Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

My Observations And Advice

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

(salam) brother MysticKnight,

I can see that you now attack the Qur'aan with fervour. You used to defend this Holy Book once. Something must have really gone wrong somewhere. I do not ask you to accept my opinion or change your opinion. But I see a terrible flaw in your methodology against the Qur'aan. You judge the Qur'aan through your personal understandings. This is the problem, brother.

The Qur'aan itself has stated:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِنْ عِنْدِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ {7}

[shakir 3:7] He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. 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.

There are allegorical verses in the Qur'aan. Allaah is the Knower of the "interpretation" of the Quraa'n as a whole. But, Allaah has taught His Prophet (pbuh) these interpretation of the whole Qur'aan:

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

[al-hilali and khan 16:44] And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) the Dhikr [reminder and the advice (i.e. the Qur'an)], that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.

It also states:

وَمَا أَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ إِلَّا لِتُبَيِّنَ لَهُمُ الَّذِي اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ ۙ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةً لِّقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ

[al-hilali and khan 16:64] And We have not sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم), except that you may explain clearly unto them those things in which they differ, and (as) a guidance and a mercy for a folk who believe.

So, the Qur'aan, by its own words, has interpretation, and its designated interpreter: the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

You may not agree with my assessments above. But what matters MOST is that the Qur'aan claims itself to contain allegorical verses, and that its own true meanings are known only through the Prophet (pbuh).

You cannot deny these facts. You may disagree with the Quraan. But this is what it has said about itself. The correct methodology would have been for you to completely AVOID using your own personal interpretations to judge the Qur'aan. That is an unfair method.

Aboo Ya'laa in his Musnad, vol. 9, p. 80, # 5149 records that the Prophet (pbuh) said:

إن القرآن نزل على سبعة أحرف لكل آية منها ظهر وبطن

Verily, the Quraa'n was revealed upon seven ahruf. For every verse in it is an apparent meaning and a hidden meaning.

Husayn Saleem Asad, the annotator, says:

إسناده صحيح

Its chain is Saheeh.

In all honesty, is it fair to just take random verses of such a book, attribute interpretations to them based upon personal wishes, and then condemn it for that?

This is just my little observation. And thanks for the understanding.

Edited by Saved
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

as iv stated before, some one without great knowledge of hadith, teachings of our imams, and indepth knowledge of history of arabia at the time, cannot simply take out verses and try and dictate that there are contradictions in the quran, some verses have 70 levels of interpretation, our great scholars of faith, such as the iyatullahs, spend their life dedicated to islam, and still do not understand fully the message of the holy quran, when imam mahdi as, returns they will teach us the whole meaning, i pray for everyone to come to the right of islam, as Allah sbwts mercy has no limits, and Allah sbwt will guide who is willing to be guided

(bismillah)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just my little observation. And thanks for the understanding.

If hypothetically, the Quran were written by a being who wasnt divine, but rather was a normal person, being assisted by other normal people, if hypothetically, this were true, then mystic knights methods would be reasonable, would they not?

If not with use of the opinions of modern people, then how else could we judge the Quran's text, itself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts Saved. I understand where your coming from.

Have you read the 28 Issues document?

There is some points to make.

Language is to communicate something. If we were going to take an interpretation of an infallible, that too would take understanding of language.

The Quran obviously has some words that don't have alternate meanings, and if they have alternate meanings, it is possible to investigate all possible meanings by the rational.

That said, if a verse possible meanings or only possible meaning has a logical error, then we can deduce their is a problem.

Assume Quran is not from God, and that their are errors in the Quran...how will humans find those errors?

You can basically at the same standard to any book, that you don't know what the author meant, so you can't find errors.

By this standard as well, humans might as well not make any conclusions from Quran. But obviously anyone reading Quran knows you can deduce facts from it. If what you can deduce from it has logical errors or contradictions, then we can assume the Quran is not from God.

If hypothetically, the Quran were written by a being who wasnt divine, but rather was a normal person, being assisted by other normal people, if hypothetically, this were true, then mystic knights methods would be reasonable, would they not?

There is also the point that Quran makes, that if was from other then God, they would find it many contradictions. But if a book claiming to be from God would mean you can't find contradictions because it's interpretations are not all known, then by that standard they would not find contradictions.

Basically, if the book was not true, and was full of logical errors, how would you go about finding them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts Saved. I understand where your coming from.

Have you read the 28 Issues document?

There is some points to make.

Language is to communicate something. If we were going to take an interpretation of an infallible, that too would take understanding of language.

The Quran obviously has some words that don't have alternate meanings, and if they have alternate meanings, it is possible to investigate all possible meanings by the rational.

That said, if a verse possible meanings or only possible meaning has a logical error, then we can deduce their is a problem.

Assume Quran is not from God, and that their are errors in the Quran...how will humans find those errors?

You can basically at the same standard to any book, that you don't know what the author meant, so you can't find errors.

By this standard as well, humans might as well not make any conclusions from Quran. But obviously anyone reading Quran knows you can deduce facts from it. If what you can deduce from it has logical errors or contradictions, then we can assume the Quran is not from God.

You are not getting my point, brother. I am NOT debating you on the truth or otherwise of your claims (of course, you already know my position). I am questioning the propriety of your methodology. If any other book has said, "I have an interpreter", then the fairest method would be to understand it through such! For instance, laws usually have their interpretation parts. In other cases, a special law is promulgated to interpret the other laws. I am a lawyer. So, I know what I am saying. In courts, lawyers and judges are not allowed to go beyond the interpretations offered by the interpretation laws. A good example is this Interpretation Act (I think from Singapore) which starts thus:

An Act to define certain terms and expressions used in written law and to make provision for the construction, interpretation and publication of written law and for matters connected therewith.

http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?&actno=reved-1&date=latest&method=part

A lawyer would be wasting time to try to interpret any legal document covered by the above Act (however clear its words may be), without relying upon the Act.

This is my point.

Your methodology is very wrong brother. The origin of the Qur'aan does not matter here. What matters is, has it provided for its own interpreter(s)? If it has (like in all other documents that have done the same), the correct method would be to interpret it ONLY through its interpreter(s).

Edited by Saved
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the point that Quran makes, that if was from other then God, they would find it many contradictions. But if a book claiming to be from God would mean you can't find contradictions because it's interpretations are not all known, then by that standard they would not find contradictions.

Basically, if the book was not true, and was full of logical errors, how would you go about finding them?

Yes yes, the question still stands for "saved". Surely were not to depend upon muslim scholars alone, otherwise by that rule we may as well be believing in christian scholar words as well. Or scientist perspectives or buddhist perspectives etc.

What other methods can be used to determine flaws within the Quran if we are not to find them ourselves?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also add it would mean a person should never read Quran without reading interpretations for all the verses by infallibles. Was this done during time of the Messenger...was as an elaborate tafsir given to all of Quran to everyone hearing the Surahs? Or were the verses of the Surahs allowed to speak for themselves.

Anyways, as I said, the biggest problem would be that you can't really conclusively deduce anything from the Quran if this argument is sound.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand your point, I looked at the points I made, and I think it sufficiently addresses the argument. Besides that, we don't have ahadith on most of the Quran anyways, would it make most of Quran useless?

Actually, that red part is inaccurate. Have you checked our Tafseer books and hadeeth books dealing with the verses?

Moreover, your points do NOT address my observation AT ALL. Your observations are based upon your personal understanding - contrary to what the Qur'aan itself demands.

You need to start quoting authentic hadeeths now, to back up your views on the verses.

I would also add it would mean a person should never read Quran without reading interpretations for all the verses by infallibles. Was this done during time of the Messenger...was as an elaborate tafsir given to all of Quran to everyone hearing the Surahs? Or were the verses of the Surahs allowed to speak for themselves. Anyways, as I said, the biggest problem would be that you can't really conclusively deduce anything from the Quran if this argument is sound.

The answer to this is already given above (and now too):

وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

[al-hilali and khan 16:44] And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) the Dhikr [reminder and the advice (i.e. the Qur'an)], that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point, I looked at the points I made, and I think it sufficiently addresses the argument. Besides that, we don't have ahadith on most of the Quran anyways, would it make most of Quran useless?

And from where have you reached that conclusion? Fact is we do have a huge amount of hadiths, volumes full, that give tafsir of ayat along with classical tafasir of the giants of our ta'ifa. Your problem now and in the past has been that you've consistently preferred to wing it on your own and ignore them. Case in point was the verse about the treasuries of the heavens that you kept insisting was talking about wahdat al-wujud when I showed you an authoritative tafsir clearly stating it was talking about water from the sky (not to mention the context of the verse).

Link to post
Share on other sites

And from where have you reached that conclusion? Fact is we do have a huge amount of hadiths, volumes full, that give tafsir of ayat along with classical tafasir of the giants of our ta'ifa. Your problem now and in the past has been that you've consistently preferred to wing it on your own and ignore them. Case in point was the verse about the treasuries of the heavens that you kept insisting was talking about wahdat al-wujud when I showed you an authoritative tafsir clearly stating it was talking about water from the sky (not to mention the context of the verse).

http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2160070

And did you look at my reply and reasoning, what about the "Sun", how is it's "khuzan" water? ALL things including the stars have water as their khuzaan? You didn't even post a hadith, you posted an interpretation, and I showed why it didn't make sense.

Honestly if Quran was true, then the interpretation I had of it being the light and divine glory, is really what made sense...

Edited by MysticKnight
Link to post
Share on other sites
i guess nobody has an answer, either that or its being ignored. does anyone know what other methods can be used to determine flaws within the Quran if we are not to find them ourselves?

If you are really serious about getting the "flaws" in the Qur'aan, then you still need to apply the correct meanings of the verses first - their outer meanings and their inner meanings. The Qur'aan has its interpreter - the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). When you tell us the real meaning of each verse according to its interpreter, then go ahead to show us the "faults".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

If you are really serious about getting the "flaws" in the Qur'aan, then you still need to apply the correct meanings of the verses first - their outer meanings and their inner meanings. The Qur'aan has its interpreter - the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). When you tell us the real meaning of each verse according to its interpreter, then go ahead to show us the "faults".

The problem with that though is that youre using a fallible source to explain an infallible source, its like the 3 legged race at school; two people tied together but one is weak, if they run together the weak one automatically weakens the strong one because they are not equal. So, although the Quran mentions the sunna for guidence, it also has to be able to stand alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can understand each other, then we can understand what the author of Quran is saying, that is not to say some verses will not be ambiguous but even in those verses, we can derive possible meanings and know which possible meanings there are to pick from. If you look at the 28 issues, it wasn't matter of picking one interpretation while there are other possible. I think if you want to refute the 28 issues I brought up from Quran, you should do so on individual basis. Not blanket them all as all possible misinterpretations. Language conveys meanings to be understood, the same is true of the author of Quran, if we go the root of not trusting what we think something says, then why do you trust what a hadith says about a verse, don't you need tafsir of what the hadith means, and don't you then need tafsir of what that tafsir means..and so on and so forth.

Also you would not be able to conclusively conclude anything from Quran as ahadith are not sure knowledge, you don't know if they are true...also the Quran itself says it's clear book, if most of it is ambiguous and need of interpretation, it goes against itself calling it itself a clear book.

Edited by MysticKnight
Link to post
Share on other sites
If we can understand each other, then we can understand what the author of Quran is saying, that is not to say some verses will not be ambiguous but even in those verses, we can derive possible meanings and know which possible meanings there are to pick from. If you look at the 28 issues, it wasn't matter of picking one interpretation while there are other possible. I think if you want to refute the 28 issues I brought up from Quran, you should do so on individual basis. Not blanket them all as all possible misinterpretations. Language conveys meanings to be understood, the same is true of the author of Quran, if we go the root of not trusting what we think something says, then why do you trust what a hadith says about a verse, don't you need tafsir of what the hadith means, and don't you then need tafsir of what that tafsir means..and so on and so forth. Also you would not be able to conclusively conclude anything from Quran as ahadith are not sure knowledge, you don't know if they are true...also the Quran itself says it's clear book, if most of it is ambiguous and need of interpretation, it goes against itself calling it itself a clear book.

This is perhaps my last post on SC. So, I may not reply to further queries from you brother. But then, my argument remain brother. The Qur'aan has interpretation, ALL its verses. ALL the verses have both outer and inner meanings. You cannot possibly know the true meaning of each verse except through its interpreter(s). You are NOT one of its designated interpreters. So, your understanding of these verses is a distortion of them. Basing your criticisms upon these distortions disturb the mind a lot. It is an unfair method. This is just my point.

I expect that you bring valid hadeeths to back your understanding of the verses. If you do not, then you are making no point!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are really serious about getting the "flaws" in the Qur'aan, then you still need to apply the correct meanings of the verses first - their outer meanings and their inner meanings. The Qur'aan has its interpreter - the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). When you tell us the real meaning of each verse according to its interpreter, then go ahead to show us the "faults".

are you insinuating that, without the prophet Muhammad with us here and now, we can never truly know if the Quran is truth or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

are you insinuating that, without the prophet Muhammad with us here and now, we can never truly know if the Quran is truth or not?

i think its more along the lines of never knowing the true interpretation and the FULL message of the quran, not its authenticity

(bismillah)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think its more along the lines of never knowing the true interpretation and the FULL message of the quran, not its authenticity

(bismillah)

The purpose of the original question was, to find out if there is a way to point out flaws in the Quran. My question was about authenticity, not necessarily about its interpretation.

Saved is saying that we cannot properly interpret the Quran and therefore cannot properly judge it, so essentially this person is saying that we need the prophet in order to determine authenticity in the Quran, which is a flawed in and of itself.

Im waiting to see if saved wants to answer my question. Is there any way that we ourselves can determine if there are flaws or not in the Quran? Or are we dependent upon the Prophet?

Concepts and dogmas that are accepted, if they are not disprovable, and they are subjectively accepted, that is failed logic in the purest sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The purpose of the original question was, to find out if there is a way to point out flaws in the Quran. My question was about authenticity, not necessarily about its interpretation.

Saved is saying that we cannot properly interpret the Quran and therefore cannot properly judge it, so essentially this person is saying that we need the prophet in order to determine authenticity in the Quran, which is a flawed in and of itself.

Im waiting to see if saved wants to answer my question. Is there any way that we ourselves can determine if there are flaws or not in the Quran? Or are we dependent upon the Prophet?

Concepts and dogmas that are accepted, if they are not disprovable, and they are subjectively accepted, that is failed logic in the purest sense.

but once again, that is what we are saying, we have been told it has no contradiction, we know their are many levels and depth of interpretation in some verses, that is the why it takes years and years to just simply understand its initial meaning and interpretation, but what we are saying you cannot find a flaw that is not there, the only reason you see that "flaw" is because you have not studied in depth of that verse, and do not have enough knowledge on hadith, and the lives and sayings of the imams and prophets to begin to understand the whole meaning of the verse. and once again we are not being asked to judge it, and no not singly the prophet is needed, that is one of the roles of our 12 imam as, to reveal the whole interpretation of the quran.

(bismillah)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...