable?


This is actually a good question. Earlier in the thread I shared a quote from a famed Egyptian scholar which says the Mutashabihaat can in fact be known, meaning it is not impossible to figure it out per se.

In terms of the example I shared throughout this thread, the disconnected letters [Alif laam meem, Ya seen, Taa Haa, etc..] I have read many different interpretations, and do have a view on it [we discussed this before in an old thread, so no need to repeat what my view is here], however almost always in the explanations, the statement that will follow it  is that ultimately, God knows the correct explanation.

Isn't that a safe statement? A statement not only of truth, but humility.


No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 30 April 2016 at 4:23pm
Yes, I do ponder these type of things, and have studied and given much time to these sort of elements, and continue to do so.

But the verse says that those who seek an interpretation of these verses are deviants. Are you?
Since the context of this warning of deviance is that these verses are UNKNOWABLE. You are trying to understand something that Allah claims is reserved for his mind only. You are attempting to defy Allah.
It is when getting obsessed on these issues, that is when problems have a higher probability to emerge. Two or three times in this thread I have mentioned that the Bible says Christians are immune from poison and snake bites.

Is there an interpretation of this? I;m sure there is. However there does exist people who will take this text and run with it. That is because they have become obsessed over such things. There has been cases where people handling poisonous snakes have died, allowing themselves to be bitten because they thought that God would save them from death.

I think we should be able to agree that these people are rare. I personally have only seen them in one of the Omen films.
There are a few points of difference here though. This is not a command to go round handling snakes and drinking poison. It is included among the signs that accompany believers. Good example of this in action is when Paul gets shipwrecked on Malta. He survives the storm but then gets bitten by a viper. The islanders think he must be an evil man with death chasing him like in the Final Destination films but he shows no ill effect and they change their minds about him.
Also some people will always get hung up on specific parts of the Bible but these parts of the Bible are still good and are meant to be there. That is very different to a god adding bits to his revelation to mankind that are unknowable, whose only purpose seems to be to give ammunition to devients and potentially trip up well meaning pious folk.

This is actually a good question. Earlier in the thread I shared a quote from a famed Egyptian scholar which says the Mutashabihaat can in fact be known, meaning it is not impossible to figure it out per se.

With all due respect to this scholar, he MUST be wrong. The verse says:
And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah .
Whatever this scholar thinks he knows must be a false interpretation. Unless the Quran is wrong or words have no meaning or this Egyptian is greater than Allah.
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 05 May 2016 at 2:16pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Yes, I do ponder these type of things, and have studied and given much time to these sort of elements, and continue to do so.

But the verse says that those who seek an interpretation of these verses are deviants. Are you?
Since the context of this warning of deviance is that these verses are UNKNOWABLE. You are trying to understand something that Allah claims is reserved for his mind only. You are attempting to defy Allah.
It is when getting obsessed on these issues, that is when problems have a higher probability to emerge. Two or three times in this thread I have mentioned that the Bible says Christians are immune from poison and snake bites.

Is there an interpretation of this? I;m sure there is. However there does exist people who will take this text and run with it. That is because they have become obsessed over such things. There has been cases where people handling poisonous snakes have died, allowing themselves to be bitten because they thought that God would save them from death.

I think we should be able to agree that these people are rare. I personally have only seen them in one of the Omen films.
There are a few points of difference here though. This is not a command to go round handling snakes and drinking poison. It is included among the signs that accompany believers. Good example of this in action is when Paul gets shipwrecked on Malta. He survives the storm but then gets bitten by a viper. The islanders think he must be an evil man with death chasing him like in the Final Destination films but he shows no ill effect and they change their minds about him.
Also some people will always get hung up on specific parts of the Bible but these parts of the Bible are still good and are meant to be there. That is very different to a god adding bits to his revelation to mankind that are unknowable, whose only purpose seems to be to give ammunition to devients and potentially trip up well meaning pious folk.

This is actually a good question. Earlier in the thread I shared a quote from a famed Egyptian scholar which says the Mutashabihaat can in fact be known, meaning it is not impossible to figure it out per se.

With all due respect to this scholar, he MUST be wrong. The verse says:
And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah .
Whatever this scholar thinks he knows must be a false interpretation. Unless the Quran is wrong or words have no meaning or this Egyptian is greater than Allah.



But the verse says that those who seek an interpretation of these verses are deviants. Are you?
Since the context of this warning of deviance is that these verses are UNKNOWABLE. You are trying to understand something that Allah claims is reserved for his mind only. You are attempting to defy Allah


Please recall at the beginning of this thread the discussion on the punctuation of this verse. "None know it's Ta'weel except God and those who are endowed with knowledge..."


I think we should be able to agree that these people are rare. I personally have only seen them in one of the Omen films.
There are a few points of difference here though. This is not a command to go round handling snakes and drinking poison. It is included among the signs that accompany believers. Good example of this in action is when Paul gets shipwrecked on Malta. He survives the storm but then gets bitten by a viper. The islanders think he must be an evil man with death chasing him like in the Final Destination films but he shows no ill effect and they change their minds about him.
Also some people will always get hung up on specific parts of the Bible but these parts of the Bible are still good and are meant to be there. That is very different to a god adding bits to his revelation to mankind that are unknowable, whose only purpose seems to be to give ammunition to devients and potentially trip up well meaning pious folk.


A couple of points. [1] Snake handling and all that are a bit more common than one may think. This trend particularly took hold in the Pentecostal movement, which is currently the fastest growing branch of Christendom, So you will see more and more of these things mentioned in news and in particular in literature dealing with religious history and movements [which I follow with great interest] [2] I am not going to dispute your characterization of Paul getting shipwrecked and getting bitten. [3] The Qur'an did not come down in paper form. It was not a book sent literally down as a book with paper and ink. Rather, it was an oral revelation. It is recited, it reaches people through their ears, and it seeks to get our attention.

Thus, It gives us things, such as the letters, to get our attention. It also spends a great deal of time warning the believers about hypocirtes, about evil folks pretending to believe, about people up to no good. In this verse, we are warned about that situation as well as being cautioned not to go after things that may be ambiguous whilst ignoring what is clear. We are to be firm upon what is clear, rather than basing religion upon [to use a Christian example] things like miracles and tricks, or [in this case] interpretative gymnastics.

Indeed, the Qur'an tells us about Judgement day, and the hadeeths of the Prophet do as well [peace be on him], but both make it clear that none knows when exactly it happens except Allah. Yet, some have gone astray, by proclaiming that they know precisely when it will happen. Christian history itself is full of millennial movements, people predicting the end, selling off their goods, just to be disappointed, even killing themselves upon seeing their predictions not become true.

With all due respect to this scholar, he MUST be wrong. The verse says:
And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah .
Whatever this scholar thinks he knows must be a false interpretation. Unless the Quran is wrong or words have no meaning or this Egyptian is greater than Allah.


See above.

and none is greater than God.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 05 May 2016 at 5:29pm

Please recall at the beginning of this thread the discussion on the punctuation of this verse. "None know it's Ta'weel except God and those who are endowed with knowledge..."

Waheed, why did you stop your quotation of the verse there? I think you need to learn that I don’t just accept it when you quote a verse to me. I have learned that this is not to be trusted. I am tempted to say you are being tricky here. You can only get to your understand by chopping up the verse exactly as you have done here.

An honest reading of the whole verse cannot lead you to your conclusion.

A couple of points. [1] Snake handling and all that are a bit more common than one may think. This trend particularly took hold in the Pentecostal movement, which is currently the fastest growing branch of Christendom, So you will see more and more of these things mentioned in news and in particular in literature dealing with religious history and movements [which I follow with great interest] [2] I am not going to dispute your characterization of Paul getting shipwrecked and getting bitten. [3] The Qur'an did not come down in paper form. It was not a book sent literally down as a book with paper and ink. Rather, it was an oral revelation. It is recited, it reaches people through their ears, and it seeks to get our attention.

1 – I believe the Pentecostal movement is only about 100 years old so that only covers 5% of Christian history. They make up about 13% of Christian so even if every single one believes strongly in snake handling it wouldn’t be that common. However a quick glance of the Wiki page on Pentecostalism yielded no references to snakes. There is a strong emphasis on the Holy Spirit but I couldn’t find snakes.

So I repeat – These people (snake handlers) are rare.

2 – Good. Its not my characterization but rather straight from the Bible.

3 – I never said it was. Not sure of your point here.

Thus, It gives us things, such as the letters, to get our attention. It also spends a great deal of time warning the believers about hypocirtes, about evil folks pretending to believe, about people up to no good. In this verse, we are warned about that situation as well as being cautioned not to go after things that may be ambiguous whilst ignoring what is clear. We are to be firm upon what is clear, rather than basing religion upon [to use a Christian example] things like miracles and tricks, or [in this case] interpretative gymnastics.

I think you are the gymnast here with your chopping up verses, creative punctuation, and deviant interpretation. I am simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away.

Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 08 May 2016 at 12:38pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Please recall at the beginning of this thread the discussion on the punctuation of this verse. "None know it's Ta'weel except God and those who are endowed with knowledge..."

Waheed, why did you stop your quotation of the verse there? I think you need to learn that I don’t just accept it when you quote a verse to me. I have learned that this is not to be trusted. I am tempted to say you are being tricky here. You can only get to your understand by chopping up the verse exactly as you have done here.

An honest reading of the whole verse cannot lead you to your conclusion.

A couple of points. [1] Snake handling and all that are a bit more common than one may think. This trend particularly took hold in the Pentecostal movement, which is currently the fastest growing branch of Christendom, So you will see more and more of these things mentioned in news and in particular in literature dealing with religious history and movements [which I follow with great interest] [2] I am not going to dispute your characterization of Paul getting shipwrecked and getting bitten. [3] The Qur'an did not come down in paper form. It was not a book sent literally down as a book with paper and ink. Rather, it was an oral revelation. It is recited, it reaches people through their ears, and it seeks to get our attention.

1 – I believe the Pentecostal movement is only about 100 years old so that only covers 5% of Christian history. They make up about 13% of Christian so even if every single one believes strongly in snake handling it wouldn’t be that common. However a quick glance of the Wiki page on Pentecostalism yielded no references to snakes. There is a strong emphasis on the Holy Spirit but I couldn’t find snakes.

So I repeat – These people (snake handlers) are rare.

2 – Good. Its not my characterization but rather straight from the Bible.

3 – I never said it was. Not sure of your point here.

Thus, It gives us things, such as the letters, to get our attention. It also spends a great deal of time warning the believers about hypocirtes, about evil folks pretending to believe, about people up to no good. In this verse, we are warned about that situation as well as being cautioned not to go after things that may be ambiguous whilst ignoring what is clear. We are to be firm upon what is clear, rather than basing religion upon [to use a Christian example] things like miracles and tricks, or [in this case] interpretative gymnastics.

I think you are the gymnast here with your chopping up verses, creative punctuation, and deviant interpretation. I am simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away.



Waheed, why did you stop your quotation of the verse there? I think you need to learn that I don’t just accept it when you quote a verse to me. I have learned that this is not to be trusted. I am tempted to say you are being tricky here. You can only get to your understand by chopping up the verse exactly as you have done here.

An honest reading of the whole verse cannot lead you to your conclusion.


To be honest, I find this whole name calling really beneath you. Dishonest, deviant interpretations, tricky. Rather than addressing the argument you simply go to name-calling.

Back to the discussion, I already mentioned the issues regarding punctuation and interpretation. These are not issues that Mad Cat has just discovered. Muslim scholars have been and continue to discuss the Quranic texts and the subtleties and nuances involved in its understanding.


So what I have shared in response to your initial query [since you are the one who opened the thread] are in fact some of those subtleties.


1 – I believe the Pentecostal movement is only about 100 years old so that only covers 5% of Christian history. They make up about 13% of Christian so even if every single one believes strongly in snake handling it wouldn’t be that common. However a quick glance of the Wiki page on Pentecostalism yielded no references to snakes. There is a strong emphasis on the Holy Spirit but I couldn’t find snakes.


Yes, Pentecostalism is a new movement in the big scheme of things, but they are fast growing, and what I attempted to convey is that you will see more and more interest in things about snake handling, because the NT says that the Christian will be immune from poison and such.

That practice is not mainstream, I am saying that you will see a rise in that.

Look at this article, regarding a pastor from USA [Pentecostalism] who died after refusing treatment for the snake bite.

https://www.rt.com/usa/snake-handling-pastor-dies-334/


3 – I never said it was. Not sure of your point here.


My point was that the Qur'an was sent orally, without the punctuation per se and conveyed for those who listen first [before 'reading' a text]. So they heard Alif, Laam, Meem. They also heard 3:7.

I think you are the gymnast here with your chopping up verses, creative punctuation, and deviant interpretation. I am simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away.


I addressed much of your insulting terms above, but I must say that you are not "simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away."

You are "reading" from a perspective of one who has an agenda to convey. Just as before, when you stated the Qur'an says to crucify Christian missionaries. None in history had stated that before.

Anyways, more later.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 08 May 2016 at 4:15pm

Originally posted by Waheed

To be honest, I find this whole name calling really beneath you. Dishonest, deviant interpretations, tricky. Rather than addressing the argument you simply go to name-calling.

You are clearly not reading my posts.

You quoted a very select part of a verse to make a point. In fact the only way you could formulate the argument you are attempting is to butcher the verse in exactly the way you did. Below are all the versions from Quran.com. Underlined is the section you included. In bold is the bit you edited out.

  • Sahih Intn. - ...And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

  • Muhsin Khan - ...but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord." And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).

  • Pickthall - ...None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.

  • Yusuf Ali - ...but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.

  • Shakir - ...but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

  • Dr. Ghali - …and in no way does anyone know its interpretation except Allah. And the ones firmly established in knowledge say, "We have believed in it; all is from the Providence of our Lord."

Its unanimous! Every single version has the word 'Say' right where you chopped the verse off. The way you edited the verse make it seem as though it was only Allah AND those who are firm in knowledge who know the meaning but that is not what the verse is saying. Only Allah knows the meaning. Next sentence, those who are firm in knowledge have something to say and that is recorded.

I said that an honest reading of the verse could not allow the understanding you are pushing and I stand by this assertion. If your quotation contained only one word more it would completely change the meaning.

I suggest you are being dishonest because you must be aware of what you are doing when you edit the text in such a precise way.

Deviant – This is not me calling you names but your god in your Quran.

Tricky – I only said I was tempted to call you this but that is because I cannot believe you are unaware of what you are trying to do.


If you read back over this thread you will see that I am addressing your arguments. Look more deeply at these 'names' you think I am calling you. You will see they have meanings and reasons and are not just rude names.

Originally posted by Waheed

Back to the discussion, I already mentioned the issues regarding punctuation and interpretation. These are not issues that Mad Cat has just discovered. Muslim scholars have been and continue to discuss the Quranic texts and the subtleties and nuances involved in its understanding.


So what I have shared in response to your initial query [since you are the one who opened the thread] are in fact some of those subtleties.

You mentioned the punctuation issues and I responded to them. You simply seem to be reasserting the issues whilst ignoring my responses. Take a look at what I wrote above. It shows how your interpretation cannot be correct unless you butcher the verse as you have attempted in this thread.



Originally posted by Waheed

Yes, Pentecostalism is a new movement in the big scheme of things, but they are fast growing, and what I attempted to convey is that you will see more and more interest in things about snake handling, because the NT says that the Christian will be immune from poison and such.

That practice is not mainstream, I am saying that you will see a rise in that.

Look at this article, regarding a pastor from USA [Pentecostalism] who died after refusing treatment for the snake bite.

https://www.rt.com/usa/snake-handling-pastor-dies-334/

I did not say it never happened. I said it was rare. I also mentioned how in the whole of the Wiki page on Pentecostalism I could find no mention of snakes, suggesting that even among Pentecostals, snake handling was rare. Therefore even if Pentecostalism is fast growing that does not mean we will see much in the way of snake-handling.

But to return to the point of you raising this subject, with the issue of the Bible and snakes, we can accept that it is from God and is good and useful for teaching and we have the example of Paul living out this idea. However with verse 3:7 of the Quran you have the author saying that if you attempt to seek and interpretation of the Quran's unknowable verses, you are a deviant. Allah reveals verses that are not intended to be understood.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.


Originally posted by Waheed

I addressed much of your insulting terms above, but I must say that you are not "simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away."

You are "reading" from a perspective of one who has an agenda to convey. Just as before, when you stated the Qur'an says to crucify Christian missionaries. None in history had stated that before.

And you dont have an agenda? I actually quote the whole verse. I look at 6 different versions from an Islamic website to get a better understanding. You call the unknown 'not immediately clear'. You have made several unsubstantiated claims which you cannot possibly know to be true like this one above 'None in history has stated that before'. You chop up parts of verses to force a meaning to the text that was never meant. You claim to know or have strong opinions on what your own god says you cannot know.

I think it unfair to criticise me in light of the above.



Edited by Mad Cat - 08 May 2016 at 4:18pm
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 10 May 2016 at 1:58pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Originally posted by Waheed

To be honest, I find this whole name calling really beneath you. Dishonest, deviant interpretations, tricky. Rather than addressing the argument you simply go to name-calling.

You are clearly not reading my posts.

You quoted a very select part of a verse to make a point. In fact the only way you could formulate the argument you are attempting is to butcher the verse in exactly the way you did. Below are all the versions from Quran.com. Underlined is the section you included. In bold is the bit you edited out.

  • Sahih Intn. - ...And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

  • Muhsin Khan - ...but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord." And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).

  • Pickthall - ...None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.

  • Yusuf Ali - ...but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.

  • Shakir - ...but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.

  • Dr. Ghali - …and in no way does anyone know its interpretation except Allah. And the ones firmly established in knowledge say, "We have believed in it; all is from the Providence of our Lord."

Its unanimous! Every single version has the word 'Say' right where you chopped the verse off. The way you edited the verse make it seem as though it was only Allah AND those who are firm in knowledge who know the meaning but that is not what the verse is saying. Only Allah knows the meaning. Next sentence, those who are firm in knowledge have something to say and that is recorded.

I said that an honest reading of the verse could not allow the understanding you are pushing and I stand by this assertion. If your quotation contained only one word more it would completely change the meaning.

I suggest you are being dishonest because you must be aware of what you are doing when you edit the text in such a precise way.

Deviant – This is not me calling you names but your god in your Quran.

Tricky – I only said I was tempted to call you this but that is because I cannot believe you are unaware of what you are trying to do.


If you read back over this thread you will see that I am addressing your arguments. Look more deeply at these 'names' you think I am calling you. You will see they have meanings and reasons and are not just rude names.

Originally posted by Waheed

Back to the discussion, I already mentioned the issues regarding punctuation and interpretation. These are not issues that Mad Cat has just discovered. Muslim scholars have been and continue to discuss the Quranic texts and the subtleties and nuances involved in its understanding.


So what I have shared in response to your initial query [since you are the one who opened the thread] are in fact some of those subtleties.

You mentioned the punctuation issues and I responded to them. You simply seem to be reasserting the issues whilst ignoring my responses. Take a look at what I wrote above. It shows how your interpretation cannot be correct unless you butcher the verse as you have attempted in this thread.



Originally posted by Waheed

Yes, Pentecostalism is a new movement in the big scheme of things, but they are fast growing, and what I attempted to convey is that you will see more and more interest in things about snake handling, because the NT says that the Christian will be immune from poison and such.

That practice is not mainstream, I am saying that you will see a rise in that.

Look at this article, regarding a pastor from USA [Pentecostalism] who died after refusing treatment for the snake bite.

https://www.rt.com/usa/snake-handling-pastor-dies-334/

I did not say it never happened. I said it was rare. I also mentioned how in the whole of the Wiki page on Pentecostalism I could find no mention of snakes, suggesting that even among Pentecostals, snake handling was rare. Therefore even if Pentecostalism is fast growing that does not mean we will see much in the way of snake-handling.

But to return to the point of you raising this subject, with the issue of the Bible and snakes, we can accept that it is from God and is good and useful for teaching and we have the example of Paul living out this idea. However with verse 3:7 of the Quran you have the author saying that if you attempt to seek and interpretation of the Quran's unknowable verses, you are a deviant. Allah reveals verses that are not intended to be understood.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.


Originally posted by Waheed

I addressed much of your insulting terms above, but I must say that you are not "simply reading the whole verse and not adding or taking away."

You are "reading" from a perspective of one who has an agenda to convey. Just as before, when you stated the Qur'an says to crucify Christian missionaries. None in history had stated that before.

And you dont have an agenda? I actually quote the whole verse. I look at 6 different versions from an Islamic website to get a better understanding. You call the unknown 'not immediately clear'. You have made several unsubstantiated claims which you cannot possibly know to be true like this one above 'None in history has stated that before'. You chop up parts of verses to force a meaning to the text that was never meant. You claim to know or have strong opinions on what your own god says you cannot know.

I think it unfair to criticise me in light of the above.



You quoted a very select part of a verse to make a point. In fact the only way you could formulate the argument you are attempting is to butcher the verse in exactly the way you did. Below are all the versions from Quran.com. Underlined is the section you included. In bold is the bit you edited out.


For the first time you are highlighting the "say". Moreover, the entirety of the verse has been addressed in the previous page.

Who denied the 'say' was there? The believers are to assert that they believe that all of the revelation, both that whose import is clear and obvious, and whose import is not immediately recognizable, as being from the presence of God. 


The way you edited the verse make it seem as though it was only Allah AND those who are firm in knowledge who know the meaning but that is not what the verse is saying. Only Allah knows the meaning. Next sentence, those who are firm in knowledge have something to say and that is recorded.

I said that an honest reading of the verse could not allow the understanding you are pushing and I stand by this assertion. If your quotation contained only one word more it would completely change the meaning.

I suggest you are being dishonest because you must be aware of what you are doing when you edit the text in such a precise way.

Deviant – This is not me calling you names but your god in your Quran.

Tricky – I only said I was tempted to call you this but that is because I cannot believe you are unaware of what you are trying to do.


If you read back over this thread you will see that I am addressing your arguments. Look more deeply at these 'names' you think I am calling you. You will see they have meanings and reasons and are not just rude names.

I already spoke on the punctuation. It is not my fault or problem you have never encountered this point, which, BTW, is widely available even in English, even in some of the English commentaries or translations of the Qur'an. You can probably even find lectures on 3:7 on YouTube.

In terms of the rest of the ayah, I have already written on this in the previous page. The message of the verse is that the scripture has both elements, clear and not immediately clear, one should be firm on what is clear and decisive, make that as focus rather than things whose meaning is not immediately clear. Otherwise, you risk going down a wrong path.


In terms of the rude names, you are the one who posted those, not me.


I suggest calming down in these areas. Take more time, don't be satisfied with very shallow and superficial [in this case, even below superficial] glances at religion and then post as if you are an authority on the religion.

However with verse 3:7 of the Quran you have the author saying that if you attempt to seek and interpretation of the Quran's unknowable verses, you are a deviant. Allah reveals verses that are not intended to be understood.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.


Great scholars of Islam disagree with your assertion, I already referenced two of them in this discussion.


. I look at 6 different versions from an Islamic website to get a better understanding. You call the unknown 'not immediately clear'. You have made several unsubstantiated claims which you cannot possibly know to be true like this one above 'None in history has stated that before'. You chop up parts of verses to force a meaning to the text that was never meant. You claim to know or have strong opinions on what your own god says you cannot know.

I think it unfair to criticise me in light of the above.


[1] You are not looking at different versions. You are looking at translations. [2] The punctuation present in the quote has already been addressed, and the issues regarding the punctuation  have been explored by Muslims for 1400 years. [3] My assertion was that no Muslim scholar ever said that you are supposed to crucify Christian missionaries. That was simply your odd extrapolation. If you have some reputable Muslim scholar [or even minor] that said you are supposed to crucify Christians, please post the link or even a book reference.


Come to think of it, that very issue [i.e. your extrapolation that the Qur'an orders the crucifixion of Christian missionaries] is something that the Qur'an, both here and elsewhere, speaks on. It speaks on people who have a barrier, who cannot truly benefit from this revelation from God. "None touch it, except those who are purified" [Q 56:79]. Why can't  such people benefit from the revelation?


It's because their hearts are not in the right place. Deviation in their thinking, as this very text alluded to.




No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Mad Cat  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Christian(Non-Denom.)
Posts: 2468
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Mad Cat Replybullet Posted: 10 May 2016 at 4:57pm

Originally posted by Waheed

For the first time you are highlighting the "say".

Is that all you have to say on this subject. Yes its the first time. Any comments?

Originally posted by Waheed

Moreover, the entirety of the verse has been addressed in the previous page.

You keep saying this but I have addressed your addressing and you have not responded to that.

Originally posted by Waheed

Who denied the 'say' was there?

If I had to say names I would say you!

You cut the verse off exactly before the word say. By doing that you completely changes the meaning of the section of the verse. Let me simplify things through an analogy. Imagine the verse read:

Mark is rich and Luke says hello.

If you cut the verse off between the words Luke and says it gives the impression that both Mark and Luke are rich but that is not the meaning of the sentence. Luke is saying hello.

This is what you have done and you must be aware you are doing it regardless of whether I have highlighted it before or not.

Originally posted by Waheed

The believers are to assert that they believe that all of the revelation, both that whose import is clear and obvious, and whose import is not immediately recognizable, as being from the presence of God.

I generally agree but this is a different point/subject. This verse has a lot of elements and we are discussing the element before this. You were trying to demonstrate that it is both Allah and those firm in knowledge who understand it's meaning but by simply reading the whole verse we can see that this is not the case. The fact that these knowledgeable people believe it is all from God is the next point/element.

Originally posted by Waheed

I already spoke on the punctuation. It is not my fault or problem you have never encountered this point, which, BTW, is widely available even in English, even in some of the English commentaries or translations of the Qur'an. You can probably even find lectures on 3:7 on YouTube.

In terms of the rest of the ayah, I have already written on this in the previous page. The message of the verse is that the scripture has both elements, clear and not immediately clear, one should be firm on what is clear and decisive, make that as focus rather than things whose meaning is not immediately clear. Otherwise, you risk going down a wrong path.

I will say this to address all the times you have written that you already having spoken on a subject – Yes I understand that but your explanations were lacking and I have responded as to why. Please read my responses to your explanations.

Originally posted by Waheed

In terms of the rude names, you are the one who posted those, not me.

I dont think you are reading my posts Waheed! I know I posted these 'names'. I said so in my last response and you even quoted the bits where I said this. However, as I have already said, I am not just calling you senseless names like 'stinky-pants'. I have questioned your honesty because you chop up a verse in such a precise way to force an understanding that is not meant and you MUST be aware you are doing this. If you were to allow just one more word from your chopped-quote it would change the meaning of what was being said. You MUST have been very careful in how you selected the words to include and exclude from you quote because the meaning you are trying to force can only work if you chop the verse exactly as you did.

Originally posted by Waheed

I suggest calming down in these areas. Take more time, don't be satisfied with very shallow and superficial [in this case, even below superficial] glances at religion and then post as if you are an authority on the religion.

Consider it done! I started this thread on the 15th March and it is currently 10th May. That is almost two months so I am taking my time. I am trying to push you beyond the shallow and superficial responses but that is proving quite hard. In my first post I demonstrated a considered breakdown of a single verse of the Quran so I cannot be accused of merely glancing at the religion.

Originally posted by Waheed

Great scholars of Islam disagree with your assertion, I already referenced two of them in this discussion.

It shouldn't be a surprise that Muslim scholars are trying to get away from this problem but can you demonstrate your view from the text without abusing it?

Originally posted by Waheed

[1] You are not looking at different versions. You are looking at translations.

I use this word because Muslims seem to take great delight in using it of the different translations of the Bible. Translations/versions, tomatoes/tomartos its all the same to me. Its only Muslims who have an issue with the choice of words.

Originally posted by Waheed

[2] The punctuation present in the quote has already been addressed, and the issues regarding the punctuation  have been explored by Muslims for 1400 years.

If you read what I have written you will see that is goes beyond the punctuation. Remove all full stops/periods, potatoes/potartos and capital letters and my points still remain. In fact my point still remains using all 6 'translations' and their punctuation is all over the shop.

Originally posted by Waheed

[3] My assertion was that no Muslim scholar ever said that you are supposed to crucify Christian missionaries. That was simply your odd extrapolation. If you have some reputable Muslim scholar [or even minor] that said you are supposed to crucify Christians, please post the link or even a book reference.

I never said that verse specifically was referring to Christians but since you are so keen to revisit it I will lay out my argument again and you can refute it. But actually refute it if you will.

Verse 5:33

It says that there is a four option penalty - Death, Crucifixion, Mutilation and Expulsion

It mentions three crimes worth of this penalty – Waging war against Allah, Waging war against Muhammad and causing mischief in the land.

My argument was that there is no greater mischief within Islam than Shirk.

Believing in the Trinity, according to Islam, is Shirk. Encouraging others to believe in Shirk MUST be the worst crime in Islam. Doing this in an Islamic land MUST qualify as mischief if anything does.

Explain where that argument is incorrect. Dont just say you have never read/heard it laid out that way.

Murder is illegal in the UK. Just because you have never heard it said or read it exactly written by a high court judge that killing someone with a piece of cheese in outer-space is illegal, it is fine. What we are talking about with this verse is something so typically vague that it could mean a whole load of things. I am simply applying it to the most serious crime in Islam.

Originally posted by Waheed

Come to think of it, that very issue [i.e. your extrapolation that the Qur'an orders the crucifixion of Christian missionaries] is something that the Qur'an, both here and elsewhere, speaks on. It speaks on people who have a barrier, who cannot truly benefit from this revelation from God. "None touch it, except those who are purified" [Q 56:79]. Why can't  such people benefit from the revelation?


It's because their hearts are not in the right place. Deviation in their thinking, as this very text alluded to.

I am not the one seeking interpretation of the unclear verses. The Quran clearly says that those people are the deviants. Unless this verse 3:7 is one of the unclear verses.



Edited by Mad Cat - 10 May 2016 at 4:59pm
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Niblo  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 176
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Niblo Replybullet Posted: 03 June 2016 at 10:37am
‘Nothing on earth or in heaven is hidden from Allāh: it is He who shapes you all in the womb as He pleases. There is no God but Him, the Mighty, the Wise: it is He who has sent this Scripture down to you (Prophet). Some of its verses are absolutely clear (muḥ'kamātun) – these are the cornerstone of the Scripture – and others are allegorical (mutashābihātun). The perverse at heart eagerly pursue the allegorical in their attempt to make trouble and to pin down a specific meaning of their own: only Allāh knows the true meaning. Those firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it: it is all from our Lord” – only those with real perception will take heed – “ Our Lord, do not let our hearts deviate after You have guided us. Grant us Your mercy: You are the Ever Giving. Our Lord, You will gather all people on the Day of which there is no doubt: Allāh never breaks His promise.”’ (Al‘Imran: 5-8).

A Rabbi joked that should ten of his colleagues meet in a room to discuss one single Tanakh allegory they would emerge with eleven quite different explanations. The point of the joke was that Rabbis love to argue, and that the Tanakh contains much to argue about. The same can be said for the New Testament, of course.

The Bible contains many instances of allegory; for example, the story of the eagles and the vine in Ezekiel 17; numerous Proverbs; the story of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 11-32); the Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13: 3-9); and the vision of the dragon and the woman in Revelation 12: 1-6. These are used to explain spiritual truths, or to foreshadow future events.

Allegory is a tried and tested method, used by Allāh (Subḥānahu ūta'āla) to facilitate our comprehension of various issues that are beyond our limited understanding; that cannot be described in simple words.

It amuses me that someone whose own Testaments (both ‘Old’ and ‘New’) are awash with allegory should quibble at the presence. in the Qur’an, of that same literary device.

Referring to Al‘Imran, verse 7 Sheik Muhammad Asad writes:

‘It Is this verse which represents, in an absolute sense, a key to the understanding of the Qur'anic message and makes the whole of it accessible to "people who think" (Li-qawmin yatafakkarun)………

‘Without a proper grasp of what is implied by this latter term, much of the Qur'an is liable to be - and, in fact, has often been - grossly misunderstood both by believers and by such as refuse to believe in its divinely-inspired origin. However, an appreciation of what is meant by "allegory" or "symbolism" in the context of the Qur'an is, by itself, not enough to make one fully understand its world-view: in order to achieve this we must relate the Qur'anic use of these terms to a concept touched upon almost at the very beginning of the divine writ - namely, the existence of "a realm which is beyond the reach of human perception" (al-ghayb). It is this concept that constitutes the basic premise for an understanding of the call of the Qur'an, and, indeed, of the principle of religion - every religion - as such: for all truly religious cognition arises from and is based on the fact that only a small segment of reality is open to man's perception and imagination, and that by far the larger part of it escapes his comprehension altogether.

‘Now as soon as we realize that the human mind cannot operate otherwise than on the basis of previous experiences and cognitions already recorded in that mind we are faced by a weighty question: Since the metaphysical ideas of religion relate, by virtue of their nature, to a realm beyond the reach of human perception or experience how can they be successfully conveyed to us? How can we be expected to grasp ideas which have no counterpart, not even a fractional one, in any of the apperceptions which we have arrived at empirically?

‘The answer is self-evident: By means of loan-images derived from our actual - physical or mental – experiences.

‘Thus, the Qur'an tells us clearly that many of its passages and expressions must be understood in an allegorical sense for the simple reason that, being intended for human understanding, they could not have been conveyed to us in any other way. It follows, therefore, that if we were to take every Qur'anic passage, statement or expression in its outward, literal sense and disregard the possibility of its being an allegory, a metaphor or a parable, we would be offending against the very spirit of the divine writ.’ (‘The Message of the Qur’an: Appendix 1 - Symbolism and Allegory in The Qur'an).
‘……..….It follows, therefore, that if we were to take every Qur'anic passage, statement or expression in its outward, literal sense and disregard the possibility of its being an allegory, a metaphor or a parable, we would be offending against the very spirit of the divine writ.’

The same can be said – quite correctly – for allegories, metaphors and parables contained within the Bible; indeed, one could take the Sheik’s comments; substitute the words ‘Bible’ and Biblical’ for ‘Qur’an and ‘Qur’anic’, and still make absolute sense. His words apply equally well to both Books.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 3 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.