.jpg)
Welcome Friends: Ahlan wa sahlan!
Their commentaries can only be read in verse by verse view.
COMMENTS:
1. Today’s Reading begins with Verse 39:
“It has become known/ It is proclaimed to those who are being assaulted/combated, in that they were wronged, and verily, God is of their succor/support indeed capable.”
All the explanations of this verse, even the Arabic, have jumped over the passive verb ‘uthinaأذِنَ- ’ [i] and have dealt directly with ‘yuqatalunaيقاتَلون- ’ (being fought against) understanding this only as an indirect permission, granting the Faithful (after being wronged by Qureish and fought against), the insinuated and unspoken ‘permission to fight back.’ Even today, we only think of the word ‘ithnأذن- ’ as denoting permission, while it main connotation is ‘announcing, or making known (HQ 2:279, 9:3, 14:7), hence the term ‘athaan,’ for the prayer announcement, or ‘call to prayer.’
I see this verse in broader terms, announcing to the Believers, after they were fought against and wronged (and uprooted from their homes for no more than the statement of: ‘Our Lord is God!’).. I see this verse assuring them of the certainty of God’s support against their oppressors -whenever they needed it (including fighting back, of course).
See Verse 39 according to Ali/ Asad, and Verse 40, which illustrates the hardships which the Deniers had brought upon the Believers in Mecca, including banishment from their homes.
From Yusuf Ali’s footnotes:
“Several translators have failed to notice that yuqataluna (in the best-approved texts) is in the passive voice, "against whom war is made",-not "who take arms against the unbelievers" as Sale translates it. The clause -and verily ... their aid- is parenthetical. Verse 40 connects on with "they are wronged". The wrong is indicated: ’driven by persecution from their home, for no other reason than that they worshipped the One True God’. This was the first occasion on which fighting-in self-defence-was permitted. This passage therefore undoubtedly dates from Madinah.”
From Muhammad Asad’s footnotes:
“Lit., “inasmuch as they have been wronged.” Connecting with the promise, in the preceding verse, that “God will ward off [all evil] from those who attain to faith,” the present verse enunciates the permission to fight physically in self-defence. … The principle of war in self-defence – and only in self-defence – has been further elaborated in Al-Baqarah, which was revealed about a year later.”
2. Dear Reader:
I feel that we ‘Muslims’ have become over-defensive with regard to this subject, probably due to people having taken the term ‘Jihad’ to mean ‘Holy War,’ rather than ‘Self-Exertion.’ Notice that, whenever fighting is mentioned, we go out of our way to clarify that it is only in ‘self-defense.’
The sad part is that we would NOT have needed to do that, had we made it clear from the onset that ALL FORMS OF OPPRESSION AND AGGRESSION ARE ‘UDWAANعدوان- ’) which Believers should neither assist each other to commit (HQ 5:2), nor even discuss verbally (58:9)!!!
Why is ‘udwaan/ aggression’ so dangerous?
Regular Readers remember the story of the two sons of Adam: The Aggressor and The Aware, and know that ‘udwaan/ aggression’ negates ‘taqwaتقوى- ’ (one cannot be present unless the other is absent), and also that, what we aspire for, indeed the purpose of all our deeds, and of our Life itself is: Taqwa /Awareness!
Our Readers know this, thanks to the 1,000 year old Lexicon we are using at iqrathechallenge. Please spread the word: Very few people, even among scholars of Islamic studies would know the answer to this simple question:
‘What is the opposite of Taqwa?’
3. Verse 41 continues, with FOUR recommendations for those whom God has ‘secured upon the Earth.’ Being ‘secure upon the earth’ is a blessing some of us do not fully appreciate. Having a Homeland and a secure Home is a precondition to so many important aspects of human life; everything is destabilized when we have no security.
Verses 42-46 present examples of townships which belied their Prophets, asking those who belie this Message and its Messenger to look around them. The conclusion shows us that Blindness is not an affliction of eyesight, but rather an affliction of the ‘qalb,’ the heart/mind, which is ‘blind’ to apparent Truth.
An interesting point to mention here is the word ‘sudoorصدور- ’ plural of ‘sadrصدر-[ii] ’ which is commonly understood to mean ‘chest/ breast,’ but originally had a broader connotation, related to BOTH the head and chest (a ‘siddaar’ is a coat which covered both. I still remember my grandmother telling her guests, ‘Rise, and sit in the sadr! ارتفعي واجلسي في الصدر)
So the ‘qalb’ really is the ‘heart/mind’ organ(s), located in the ‘head/chest!!’ See our explanation of HQ 6:25.
Before we continue we must inform Readers that the word ‘alf[iii] ألف- ’ in Arabic means to ‘combine/ compose/ compound’ one thing to another (as in HQ 8:63), and has also been taken to denote ‘hundreds combined together,’ which would point to something in its ‘thousands.’
Here we find the statement that, to God, a ‘time period/ epoch’ of ‘yawm’ is similar to ‘alfaألف- ’ ‘years’ of our ‘count/ enumeration عد-’ (put يوم in ‘Search this Site). Also see (HQ 32:5).
In another verse we find the statement that one ‘yawm’ to God, is of the ‘extentمقدار-’ of ‘fifty ‘alf’ years (HQ 70:4). There is no similarity between these two verses, as the second verse is neither relative to human time nor to our ‘enumeration’ of it, but rather to intrinsic ‘extent’ of a time-span. Nevertheless these two verses have given Koran-bashers something which to them, shows imprecision… but I beg to differ!
Precision is what the Qur’an is all about.
5. In Verses 49- 51 we find an announcement which Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him, is told to make to Cognizant Humans, adding persuasion and dissuasion to his argument.
6. Verse 52 mentions previous Prophets/ Messengers, narrating how the Deviant/ Sheytaan ‘pitches into their aspirations.’
“We had not sent before you a Messenger or a Prophet, but when he aspires- ‘tamanna’ (تمنّى), the Deviant/ Sheytaan pitched (falsities) into his aspiration, so God effaces that which the Deviant/Sheytaan had pitched (of falsities), and subsequently (ultimately) God confirms His Signs, and God is All-Knowing, All-Wise.”
This type of ‘deviance,’ as Regular Readers know, is related to ‘conjecture,’ and our tendency to misread, misunderstand, and misrepresent the Truths we see in front of us (including God’s Signs and His conveyed information). We know from HQ 4: 119-120 that ‘false hopes’ are what the Deviant/ Sheytaan offers us, which leads us to being deceived. The ‘Deviant/Sheytaan and these ‘false hopes’ are no other than our dialectic minds, full of ‘jadal,’ influenced by our predetermined views, with the result that we see ‘what we wish to see,’ not what really is (put ‘jadal’ in ‘Search this Site’- and see postings of April 20th ; June 25th.
We have examples for that in the story of the Adam in the Garden, then in the Two Sons of Adam (HQ 5:27), of Joseph and his brothers (HQ 12:100), and certainly in the incident of Moses killing one of Pharaoh’s men (HQ 28:15), where he even calls it ‘a deed of the Deviant/ Sheytaan,’ peace upon him.
We should beware of Conjecture- which is no substitute for Reality (HQ 10:36).
Back to this verse, which does not mention Prophet Muhammad, and we are not told of any ‘falsities’ –if any- which the Deviant/Sheytaan may have ‘pitched’ into his aspirations, peace upon him. But, we do have several verses which tell him to seek refuge in God from the Deviant/ Sheytaan (HQ 7:200, 16:98, 40:56, 41:36), and we can safely ascertain that he did just that, and not waste our time in a rebuttal of the allegations against him in his capacity as Messenger [iv].
Having read Verses 52- 55 we can say that they were taken out of context and their explanation was fed with fancy until the supposed ‘meaning’ of these verses had a life of their own- see footnote of Muhammad Asad. Suffice it to know that these verses were mis-explained and cited by certain early ‘Koran-bashers’ (as well as more recent ones) as ‘evidence’ for what they have termed ‘the Satanic Verses.’
Without proof of anything either way, we must take the verses at face value and desist from conjecture.
Enough said!
Our next Reading is from HQ 22:56-72.
Peace unto all!
[i] أذن: أصلان، أحدهما أُذُنُ كلِّ ذي أُذُن، والآخَر العِلْم؛ وعنهما يتفرّع البابُ كلُّه.
ويقال للرجل السامع من كلِّ أحدٍ أذُنٌ. قال الله تعالى: {وَمِنْهُمُ الّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ النّبيَّ ويَقُولُونَ هُوَ أُذُنٌ} [التوبة 61]. والأذُن عُروة الكوز، وهذا مستعار. والأَذَنُ الاستماع.
والأصل الآخر العِلْم والإعلام. تقول العرب قد أذِنْتُ بهذا الأمر أي عَلِمْت. وآذَنَني فُلانٌ أعلَمَني. والمصدر الأَذْن والإيذان. وفَعَلَه بإذْني أي بِعِلمي، ويجوز بأمري، وهو قريبٌ من ذلك. وفي الباب الأذان، وهو اسم التّأذين.
فأما قوله تعالى: {وَإذْ تَأَذَّنَ رَبُّكُمْ لَئِنْ شَكَرْتُمْ لأَزِيدَنَّكُمْ} [إبراهيم 7]، فقال الخليل: التّأذُّن من قولك لأفعلنَّ كذا، تريد به إيجاب الفعل، أي سأفعله لا محالة. وهذا قولٌ. وأوضَحُ منه قولُ الفرّاء تأَذَّن رَبُّكم: أَعلَمَ رَبُّكم. وآذِنُ الرّجُلِ حاجبُه، وهو من الباب.
[ii] صدر: أصلان صحيحان، أحدُهما يدلُّ على خلاف الوِرْد، والآخر صَدْر الإنسان وغيره.
فالأوّلُ قولُهم: صَدَرَ عن الماءِ، وصَدَرَ عن البِلاد، إذا كان وَرَدَها ثمَّ شَخَصَ عنها.
وأمَّا الآخر فالصَّدر للإنسان، والجمع صُدور، قال الله تعالى: {ولَكِنْ تَعْمَى القُلُوبُ الَّتِي في الصُّدور} [الحج 46]، ثم يشتقُّ منه.
فالصِّدار: ثوبٌ يُغطِّي الرَّأس والصَّدْر. والتَّصدير: حبل يُصدَّر به البعير لئلاَّ يُرَدَّ حِمْلُهُ إلى خَلْفه.
[iii] ألف: يدلُّ على انضمام الشيء إلى الشيء، والأشياء الكثيرة أيضاً. قال الخليل: الأَلْفُ معروفٌ، والجمع الآلاف. وقد آلَفتِ الإبلُ، ممدودة، أي صارت ألفاً.
قال الخليل: ألِفْتُ الشيءَ آلَفُه. والأُلْفَة مصدر الائتلاف . وإلْفُكَ وأليفك: الذي تألفه. [و] كلُّ شيءٍ ضممتَ* بعضَه إلى بعضٍ فقد ألّفته تأليفاً. الأصمعيّ: يقال ألِفْتُ الشيء آلَفُه إلْفاً وأنا آلِفٌ، وآلَفْتُه وأنا مُؤْلفٌ.
قال أبو زيد: أهل الحجاز يقولون آلَفْتُ المكانَ والقومَ. وآلَفْتُ غيري أيضاً حملته على أن يألَفَ.
فأما قولـه تعالى: {لإيلاَفِ قُرَيْشٍ [قريش 1]. قال أبو زيد: المألف: الشجر المُودِق الذي يدنو إليه الصّيد لإلْفِه إيّاهُ، فيَدِقُ إليه.
[iv] Although these allegations are easily refutable because they allege that Muhammad in his capacity as MESSENGER had committed a mistake in relaying the Message, whereas we know here at iqrathechallenge that any mistakes he might have made, peace upon him, could only have been in his capacity as Prophet, where he was corrected BY THE MESSAGE ITSELF several times, with the address: ‘O Prophetيا أيها النبي- ! See Posting February 4th.
5 comments:
For some reason, I never really understood the difference between Messenger and Prophet.
Why is it important to know the difference and why can't we consider them to mean the same thing?
I too, was confused aout the time period of one yaum as mentioned in the Qur'an. Thanks a lot for the clarification. May God Bless you and your research!
U. B
Thank you dear Readers!
I hope that discussing the issue of 'Prophet versus Messenger' again will help, but in the end, it is up to each of us to decide for ourselves.
It is important to begin from the premise that each word in the Qur'an carries ITS OWN WEIGHT and nothing is redundant. Also, that there are no synonyms in the Arabic language, where EACH SOUND denotes a specific meaning. 'Nabi' and Rasool are as different as their root-verbs, the first relating to the general imparting of 'News,' and the other to the specific delivery of a 'Message.'
Indeed, to us today the difference is CRUCIAL and the mixing-up of these two terms is at the root of most of our problems!
We must understand that the Message is Divine, and that anything Muhammad, peace upon him, is told to convey as 'Messenger' is unconditional and universal, and as Timeless as the final Message itself. The Messenger Muhammad therefore, did NOT fall prey to any error or temptation, and he certainly did NOT make any false Qur’anic recitals.
(Note that God's Messengers could be either human or angelic.)
On the other hand, Prophet-hood is not Divine. Prophets are a 'higher,' more knowledgeable category of humans with 'anbaa'- or 'breaking news' to impart to others. They are 'Prophets' in their communities. They could and do have human weaknesses, and they commit mistakes. It is in Muhammad’s capacity as ‘Prophet,’ peace upon him, that he was susceptible to a few personal errors, which God promptly called upon him to correct, and these corrections are recorded in the Qur’an: RECORDED IN THE DIVINE MESSAGE which he, as Messenger, conveyed even as it reproached him in his capacity as 'Prophet' of his community.
Note that it is also in his capacity as ‘Prophet’ that he was called upon to take certain strategic positions as in HQ 8:67, 9:73.
Why is this SO important?
Why is this SO important?
Because for too long, people (Muslims AND Islam-Bashers)have gotten away with considering such strategies ‘universal.’ Some have taken it upon themselves to adopt these strategies and enforce them upon others, stating that they are 'Divine,' while others have attacked the Qur’an for having (as they mistakenly think) ‘universally and timelessly sanctioned’ these strategies!
Extremists from both sides have fed, and continue to feed, on the ambiguity.
Look for yourself:
The address, ‘O Prophet’ appears 13 times in the Qur’an, calling upon him with commands ranging from the very personal (inter-marital), or the reproachful, to the rallying calls to decisive action, which sometimes encourage and authorize battle, even as they combine severity with compassion (as in Postings of April 27, April 28).
Copy + paste "يا أيها النبي" with quotation marks in Tanzil and note that, listing them by topic would show us that these verses call:
•(1 once) ‘O Prophet’ initially, to appoint him also as Emissary/Messenger (أرسلناك), entrusting him with what that role entails: HQ 33:45.
•(1 once) Commanding his Awareness and non-compliance to the Deniers and the Hypocrites: HQ 33:1.
•(5 times) Encouraging him and authorizing battle: HQ 8:64, 65; 9:73, 66:9, and with regard to captives HQ 8:70.
•(6 times) Directing him on issues related to women/family life: HQ 33:28, 50, 59; 65:1; 66:1; and the acceptance of women’s pledge 60:12.
However, when we copy + paste "يا أيها الرسول" (O Messenger) we note that it appears only twice, both times related to the Message which Muhammad, peace upon him, is receiving and has to convey:
•HQ 5:67 commands the Messenger to deliver the Message, granting him immunity يعصمك (as Messenger), meaning that his successful delivery of the Message will be not be obstructed or tampered with by the people. It also states that God does not guide those who Deny Him.
•HQ 5:41 tells him most importantly that, as Messenger, his responsibility is in delivering the Message, and NOT in convincing people; he should therefore not be grieved by those who are rushing into Denial.
This research further confirms that:
‘Prophet’ describes the relationship of a chosen person to the people from amongst whom he was chosen and the specific circumstances of their interaction, while ‘Messenger of God’ describes the relationship of this chosen person to the Message itself (in both its receipt and delivery), and its Divine Source, God.
I hope this helped!
Although I knew the difference between the terms 'prophet' and 'messenger', your very comprehensive explanation of those two terms, and the examples given, added so much more clarity to my understanding. Thank you.
Post a Comment