Print Page | Close Window

3:7

Printed From: WhyIslam.org
Category: General
Forum Name: InterReligious Dialogue
Forum Discription: Forum for people of various faiths to discuss and inquire about different religions
URL: http://www.whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31135
Printed Date: 16 July 2019 at 5:19am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: 3:7
Posted By: Mad Cat
Subject: 3:7
Date Posted: 15 March 2016 at 5:25pm
  1. It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific.

  2. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them].

  3. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah .

  4. 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.


Just reading the Quran and I came across this verse. I have broken it down into 4 parts.

  • Part one says there are specific and unspecific verses in the Quran

  • Part two says that some devious people will follow the unspecific parts seeking and interpretation that suits themselves.

  • Part three says that no-one actually knows the true meaning of the Quran.

  • Part four says people firm in knowledge claim to believe in the Quran.


What is the point of the Quran if no-one actually knows it's true meaning?


Why not give it's true meaning if you are going to give anything?


How can you blame the devious people if you are going to hold back the meaning?


What is the point of specific and unspecific parts if the true meaning is withheld both cases?


What knowledge do these people in part four who apparently are firm, actually have, given that they cannot have the true interpretation?

The Quran says again and again and again how it is clear and yet here is says its true interpretation is unknown to man. How can it then be clear?



-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21



Replies:
Posted By: Magister
Date Posted: 15 March 2016 at 7:28pm
Read it again, big guy. I think you missed the point of that passage.

-------------
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 16 March 2016 at 5:36am
Anyone else?

-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: Magister
Date Posted: 16 March 2016 at 11:47am
After that rude and immature response, I should take back my "big guy" comment....and replace it with "little guy".

-------------
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 16 March 2016 at 1:59pm
I meant no offence but our track record of dialogue has been bad and this is starting off quite typically pointlessly already so I don’t really care to get into futility once again.
Contrary to what you say, I clearly have read the verse since I have taken the time to divide it up and then summarise each part and then ask 6 questions about it.
My questions are asking ‘what is the point of the passage’ so when you tell me I have missed the point of the passage, it is almost comically bizarre. (typical of our interactions). I feel you might as well have replied ‘I am not going to reply to this thread’. I don’t understand why you took the time to reply with such a comment. That and the other reasons given are why I ask if anyone else wants to reply. Someone who might bring something.
I honestly didn’t see the ‘big guy’ comment as a compliment but I am equally happy for you to call me ‘little guy’ if that give you some satisfaction.

To anyone else reading this – is there anyone who actually wants to engage with the questions asked?


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: Magister
Date Posted: 16 March 2016 at 3:52pm
MadCat, it's talking about the ambiguous verses of the Quran -- no one knows its true meaning except Allah -- but the disbelievers use these vague verses to push their own agendas.

But you can also use that same expression "no one knows its true meaning except Allah" to refer to ALL the Quran and everything else for that matter. We only understand as Allah lets us understand. Without Allah, we wouldn't exist, have intellects, have language, etc.

Originally posted by MadCat

What is the point of the Quran if no-one actually knows it's true meaning?


On the contrary, this passage actually emphasizes that the clear verses are easily understood but rather it is the vague verses and passages that are used to cause disruption from the disbelievers.

Originally posted by MadCat

Why not give it's true meaning if you are going to give anything?

Read what I mentioned above. There was a misunderstanding on your part with regards to what was being mentioned as only understood by Allah.

Originally posted by MadCat

How can you blame the devious people if you are going to hold back the meaning?

Good question, but that's not the case here. The clear message is there for them to understand. They are held accountable for what they can understand. The stuff that is ambiguous or unclear is only for Allah to know and will not be held against us if we cannot make sense of it.

Originally posted by MadCat

What is the point of specific and unspecific parts if the true meaning is withheld both cases?

The unspecific parts serve a variety of functions. Some of these functions include allegorical, vividness, or outright mysteries (such as the initials at the beginning of some suras). The clear parts are what you're responsible for.

Originally posted by MadCat

What knowledge do these people in part four who apparently are firm, actually have, given that they cannot have the true interpretation?

This is their knowledge of what they understood from the Quran, the clear message, the bulk of the revelation.

Originally posted by MadCat

The Quran says again and again and again how it is clear and yet here is says its true interpretation is unknown to man. How can it then be clear?
It comes with clear-cut orders and commandments. The ambiguity is not what's stopping you from being a Muslim or following it the right way. All Muslims, regardless of sect, are pretty much in agreement on the clear-cut verses which is why they ALL seem to be the same exact religion down to the tee -- but there are indeed differences, it's just that the Quran is so clear-cut in its teachings that you don't see them.

-------------
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven


Posted By: waheed1
Date Posted: 17 March 2016 at 4:21pm
Actually this verse needs to be read very carefully.


  1. It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific.

  2. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them].

  3. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah .

  4. 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.

Keeping the way you divided up the text  and its  translation above, let's see what it says.


"In it are verses that are precise"  In Arabic the underlined phrase is Muhkamaat.  This term refers to that which is decisive, clear, not requiring a whole lot of interpretation. The prohibition for eating pork is a good example.


"Others unspecified". The phrase is Mutashaabihhaat. This phrase refers to things whose meaning is not immediately clear.


So it says that the people with diseased spiritual states go after the mutashaabihaat. They do so seeking power, dominion and the like.


In the Qur'an, it says that divisions and disputes did not come till certain levels of [so called] knowledge had come. Folks wanting to start their own thing and having insincerity are those addressed.


So, who does have knowledge of both Muhkamaat and mutashaabihaat?


"None know it except Allah, and those endowed with knowledge..."


The punctuation and such are not revealed. As a consequence, some [actually, many] read this as saying that none can ever have knowledge of the mutashaabihaat except God. But putting the sentences together, it says God and those with knowledge.


The people with knowledge are studying the texts from a God-conscious perspective, they want truth, not political games. God can give it to them.


This interpretation is not simply my views. It is one that is even shared by the famed Quranic scholars such as Sheikh Sha'rawi and Shaikh Muhammad Al-Ghazzali.


Those who know are prayerful to God, and those of us who cannot know about all of it, due to our own limitations, we at least acknowledge that all of it is from the presence of God.


This sort of teaching is-again- given elsewhere in the Qur'an.


Here's an excerpt with an example and comments.

"Those who think about God [i.e. Godly affairs] standing, sitting down, laying on their sides" Q 3:191

People who are trying to "make faith make sense" are constantly in thought, especially in moments of relaxation.

"These people contemplate about the contents of the heavens and the Earth" [Q 3:191]

Their thinking on Godly issues or God concept etc leads them to look at the universe. To look at not only the planets, stars and other heavenly bodies, but to look at even what they have immediate access to.

What happens when people begin to think about God and to ponder deeply their surroundings? Well, think of our immediate surroundings. Trees are useful not only in terms of paper, but are involved in the production of oxygen. A natural recycling system exists. Waste, be it from dogs, cats or humans, acts as fertilizer for the soul. Indeed, we have fossil fuels, which, basically, is the fuel that has been produced via the bones of dinosaurs and the like. In our daily speech we recognize God when we speak of an Eco-system or the immune system. "System" refers to systematic!

In another Quranic verse it says that God will show people his evidences in regions far away as well as within their own selves [Q 41:53].


So when a thoughtful person contemplates the outside world and their own inner workings, they have to reach a conclusion


Our Lord! You have not created [all] this without purpose, to you deserves glory [Q 3:191]

It all has purpose. Trees have purpose, the systems within the body have purpose. All of them function in accordance with certain parameters. They produce certain results. So our conclusion would have to be that God is the Ultimate Engineer!

So this is a solid foundation for faith in God. It is not blind faith, rather, it is actually reasonable.

http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2015/12/making-faith-make-sense.html - http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2015/12/making-faith-make-sense.html






-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 22 March 2016 at 8:56am

Originally posted by Magister

] MadCat, it's talking about the ambiguous verses of the Quran -- no one knows its true meaning except Allah -- but the disbelievers use these vague verses to push their own agendas.

How do you know that? The verse says ‘no one knows ITS true meaning…’
If it were referring to the ambiguous verses it should say ‘no one knows their true meaning. Better still would be if the Quran was as clear as it pretends to be and specified exactly what it meant ‘no one knows the true meaning of the ambiguous verses
Originally posted by Magister

] But you can also use that same expression "no one knows its true meaning except Allah" to refer to ALL the Quran and everything else for that matter. We only understand as Allah lets us understand. Without Allah, we wouldn't exist, have intellects, have language, etc.

I appreciate that we don’t fully understand everything but it seems bizarre at best and unnecessarily pointless otherwise for Allah to send down ‘guidance’ whilst saying at the same time:

‘I am going to give you clear guidance and I am going to give you unclear guidance. I already know that the unclear guidance is going to be used for evil by devious people but I am going to put it in there anyway. I could have made it all clear but I won’t.’

Also I presume that there is some use in the ambiguous verses in understanding Islam. Why make them ambiguous? Surely that compromises everything.
Surely the ambiguous verses should be followed too or else they are pointless. But if you do then you are among the devious. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Originally posted by Magister

] On the contrary, this passage actually emphasizes that the clear verses are easily understood but rather it is the vague verses and passages that are used to cause disruption from the disbelievers.

I don’t see the verse saying that clear verses are easily understood but like I said above the ambiguity of those verses compromised the whole thing if you believe there is some value to them. Also again you have to see the ridiculousness of an all-knowing God explaining his method and how flawed it is.
Originally posted by Magister

] Good question, but that's not the case here. The clear message is there for them to understand. They are held accountable for what they can understand. The stuff that is ambiguous or unclear is only for Allah to know and will not be held against us if we cannot make sense of it.

But Muslims are encouraged to read the whole Quran and so they will come across both parts. How can one know what parts are in which camp? If Allah is consciously holding back the meaning then people might follow something they think is clear.
All this points to a devious god. Sending guidance that is unnecessarily unknowable (in part or whole).
That is not really guidance in any normal sense of the word.
Originally posted by Magister

] This is their knowledge of what they understood from the Quran, the clear message, the bulk of the revelation.

The trouble is that anyone can think they have knowledge based on what they think they know from what they think are clear bits. It becomes an absolute mess.
Originally posted by Magister

] It comes with clear-cut orders and commandments. The ambiguity is not what's stopping you from being a Muslim or following it the right way. All Muslims, regardless of sect, are pretty much in agreement on the clear-cut verses which is why they ALL seem to be the same exact religion down to the tee -- but there are indeed differences, it's just that the Quran is so clear-cut in its teachings that you don't see them.

This is your interpretation however, whenever I question a verse it appears to be unclear. Just like this verse. There seems to be lots of different ways of understanding what Allah is trying to say here. Ironically this verse about explaining the clear and unclear bits of the Quran is unclear itself.

There is another far simpler hypothesis that explains everything far better, including this verse and that is that Muhammad was making it up as he went along. The idea that this is the work of an all-knowing God is incredible.


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 22 March 2016 at 10:14am
Originally posted by Waheed

] The punctuation and such are not revealed. As a consequence, some [actually, many] read this as saying that none can ever have knowledge of the mutashaabihaat except God. But putting the sentences together, it says God and those with knowledge.

This is a big admission with large consequences. Allah is supposedly all-knowing. This means that he would have known at the time of revelation that punctuation would later be added to his work. He would have known that this punctuation would make his revelation clearer but he still decided not to add it in himself.
As you say here yourself, the punctuation plays a big role in determining what is being said.

As is so often the case with the ‘clear’ book, multiple people have multiple understandings
1.     And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah.
This one suggests that Quranic interpretations will be arrived at but no-one will be correct.
2.     …but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah.
This one is talking about hidden meanings. Add this to the above version and you get the True interpretations are consciously, actively hidden from people.
3.     None knoweth its explanation save Allah.
This version isn’t talking about true or hidden meanings but just general meaning are unknown.
4.     …but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah.
We have an agreement with number 2!
5.     . but none knows its interpretation except Allah,
Similar wording but different punctuation.
6.     ; and in no way does anyone know its interpretation except Allah.
This guy uses some strong language. No one ‘IN ANY WAY’ knows what it means.

So we see some people interpreting the verse to be part of the sentence before it but most here do not.
Also all use the word ‘its’ which suggests the whole Quran is being spoken of rather than a selection of verses (their).


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date Posted: 31 March 2016 at 3:58pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Originally posted by Waheed

] The punctuation and such are not revealed. As a consequence, some [actually, many] read this as saying that none can ever have knowledge of the mutashaabihaat except God. But putting the sentences together, it says God and those with knowledge.

This is a big admission with large consequences. Allah is supposedly all-knowing. This means that he would have known at the time of revelation that punctuation would later be added to his work. He would have known that this punctuation would make his revelation clearer but he still decided not to add it in himself.
As you say here yourself, the punctuation plays a big role in determining what is being said.

As is so often the case with the ‘clear’ book, multiple people have multiple understandings
1.     And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah.
This one suggests that Quranic interpretations will be arrived at but no-one will be correct.
2.     …but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah.
This one is talking about hidden meanings. Add this to the above version and you get the True interpretations are consciously, actively hidden from people.
3.     None knoweth its explanation save Allah.
This version isn’t talking about true or hidden meanings but just general meaning are unknown.
4.     …but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah.
We have an agreement with number 2!
5.     . but none knows its interpretation except Allah,
Similar wording but different punctuation.
6.     ; and in no way does anyone know its interpretation except Allah.
This guy uses some strong language. No one ‘IN ANY WAY’ knows what it means.

So we see some people interpreting the verse to be part of the sentence before it but most here do not.
Also all use the word ‘its’ which suggests the whole Quran is being spoken of rather than a selection of verses (their).


You have to look at the whole verse rather than taking a part of the text.


We are told that God sent all of it down in the form of scripture to Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him].

There are things in it whose meaning are not immediately clear. This Soorah itself begins with the disjointed letters. What do they mean? Yes, there is speculation and debate, and I myself have my own views as to possible meaning, but truthfully the meaning is not immediately apparent.

The verse tells us that there are folks who go after, or who seek dominion, by using texts such as that. Perhaps an example would be to Freemasons, to those secret societies who supposedly have knowledge of the secrets of Solomon, who allegedly have connections with the occult and the like. Such people are declared people of perverse hearts, they actually are devoid of Divine guidance.

The verse tells us that while the Qur'an does contain Mutashaabihaat [a term which I explained before], it also contains Muhkamaat, those things whose meanings are clear and decisive. It tells us about God concept, about morality, and about legal issues such as prohibiting Pork and alcohol.

The clear and decisive rulings are the foundation of this scripture[Umm al Kitaab] . It is the decisive which is to command the attention of Muslims, more so than that which is not immediately clear.  The Muslim  believes all of it is from the presence of God. If he knows the mutashaabihaat or not, it doesn't matter, he or she accepts that it is all from God.

There are people, both in Muslim history and among orientalists, who have, for example, opined some rather odd stuff about the disjointed letters, and those interpretations often go totally against that which is totally clear.

One writer that we have discussed on this forum in the past argues that the disjointed letters are a code which allows us to determine when the day of judgement will occur. He claims it will be in the year 2280.

Yet, the Qur'an [as does the New Testament] says repeatedly that God alone knows when that will be  {Q 7:187}.

So we would have to dismiss that author's statement.

Whatever knowledge we can get, it should not be superficial, it should be well thought out, and should conform to the overall standards in the Divine Law. That is what the text refers to.

Yes, there is disagreement about the punctuation and its subsequent interpretation. But much of what your view is here is addressed when one reads the verse in its entirety.

Regards


-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 01 April 2016 at 12:22pm
Originally posted by Waheed

You have to look at the whole verse rather than taking a part of the text.

Hi Waheed. I hoped that it was clear that I was looking at the whole verse since in my first post I broke it down into parts and looked at them all.
Originally posted by Waheed

There are things in it whose meaning are not immediately clear. This Soorah itself begins with the disjointed letters. What do they mean? Yes, there is speculation and debate, and I myself have my own views as to possible meaning, but truthfully the meaning is not immediately apparent.

I find this strange. You bring the disjointed letters as an example of things that are not immediately clear but if you were honest you would say that in 1400 years they have not become clear – no one knows their meaning yet. That is 'not immediately clear' in the extreme.
Originally posted by Waheed

The Muslim  believes all of it is from the presence of God. If he knows the mutashaabihaat or not, it doesn't matter, he or she accepts that it is all from God.


Accepting it is from God is one thing but not relevant to what I am wanting to talk about here.
What I am asking about is how can you claim to understand much of it when Allah has purposely and unnecessarily made part of it unknowable and worst than that, potentially sinful to follow?
Originally posted by Waheed

Yes, there is disagreement about the punctuation and its subsequent interpretation. But much of what your view is here is addressed when one reads the verse in its entirety.


But we know that is not true. Translators are trying to change the meaning of exact verse we are discussing here by adding in their own punctuation. As I have pointed out some versions have a full stop (period), capital letter, new sentence while other versions have a comma, no capital letter, no new sentence.

Ill revisit my questions:
What is the point of the Quran if no-one actually knows it's true meaning?
The two options seem to be:
No one knows the true meaning of the Quran which I argue makes most sense from the way its written.
No one knows the true meaning of the ambiguous verses. This still leaves us with a huge problem. Why include them if they CANNOT be understood? How can you really understand the religion the meaning is withheld from an unknown portion of the text.

Why not give it's true meaning if you are going to give anything?
What is the point of revealing something whilst withholding its meaning?

How can you blame the devious people if you are going to hold back the meaning?
The message of the Quran is made up of all its verses, both clear and unclear. You might think you know which are which but how do you know for sure? You might be following the ambiguous verses thinking you know their meaning and thus thinking they are clear, thus being unaware that you are following the ambiguous.

What is the point of specific and unspecific parts if the true meaning is withheld both cases?
Why not make it all clear since Allah must have that option?
Why hold back the meaning of a revelation from mankind that supposedly is designed as guidance for mankind?

What knowledge do these people in part four who apparently are firm, actually have, given that they cannot have the true interpretation?
How do they know when meaning is withheld without specification of which bits are knowable?
The Quran says again and again and again how it is clear and yet here is says its true interpretation is unknown to man. How can it then be clear?


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date Posted: 04 April 2016 at 5:11pm
It's hard for me to understand your post. Can you please fix the formatting, as in its current form I am unable to post a reply. Thanks

-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date Posted: 07 April 2016 at 12:50pm
My bad. Sorry about that. Formatting fixed!

-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date Posted: 10 April 2016 at 1:25pm
Originally posted by Mad Cat

Originally posted by Waheed

You have to look at the whole verse rather than taking a part of the text.

Hi Waheed. I hoped that it was clear that I was looking at the whole verse since in my first post I broke it down into parts and looked at them all.
Originally posted by Waheed

There are things in it whose meaning are not immediately clear. This Soorah itself begins with the disjointed letters. What do they mean? Yes, there is speculation and debate, and I myself have my own views as to possible meaning, but truthfully the meaning is not immediately apparent.

I find this strange. You bring the disjointed letters as an example of things that are not immediately clear but if you were honest you would say that in 1400 years they have not become clear – no one knows their meaning yet. That is 'not immediately clear' in the extreme.
Originally posted by Waheed

The Muslim  believes all of it is from the presence of God. If he knows the mutashaabihaat or not, it doesn't matter, he or she accepts that it is all from God.


Accepting it is from God is one thing but not relevant to what I am wanting to talk about here.
What I am asking about is how can you claim to understand much of it when Allah has purposely and unnecessarily made part of it unknowable and worst than that, potentially sinful to follow?
Originally posted by Waheed

Yes, there is disagreement about the punctuation and its subsequent interpretation. But much of what your view is here is addressed when one reads the verse in its entirety.


But we know that is not true. Translators are trying to change the meaning of exact verse we are discussing here by adding in their own punctuation. As I have pointed out some versions have a full stop (period), capital letter, new sentence while other versions have a comma, no capital letter, no new sentence.

Ill revisit my questions:
What is the point of the Quran if no-one actually knows it's true meaning?
The two options seem to be:
No one knows the true meaning of the Quran which I argue makes most sense from the way its written.
No one knows the true meaning of the ambiguous verses. This still leaves us with a huge problem. Why include them if they CANNOT be understood? How can you really understand the religion the meaning is withheld from an unknown portion of the text.

Why not give it's true meaning if you are going to give anything?
What is the point of revealing something whilst withholding its meaning?

How can you blame the devious people if you are going to hold back the meaning?
The message of the Quran is made up of all its verses, both clear and unclear. You might think you know which are which but how do you know for sure? You might be following the ambiguous verses thinking you know their meaning and thus thinking they are clear, thus being unaware that you are following the ambiguous.

What is the point of specific and unspecific parts if the true meaning is withheld both cases?
Why not make it all clear since Allah must have that option?
Why hold back the meaning of a revelation from mankind that supposedly is designed as guidance for mankind?

What knowledge do these people in part four who apparently are firm, actually have, given that they cannot have the true interpretation?
How do they know when meaning is withheld without specification of which bits are knowable?
The Quran says again and again and again how it is clear and yet here is says its true interpretation is unknown to man. How can it then be clear?


I find this strange. You bring the disjointed letters as an example of things that are not immediately clear but if you were honest you would say that in 1400 years they have not become clear – no one knows their meaning yet. That is 'not immediately clear' in the extreme.


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.



What I am asking about is how can you claim to understand much of it when Allah has purposely and unnecessarily made part of it unknowable and worst than that, potentially sinful to follow?


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

The Bible has things about believers being able to be immune from poison and things like that. Consequently, there has been people believing that who would take on poisonous snakes, expecting immunity, who then in fact die.


I am not judging the Bible here, but making the point that getting caught up in the fringe areas can lead one down a wrong path.


ll revisit my questions:
What is the point of the Quran if no-one actually knows it's true meaning?
The two options seem to be:
No one knows the true meaning of the Quran which I argue makes most sense from the way its written.
No one knows the true meaning of the ambiguous verses. This still leaves us with a huge problem. Why include them if they CANNOT be understood? How can you really understand the religion the meaning is withheld from an unknown portion of the text.


The point of the Qur'an is to guide those who have an awareness or sense of God.

I have used the term, with regards to your second question- "not immediately clear".

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.


How can you blame the devious people if you are going to hold back the meaning?
The message of the Quran is made up of all its verses, both clear and unclear. You might think you know which are which but how do you know for sure? You might be following the ambiguous verses thinking you know their meaning and thus thinking they are clear, thus being unaware that you are following the ambiguous.


Because devious people have some heart problems. They are taking advantage in order to make a perversion or some gain that is not sincere.

For the remainder of your questions, please see this post as a whole.




-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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.


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.



-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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.


-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.


-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.




-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.



-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.


-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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.



-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: waheed1
Date 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.






-------------
http://arifinimports.com - Lectures and books
http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com - My Blog

<a href="">


Posted By: Mad Cat
Date 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.



-------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good. 1 Thessalonians 5:21


Posted By: Niblo
Date 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.



Posted By: Damo808
Date Posted: 03 June 2016 at 11:01am
"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."

-Niblo

But then again. Neither Jews nor Christians claim of their respective scripture that it is the unadulterated Word of God. Muslims do just that of the Quran therefore elevating it to a degree far superior to that of the Bible NT and OT.. It therefore should be scrutinized to the degree of that of the status it claims for itself.

-------------
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5


Posted By: Niblo
Date Posted: 03 June 2016 at 11:24am
Originally posted by Damo808

"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."

-Niblo

But then again. Neither Jews nor Christians claim of their respective scripture that it is the unadulterated Word of God. Muslims do just that of the Quran therefore elevating it to a degree far superior to that of the Bible NT and OT.. It therefore should be scrutinized to the degree of that of the status it claims for itself.


The Bible certainly is not the ‘unadulterated Word of God’; nevertheless Jews and Christians have based their respective religions upon it….allegories and all!

I’m all for scrutinising the Qur’an. I draw the line at saying that Allāh (Subḥānahu ūta'āla) can speak only as I (we) wish Him to speak. Would you deny Him the right to use allegory?    

By the way, in order to scrutinise something - anything - in a thorough and meaningful way one needs to have understanding of that something. The more we understand the better our scrutiny will be; and the more likely we are to be taken seriously by those whose understanding is greater than our own.



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide - http://www.webwizguide.info