Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

Quran 24:45

Allah has created every [living] creature from water. And of them are those that move on their bellies, and of them are those that walk on two legs, and of them are those that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

 

When this verse was revealed  in circa 600 AD, or when muslims pondered thjs 500 years ago, did they understand what the heck this verse meant.  It was only until centuries later man with his knowledge determined scientifically that life on Earth started from water.   Validating Allahs words.

Dont you think this applies to 3:7?

Humans wont understand everything in the quran right away, with time we are discovering and realizing new knowledge. 

Evolution would have been discovered long before if Muhammad SAW, his descendents, or companions  knew and understood this verse .

quranist likes everyone else to believe that anyone with appropriate knowledge can be regarded as “Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” as per Quran [3:7].
Let's us see how truthful he is.
Let's just gauge how much he actually knows. If he were to carefully read, just once, 10,000 books before his time was up, that averages to reading 4 books a week, 200 books a year, over say a 50 year period of productive life. Of those, if he were to diligently study a mere ten percent, say a 1000 books of his choice – where “study” entails more than a careful read, rather, an endeavor to master its contents – that amounts to studying 20 books a year over a 50 year
period of productive lifetime. Given that there are in excess of 10 million books in existence in all human languages, he would still be 99.x percent ignorant of the already known human knowledge of the world, let alone of what is yet to be discovered. Even if he were to strive his hardest his entire life to escape the natural paradigm of “ilm” explosion as man endeavors to discover its place in the universe, and as the wisdom of civilizations and its sages continue to accumulate, he would at best be relegated to remain somewhere between a superficial generalist and narrow-gauged specialist who is largely ignorant of the breadth and depth of human knowledge. How can a 99% ignorant fellow make any claims to being among the (“Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm”)  as is required to fully comprehend the message of the Holy Qur'an which is not even the expression of human knowledge?

i will stop here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

from Taha verse 114, the command is drawn that we must not make haste with Quran before it's completing revelation  comes...

Verses 113 and 114 of Taha and verses 32 of Furqan, 4 of Muzzammil and 16 to 19 of Qiyamah refer to the recitation of the Quran-Quran means recitation-and the pronoun wahyuhu refers to the recitation, implying: "Do not hasten with the recitation of the book already revealed to you before you receive the command to recite i.e. "When We recite it, you follow the reciting thereof (Qiyamah: 18)" and in a manner mentioned in verse 4 of Muzzammil-tartila,with ease and correctness.

Verse 114 makes it clear that the whole Quran had been revealed to the Holy Prophet before he recited its chapters and verses to the people as and when commanded by Allah.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

For the same reason why Surah Fatiha is the beginning of the Quran.

Fatiha opens praising Allah lord of all, and to give us guidance to straight path,  a statement of Allah alone we worship., ... 

Thank you for mentioning Fatiha, now let me know what is "Sirat e Mustaqeem"?

Surah Al-Fatiha, Verse 7:

صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ

The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray.

(English - Shakir)

Who are "alladhina"? Why Quran refers us to the path of those upon whom Allah has bestowed favors?

8 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

mean Quran is constant... right?  Unchanging for muslims of all sects (hopefully)..

Hadith.. are not...? 

Quran is the FURQAN, the guided ones are also "furqan" within themselves. Quran introduces sadiqeen, rasikhoona fil ilm, tahireen etc. So who were they? 

If there are no reliable ahadith, how you have learned offering prayers? If you minus the hadith from picture, you would not be able to understand Quran as well as Islamic laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Wmehar2 has a ways to go before studying this book(?), as do I

I was not referring to any book :).

Haqiqat-e-Muhammadiyah means reality of Prophet Muhammad in light of the traditions of the Ahlul Bayt (asws). I know a sunni book has a similar name but I was not referring to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

I was not referring to any book :).

Haqiqat-e-Muhammadiyah means reality of Prophet Muhammad in light of the traditions of the Ahlul Bayt (asws). I know a sunni book has a similar name but I was not referring to it.

Ah I see, then I would have to agree with you on that.

If you are interested reading the traditions of the Ahlulbayt (as), @wmehar2, I would recommend getting a book like The Scale of Wisdom. 

https://www.amazon.com/Scale-Wisdom-M-Muhammadi-Rayshahri/dp/1904063349/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1508576731&sr=8-1&keywords=the+scale+of+wisdom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

If there are no reliable ahadith, how you have learned offering prayers? If you minus the hadith from picture, you would not be able to understand Quran as well as Islamic laws.

Actually, that is incorrect. If you reject hadith completely, 1. You end up with denying history.  2. You would understand Quran (In a limited manner) but you would be more apt to apply your personal views and cherrypick parts of the Quran to suit your desires. 3. There would be absolutely no understanding of Islamic fiqh, because you rejected hadiths and rely on your personal views and qisas to compensate for throwing hadith away as a legitimate source of information for Islamic laws and historical context for the Quran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Actually, that is incorrect. If you reject hadith completely, 1. You end up with denying history.  2. You would understand Quran (In a limited manner) but you would be more apt to apply your personal views and cherrypick parts of the Quran to suit your desires. 3. There would be absolutely no understanding of Islamic fiqh, because you rejected hadiths and rely on your personal views and qisas to compensate for throwing hadith away as a legitimate source of information for Islamic laws and historical context for the Quran.

Exactly!
@wmehar2 seems uncomfortable with accepting ahadith:

16 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

I can respect if you want to use Hadith to support your sound and reasoning, but It's not something I can easily do, nor that I would like to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُبَارَكَةٍ ۚ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنْذِرِينَ

[Shakir 44:3] Surely We revealed it on a blessed night surely We are ever warning--

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

The abovenoted verses clearly prove that the whole Quran was revealed to the Holy Prophet on the night of Qadr, and the gradual revelation refers to the occasions on which he was commanded by Allah to recite them to the people. Refer to the commentary of Baqarah: 2 and Ta Ha: 114. Therefore if any theory, based upon conjecture, is put forward to state that the Holy Prophet was not aware of the full text of the Quran and knew it only as and when any portion was revealed to him, should be rejected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are Traditions(Hadith) that are unanimously agreed( by ALL Muslims).

Tradition of the Two Weighty Things (thaqalayn)

The Messenger of Allah declared:

"It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am leaving for you two precious things and if you adhere to them both,  you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my Progeny, that is my Ahlul Bayt. The two shall never separate from each other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)

Then followed the key sentence denoting the clear designation of 'Ali as the leader of the Muslim ummah.  The Prophet held up the hand of 'Ali and said:

"For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla)."

The well-known and reliable hadith of the Prophet - "I am the city of knowledge and 'Ali is its gate"

Many more, that serve as the foundation of basic beliefs.

So, this argument, that hadith issue is causing me to only resort to Qur’an. is a smoke screen. We should respond to it in clear terms. Because some are marketing theory, because Hadith in their books prove, their sect wrong. And the merits of Al-e- Kisa (as) can’t be denied. So safe way is to just resort to denying everything.  (Think about this).  Tragedy of Thursday, Hydhabyia etc...

Is Hadith Thaqalayn( Hadith of the two weighty things) Disputed among the Muslim Scholars?

Second, what about the Historical Facts?

Fadak, Saqifa, Battle of Jamal, Battle of Siffin, Karbala.  These are Historical Facts that All Muslims agree. But they can be diluted and deflected and spinned  if the Hadith that ‘Hussain(as) is from me, or whoever hurts Sayeda Fatima(sa) , merits of Imam Ali(as) or who was there at event of Mubahila are discarded under this blanket argument of i can’t be sure of Hadith.  Everything becomes a fair game…

All these Historical events were just issues between Muslim of that time, no one was superior to anyone, so move on…...I think thay have moved from palying with terms and meaning to out right rejecting them under the pretext( which is different with period- rejecting hadith due concerns of health, or ban due to people mixing word of Allah(awj) and human etc...

Edited by S.M.H.A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

I am fairly certain, otherwise I wouldn't written my previous post. By the way, I do too, I guess what I'm trying to say is this: We should be wary to interpret the Quran without proper knowledge or context.

 

Yes, absolutely. It is the ultimate hadith after all. Nothing compares to it or overrides it. It is the only Sahih hadith in the world as far as I am aware.

No but what I am trying to get across is that some people want to twist the Quran so it fits their life conveniently, easy to do by rejecting all hadith  That's why I am wary of using Quran alone, besides having the historical context really helps with understanding ayahs and the Quran or how it was revealed.

From my experience, when people start believing in a Quran alone perspective, they start doubting the existences of the Prophets (as) and start making theories with no Islamic basis. The worse part is they won't even use hadith in a historical context, because being obstinate, they passionately and blindly denounce hadiths in any context. So they make stuff up on the spot.

Besides, I saw somebody progress from Sunni to Quranist to agnostic to athiest. I have seen another person go through the same thing, the common denominator being that they were both Quranists. The intention is good but then again, like the old saying, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

It is not a Quran issue, it is the Word of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and infallible but a people issue for me, we can't even agree on the definition of Quran alone.

Some follow the Quran alone and their personal interpretation, some follow the Quran alone and say Muhammad is only a messenger but take a scientist as a prophet for discovering a number code within the Quran, others reject the false prophet but accept the number code and basically worship it.

The thing that is really shocking and hypocritical is they(the Quranists) almost universally tell you "I dont follow any hadiths" but use hadith to justify their views such as Abu Bakr burning hadiths after Muhammad's death or quoting Muhammad saying "Don't believe in anything I say that contradicts the Quran." Human interpretation is as reliable as the hadith they object to and criticize.

 The latter is preposterous to the Shia view and something that Muhammad (saws) wouldn't say because we believe in the ismah or infallibility of Muhammad(saws) and none of the Ahlulbayt(as) are quoted saying that Muhammad (saws) did say that. Not to mention, isn't that also following hadiths? The whole Quranist thing is a joke.

 

I think we can both agree that Whether it's Quran alone or supplemental with hadith that anyone can cherry pick to their desires.

You guys throw Quranist around but I haven't researched their interpretation of Quran or verdicts on hadith. Just seen some youtube videos to get a general picture.   Everything Im presenting here is from me and my understanding alone.  If I coincide with them on any points, it is Coincidence.  There are probably many things we differ on as I've not finished analyzing the quran critically.

As someone whose brain is wired funny, I have to have clear, uncontradictory , non-vague direction from the Qur'an regarding Hadith.  I have to see it from this book first than from Hadith. 

I mean,  for goodness sake according to the Qur'an, Al Mesih Isa ibn Mariam AS, the Quran came to him with Torah, Injeel, and Hikmah (knowledge of a certain hour on the last day).  He had his own Sunnah.  Technically, The sunnah of the Prophet wouldn't even be his!! It's actually Isa ibn Mariam AS!

 

3:55

When God said, 'Jesus, I will take thee to Me and will raise thee to Me and I will purify thee of those who believe not. I will set thy followers above the unbelievers till the Resurrection Day. Then unto Me shall you return, and I will decide between you, as to what you were at variance on.

It says Jesus's followers are going to be above unbelievers.  We are followers of ALL messengers, not just Muhammad and his Sunnah.

We become disbelievers if we believe in a Jesus ibn Mariam different from the Quran.  Allah says we must beleive Jesus is dead, (Since Allah says he will cause jesus to die, then says I caused  (past tense) you to die in peace  (not crucified).  How many muslims out there beleive he isn't dead? I used to be one of them!

 

  1. And We granted abiding for ever (khuld) to no mortal before you (O Muhammad). If you die, will they abide (khalidun)" (21:34).
  2. "They (i.e. the prophets) did not abide for ever (khalidun)" (21:8).

As regards the meaning of the word khulud(translated above as abiding for ever), explains:

"Khulud is that a thing be immune from decay, and that it endures in an unchanging condition. The Arabs call such a thing khulud... i.e., to persist in one condition, not being subject to change" (pp. 153, 154).

I was wrong about hazrat idris AS Allah raised him to a lofty station, no different from isa ibn mariam as, by causing them to die.

 

  1. "The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger; messengers before him had indeed passed away." (5:75)
  2. "And Muhammad is only a messenger — messengers have already passed away before him. If, then, he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?" (3:143)

According to the Holy Quran, Jesus holds no more than the following three positions:

  1. He is a mortal from among mortals;
  2. He is a prophet of God from among the prophets;
  3. He is one of those who is worshipped as god by some people.

The Jews believe him to be an ordinary mortal, while the Christians worship him. The Muslims accept him as one of God’s prophets. The Quran has proved Jesus to be dead with respect to each one of the above three positions.

1. Jesus as an ordinary mortal:

The Quran states:

"We have not made before thee (O Muhammad) any mortal to abide for ever. If you die, will they (the opponents) abide?" (21:34)

This verse shows that the human body is never immune from change, and that it must live and die here in this world. As Jesus too was human, he must be subject to the laws God has established for men. Therefore, under the Quranic law "every soul must taste of death", he has died.

2. Jesus as a prophet:

"And Muhammad is only a messenger —messengers have already passed away before him." (3:143)

This verse proves the death of all previous messengers by the time of its revelation. Jesus was thus dead by that time.

3. Jesus as a supposed Deity:

As regards all those who are taken for gods besides Allah, the Quran tells us:

"Dead (are they), not living. And they know not when they will be raised." (16:21)
Why should Khulud be given for the Mahdi?
If we beleive Jesus is alive as well as a Mahdi, I'm afraid we have fallen into disbelief.. It quite contradicts the message of Allah.  
If a Hadith were to say otherwise, it would be insufficient, the Quran has the burden of proof to uncontradict itself.  Otherwise it cannot be a book from God. @Gaius I. Caesar
Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُبَارَكَةٍ ۚ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنْذِرِينَ

[Shakir 44:3] Surely We revealed it on a blessed night surely We are ever warning--

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

The abovenoted verses clearly prove that the whole Quran was revealed to the Holy Prophet on the night of Qadr, and the gradual revelation refers to the occasions on which he was commanded by Allah to recite them to the people. Refer to the commentary of Baqarah: 2 and Ta Ha: 114. Therefore if any theory, based upon conjecture, is put forward to state that the Holy Prophet was not aware of the full text of the Quran and knew it only as and when any portion was revealed to him, should be rejected.

Yet quran purports Muhammad to be but a man.

Assuming The entire Quran was revealed to Muhammad SAW, then you cannot expect him to know it in all a night, memorized.

The reading of it all continuously alone requires more than 20 hours. which would most surely extend revelation into two nights.  And we know the Quran was revealed by Jibril, one of three modes of Gods communication to man according to Quran... so we cannot assume a magical time warp took place. 

This idea you present creates contradiction in several places.

Everytime a revelation came, Jibril was there to deliver it.  Not  for Muhammad to recite from memory.

“And those who disbelieve say: Why is not the Quran revealed to him all at once? Thus (it is sent down in parts), that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages.” [25:32]. 

***It says revealed to him** Muhammad,  not revealed to the people.*****   IT WAS SENT DOWN IN PARTS*** <----  it would not need to be sent down if it was already down with Muhammad. 

(which contradicts the statement that the  Quran  was with Muhammad SAW before Adam AS was alive)

“And (it is) a Quran which We have divided (into parts), in order that you might recite it to men at intervals. And We have revealed it by stages.” [17:106]. 

** ..."and we revealed it in stages.",  we reveal, through Jibril to Muhammad SAW at every interval. ** Muhammad doesn't reveal, Allah does through Jibril only as proven earlier in my prior massive post.

There can be no contradiction. 

If Allah did reveal it all in one night. Then Muhammad didn't/couldn't retain it all in one night, and thus it required to be revealed in piecemeal. Or We misunderstand Revealing Quran on a holy night, to mean ALL of it as opposed to a portion.

 

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

Yet quran purports Muhammad to be but a man.

Make a new thread & discuss what you understand from the words of Quran "Qul innama ana basharun mithlokum".

I am not discussing it here because of your misunderstanding about the reality of Quran.

10 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

Assuming The entire Quran was revealed to Muhammad SAW, then you cannot expect him to know it in all a night, memorized.

The reading of it all continuously alone requires more than 20 hours. which would most surely extend revelation into two nights.  And we know the Quran was revealed by Jibril, one of three modes of Gods communication to man according to Quran... so we cannot assume a magical time warp took place. 

Before getting into deeper discussions, I would like you to read the tafseer of verse 2:185 by Allama Tabatabai at the following link:

http://www.almizan.org/

10 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

This idea you present creates contradiction in several places.

Everytime a revelation came, Jibril was there to deliver it.  Not  for Muhammad to recite from memory.

Contradiction is created by your mind or the minds of whom you are reading the tafaseer.

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 185:

شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ الَّذِي أُنزِلَ فِيهِ الْقُرْآنُ

The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed, 

(English - Shakir)

Surah Al-Qadr, Verse 1:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

Surely We revealed it on the grand night.
(English - Shakir)

Surah Ad-Dukhan, Verse 3:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنذِرِينَ

Surely We revealed it on a blessed night surely We are ever warning--
(English - Shakir)

What you are trying to produce is contradictions by saying 

11 hours ago, wmehar2 said:

If Allah did reveal it all in one night. Then Muhammad didn't/couldn't retain it all in one night, and thus it required to be revealed in piecemeal. Or We misunderstand Revealing Quran on a holy night, to mean ALL of it as opposed to a portion.

You seems confused on very clear verses. The reality of Quran is just one, it is undivided one book and that has been mentioned in Quran in several places:

Surah Az-Zukhruf, Verse 3:

إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ

Surely We have made it an Arabic Quran that you may understand.

(English - Shakir)

Surah Az-Zukhruf, Verse 4:

وَإِنَّهُ فِي أُمِّ الْكِتَابِ لَدَيْنَا لَعَلِيٌّ حَكِيمٌ

And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom.

(English - Shakir)

That one undivided book is in access to some purified ones:

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 77:

إِنَّهُ لَقُرْآنٌ كَرِيمٌ

Most surely it is an honored Quran,

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 78:

فِي كِتَابٍ مَّكْنُونٍ

In a book that is protected

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 79:

لَّا يَمَسُّهُ إِلَّا الْمُطَهَّرُونَ

None shall touch it save the purified ones.

(English - Shakir)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

Make a new thread & discuss what you understand from the words of Quran "Qul innama ana basharun mithlokum".

I am not discussing it here because of your misunderstanding about the reality of Quran.

Before getting into deeper discussions, I would like you to read the tafseer of verse 2:185 by Allama Tabatabai at the following link:

http://www.almizan.org/

Contradiction is created by your mind or the minds of whom you are reading the tafaseer.

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 185:

شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ الَّذِي أُنزِلَ فِيهِ الْقُرْآنُ

The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed, 

(English - Shakir)

Surah Al-Qadr, Verse 1:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

Surely We revealed it on the grand night.
(English - Shakir)

Surah Ad-Dukhan, Verse 3:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنذِرِينَ

Surely We revealed it on a blessed night surely We are ever warning--
(English - Shakir)

What you are trying to produce is contradictions by saying 

You seems confused on very clear verses. The reality of Quran is just one, it is undivided one book and that has been mentioned in Quran in several places:

Surah Az-Zukhruf, Verse 3:

إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ

Surely We have made it an Arabic Quran that you may understand.

(English - Shakir)

Surah Az-Zukhruf, Verse 4:

وَإِنَّهُ فِي أُمِّ الْكِتَابِ لَدَيْنَا لَعَلِيٌّ حَكِيمٌ

And surely it is in the original of the Book with Us, truly elevated, full of wisdom.

(English - Shakir)

That one undivided book is in access to some purified ones:

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 77:

إِنَّهُ لَقُرْآنٌ كَرِيمٌ

Most surely it is an honored Quran,

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 78:

فِي كِتَابٍ مَّكْنُونٍ

In a book that is protected

Surah Al-Waqia, Verse 79:

لَّا يَمَسُّهُ إِلَّا الْمُطَهَّرُونَ

None shall touch it save the purified ones.

(English - Shakir)

What about 25:32 , 17:106, you didn't really respond to those...?  It seems you're ignoring the contradictions the presented in your argument.

They are clear verses, you're right.  I don't find contradiction in them when read plainly.

But then you say Quran was not revealed in stages.

It either was or wasn't.  Quran says it was revealed in stages.  Rather than reconcile it, you assert it was revealed in one night, and then recited back in stages. 

Quran says it was revealed in stages.  Not recited.

Allah says he communicates the message only by Revelation, through Jibril.

I'm not reading tafsir.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

What about 25:32 , 17:106, you didn't really respond to those...?

The word meaning "to come down" is "nuzul". Its trasitive forms meaning "to bring down" are "inzal" & "tanzeel". The difference between them is "inzal" implies bringing down all at once while "tanzeel" implies bringing down gradually.

Surah Al-Isra, Verse 105:

وَبِالْحَقِّ أَنزَلْنَاهُ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَلَ وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا مُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا

And with truth have We revealed it, and with truth did it come; and We have not sent you but as the giver of good news and as a warner.

(English - Shakir)

Surah Al-Isra, Verse 106:

وَقُرْآنًا فَرَقْنَاهُ لِتَقْرَأَهُ عَلَى النَّاسِ عَلَىٰ مُكْثٍ وَنَزَّلْنَاهُ تَنزِيلًا

And it is a Quran which We have revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We have revealed it, revealing in portions.

(English - Shakir)

Surah Al-Furqan, Verse 32:

وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْلَا نُزِّلَ عَلَيْهِ الْقُرْآنُ جُمْلَةً وَاحِدَةً كَذَٰلِكَ لِنُثَبِّتَ بِهِ فُؤَادَكَ وَرَتَّلْنَاهُ تَرْتِيلًا

And those who disbelieve say: Why has not the Quran been revealed to him all at once? Thus, that We may strengthen your heart by it and We have arranged it well in arranging.

(English - Shakir)

28 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

But then you say Quran was not revealed in stages.

Where did I said it is not revealed in stages? I was from the very beginning, trying to point out the difference between "inzal" &"tanzeel".

Its "inzal" happened in the night of Qadr, lailatil mubarakh. Its tanzeel happened in the period of 23 years.

And the verses 17:106 as well as 25:32 clearly explain why Allah used "tanzeel" (gradual bringing down) i.e., by commanding the Prophet to recite certain verses.

You have no supporting verses for you claim that Prophet have no knowledge of Quran prior to its "tanzeel". And that is where you are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

I'm not reading tafsir.

Let’s look at this form a different angle.

1)Book is sufficient for you.

2)You do not want to read Hadith

3)You do not want to read Tafsir(Scholars Understanding)

If all the above is accurate.

Can you logically, rationally and intelligently explain. In an academic and dispassionate way.

Why should anyone listen to your understanding. Based on your logic, everyone should just read the book. This means you should be reading the book and understanding it for your benefit. As this is clearly a personal relationship between you and the Author of the book. As this religion is a personal religion. Separation of church and state is what your arguments lead to.  

 What are you here, giving your personal understanding, which you clearly reject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

And the verses 17:106 as well as 25:32 clearly explain why Allah used "tanzeel" (gradual bringing down) i.e., by commanding the Prophet to recite certain verses.

After thoroughly researching, I've found your point to be supported most by

29:51

And is it not sufficient for them that We revealed to you the Book which is recited to them? Indeed in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe.

The use of Anzalnaa here in above verse.  I stand corrected, thank you for your insight; I was mistaken.

It seems to make more sense after reevaluating.  (though still am using Quran only here)

And (it is) a Quran which We have divided (into parts), in order that you might recite it to men at intervals. And We have revealed it by stages.” [17:106]. 

Reveal by stages is necessary, its not a contradiction rather it is holding itself accountable to 16:101. Recitation is happening.

And when We exchange a verse in the place of another verse and God knows very well what He is sending down -- they say, 'Thou art a mere forger!' Nay, but the most of them have no knowledge

your point before is also supported best by 4:105.

Indeed, We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth so you may judge between the people by that which Allah has shown you. And do not be for the deceitful an advocate.

 

So I can now get behind Muhammad SAW having knowledge of entire Quran, as of day 1 of revelation by Jibril.  Though it does not contend with my main argument.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

Let’s look at this form a different angle.

1)Book is sufficient for you.

2)You do not want to read Hadith

3)You do not want to read Tafsir(Scholars Understanding)

If all the above is accurate.

Can you logically, rationally and intelligently explain. In an academic and dispassionate way.

Why should anyone listen to your understanding. Based on your logic, everyone should just read the book. This means you should be reading the book and understanding it for your benefit. As this is clearly a personal relationship between you and the Author of the book. As this religion is a personal religion. Separation of church and state is what your arguments lead to.  

 What are you here, giving your personal understanding, which you clearly reject.

I'm attempting to invoke discussion by communicating my view and rationale, not impose my view.  It's a great way to learn and see other ideas.

Read Quran for myself and fully analyze what I get out of it alone (which i have admitted Earlier Im not finished doing).

I need to test it, to make sure its the real deal, no contradiction.  

Tafsir from scholars comes after from  for consideration and reevaluation from myself to see if there's a strong case that I've not seen/understood clearly (or if Its clear the scholar is missing something), which I'm finding left and right, since I started learning Quran from tafsir and Hadith growing up.

So Im also determined to see if Quran alone can hold up.

Hadith can come after, though Hadith is near impossible to decisively conclude. 

There's an order I'm abiding to this method.

If I see what looks to be contradiction, It needs resolution in Allah's message, not Hadith. 

I was able to demonstrate as such so far my arguments and interpretation have not been sufficiently been countered save until @Salsabeel pointed out Anzalnaa vs tanzeel regarding Prophet's knowledge/recitation.

I'm getting something out of this.

However as of yet I'm not seeing too many,  logical play by plays of counterpoints to my argument from Quran, as many have deferred to Hadith. 

Quran claims that in it is no contradiction, Hadiths cannot be the ones that undo it a contradiction should it seemingly exist.

 

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

I'm attempting to invoke discussion by communicating my view and rationale, not impose my view.  It's a great way to learn and see other ideas.

Read Quran for myself and fully analyze what I get out of it alone (which i have admitted Earlier Im not finished doing).

I need to test it, to make sure its the real deal, no contradiction.  

Tafsir from scholars comes after from  for consideration and reevaluation from myself to see if there's a strong case that I've not seen/understood clearly (or if Its clear the scholar is missing something), which I'm finding left and right, since I started learning Quran from tafsir and Hadith growing up.

So Im also determined to see if Quran alone can hold up.

Hadith can come after, though Hadith is near impossible to decisively conclude. 

There's an order I'm abiding to this method.

If I see what looks to be contradiction, It needs resolution in Allah's message, not Hadith. 

I was able to demonstrate as such so far my arguments and interpretation have not been sufficiently been countered save until @Salsabeel pointed out Anzalnaa vs tanzeel regarding Prophet's knowledge/recitation.

I'm getting something out of this.

However as of yet I'm not seeing too many,  logical play by plays of counterpoints to my argument from Quran, as many have deferred to Hadith. 

Quran claims that in it is no contradiction, Hadiths cannot be the ones that undo it a contradiction should it seemingly exist.

 

Goodluck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2017 at 9:08 AM, S.M.H.A. said:

Quran 3:7

"...clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical..."

Which  ones are you presenting? 

Read above post.

From what is clear. in 3:7

Muhammad's SAW path is Allah's (Qur'an's path) 

6:156 -from same surah- 

And this [Qur'an] is a Book We have revealed [which is] blessed, so follow it and fear Allah that you may receive mercy.

That much is clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2017 at 1:17 PM, S.M.H.A. said:

Let’s look at this form a different angle.

1)Book is sufficient for you.

2)You do not want to read Hadith

3)You do not want to read Tafsir(Scholars Understanding)

If all the above is accurate.

Can you logically, rationally and intelligently explain. In an academic and dispassionate way.

Why should anyone listen to your understanding. Based on your logic, everyone should just read the book. This means you should be reading the book and understanding it for your benefit. As this is clearly a personal relationship between you and the Author of the book. As this religion is a personal religion. Separation of church and state is what your arguments lead to.  

 What are you here, giving your personal understanding, which you clearly reject.

If you  like to see more the link is given below:

wasalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Gen. Soleimani congratulates Ayatollah Khamenei, Muslim world for end of ISIS https://en.isna.ir/news/96083017322/ Tehran (ISNA) - In a letter to the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei Khamenei, the Commander of IRGC Quds Force Major General Qassem Soleimani announced the end of ISIS's domination over Islamic lands.   Following the historic victory of Iraq and Syria's resistance movement over the sedition of Takfiri terrorism and the end of ISIS's domination, which manifested by lowering the flag of this American-Zionist group at Abu Kumal--the last key area in the hands of ISIS--General Soleimani issued an important message to Ayatollah Khamenei. The following is the full text of Major-General Soleimani's message to Ayatollah Khamenei: In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful "Indeed, we have opened for you (Prophet Muhammad) a clear opening." Quran: 1, 48) To the dear and brave Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei: Salamun Alaikum, Six years ago, a dangerous plot like the ones at the time of Amir al-Mu'minin (as), which prevented the Muslims from truly understanding the Pure Islam of Muhammad (pbuh), this time, mixed with the poison of Zionism and arrogance, covered the Islamic world like a devastating storm. This devastating and poisonous sedition was created by the enemies of Islam with an aim of initiating widespread war within the Islamic world and a fight among Muslims. The evil movement, under the name of the "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant," managed, in the early months, to deceive tens of thousands of Muslim youth from both countries, causing a very dangerous crisis for the influential and crucial countries of the Islamic world: "Iraq" and "Syria." They occupied hundreds of thousands of square kilometers of land from these countries along with thousands of villages, towns, and provincial centers; they destroyed thousands of factories, manufactures, and major infrastructure of these countries--including roads, bridges, refineries, wells, gas and oil lines, and power plants; they destroyed or burned important cities with valuable historical monuments and national civilizations by bombing them. Although it is not possible to calculate all the damage caused yet, the preliminary investigation estimates damages to be around $500 billion. In this event, there were extremely horrendous crimes that could not be shown, which included the following: decapitation of children, skinning men alive before their families, taking young girls and women hostage and raping them, burning people alive and group massacres of hundreds of young people. People of these countries, astounded by this poisonous storm, became part of them or victims of the takfiri criminals, and millions of other Muslims left their homes and were displaced throughout other cities and countries. In this dark sedition, thousands of mosques and sacred centers of Muslims were destroyed or ruined, and sometimes a mosque along with the Imam and all the people in it were blown up. More than 6,000 young people, deceived in the name of defending Islam, blew themselves up by way of suicide bombings, using explosive vehicles at city squares, mosques, schools, even hospitals and public places of Muslims; as a result of these criminal acts, tens of thousands of innocent men, women, and children were martyred. To be continued https://en.isna.ir/news/96083017322/Gen-Soleimani-congratulates-Ayatollah-Khamenei-Muslim-world
    • Yes, that's what Khoei says. 
    • There are many good people in this world, i have suffered same what you have. Its not a big deal i think most of the people have gone through this. you need to try to ignore this stuff and continue doing gud.  There is a saying of imam ali a.s "The best revenge is to improve yourself", there are many other sayings by imam ali a.s you can google them, this will inspire you to do gud to others. Our ahlulbaith a.s has always done gud to everyone and never cared about others. YA Ali madad.
    • If sense perception is combined with either reasoning or intellectual intuition (which you can think of as the fitrah for now) then yes it can lead to such realizations. But sense perception alone - devoid of these higher faculties, is the definition of dunyawi. It is the level at which the mushrikeen see reality, so obviously it is not sufficient to bring belief. Belief requires sense perception along with thought and/or the awakening of the higher intellect.
    • I Know, and I agree mostly with your sentiments. I also agree that a muslimah should not think like that with regards to a proper husband. Also I am single and not married yet. So I cannot give advice in that department. But I like to think I am fairly observant of social phenomena. And Also I think that a way that a muslimah can help prevent getting married to a guy like that is by not having shallow standards of a marital partner. I remember in this one podcast a muslim psychologist said that the minimum time a guy and girl should court each other is 6 months. And that during those six months it is important to find out as much as you can about the guy or girl. And to above all else not rush into a marriage. And that part of finding out all details of the potential partner is by asking the right questions. And these questions should be defined by either muslim marital counselors, or by couples who truly have a good relationship.   And my own input is that if we are going to be honest most of our parents had terrible marital relationships, and thus as our generation grows up we (both genders) develop shallow and unrealistic spousal expectations. And when we carry these into our marriages, the marriage becomes like a bag of popcorn. It is really good for a while to a brief time, but once the "pop" happens is when the marital bubble bursts and now the main issue becomes cohabitation instead of trying to enact some Fabio novella with your spouse.    I think what any muslim woman here can admit is that for every women who had a bad first marital partner there were "signs" of him being not so great even before the marriage. But naivety can sometimes blind muslim women in not being attentive of these things. And even if these signs were not present before the marriage, a thorough vetting process and prolonging courtship can help to sort these things out before the marriage, if even a marriage should occur.   Anyone would be surprised that a thorough vetting process and asking the right questions during a prolonged courtship can filter out partners who could potentially do haram things like physical abuse, etc. Since for most men and women, they don't randomly start abusing or that men just go ape on their wives for no reason, but that trained behavioral health specialists or generally mentally acute people can tell of "signs" that certain men and women are more prone to do abuse if given the right situations depending on certain personal factors of an individual. Muslims need to start utilizing these resources better so as to filter out guys and even girls who do these things. 
×