Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
aaaz1618

Masjid Al-Aqsa

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I watched a lecture and in it it was stated that early scholars differed in where the furthest masjid was, that the furthest place of prostration could be in heaven. I then read this and wondered if anyone could shed some light?

 

Ali bin Ibrahim al-Qummi (May Allah be pleased with him), relying on the Isnad of Isma’il al-Ju’fi, narrated: “I was sitting in the Sacred Mosque in Makkah, when Abu Jafar – Imam Muhammad al-Baqir peace be upon him- took a glance at the heaven and another glance at the Kaa’bah. 

“He then recited the verse: “Glorified (and Exalted) is He (Allah) who took His slave (Muhammad, peace be upon him and his pure family) for a journey by night from Al-Masjid-al-Harâm (the Sacred Mosque in Makkah) to the farthest mosque’. He repeated this three times. 

“He then turned towards me and said, ‘What do the people of Iraq say about this verse, O Iraqi?’ I said: ‘They say that he (the Prophet peace be upon him and his pure family) was taken for a night journey from the Sacred Mosque to Jerusalem.’ He then said: ‘It is not as they say, rather he was taken for a night journey from here to here’, pointing to the heaven. And he added, ‘What is in between them is sacred.’” (Tafsir al-Qummi v2, p 243) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more inclined to believe it was a mosque in the vicinity of Mecca or Medina. One thing is obvious however, it's definitely not in Jerusalem as there was no such Masjid In Jerusalem at that time. 

I'm not saying it wasn't a heavenly Masjid, just that the issue of Isra has been greatly exaggerated and thus it's difficult to assess anything more than what the Qur'an says.

 

This could have been merely a dream. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows best.

Edited by Fink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a thread on this few years back with interesting comments from brother @Qa'im

Since the post I was of the opinion that it was the celestial masjid in the heavens, that the Prophet went directly upwards from Makkah, plus the fact that the mosque did not exist until the Umayyad period, and the Umayyads for a time were cut off from the Haramain under the rebel leader Abdallah ibn Zubeyr in Makkah, thus needed some form of Islamic legitimacy.

However.

Recently I emailed Sayid Muhammad Rizvi as well as having spoken to my local sheikh. Both informed me that the mainstream, stronger opinion is that Masjid al Aqsa is indeed Bait al Maqdis in al Quds.

Also in Allama Tabatabaei's tafsir, al Mizan he states Al Aqsa is Bait al Maqdis in Jerusalem.

Furthermore, al Israa means journey by night, and is clearly an event more than just an acsension (mi'raaj) to the heavens as in the following post

Alhamdulillah I was fortunate to visit and pray at the masjid in 2014. Although back then I had my doubts at the time ad to its status, thus didn't get to fully appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

Couple pics I took. One the Dome of the Rock at Fajr time.

Another inside Al Aqsa itself, attempting to be artsy by doing a shallow depth of field shot of Surah al Israa's opening verse mentioning Al Aqsa whilst being in Al Aqsa.

20190731-005418.jpg

20190731_005352.jpg

Nice you got to visit but that's not Masjid Al-Aqsa being referred to in the Qur'an :)

Edited by Fink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

 

Cheers. Are you of the opinion that Al Aqsa is Bait al Ma'moor?

Salam,

I'm not really sure. I don’t think we know conclusively, I did open a topic similar to this about Solomon's temple and if the Qur'an prophesies it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fink said:

Salam,

I'm not really sure. I don’t think we know conclusively, I did open a topic similar to this about Solomon's temple and if the Qur'an prophesies it. 

Wsalam. Saw your earlier comment after posting.

Whilst there was certainly no mosque there as the place was a dumping ground after the Romans destroyed the temple and left neglected thereafter, Masjid literally means "place of prostration", so in that sense it still could be Jerusalem. Granted Jerusalem is not mentioned by name.

There are compelling historical arguments that it was not in Jerusalem. However these narrations are weak and not the mainstream opinion of Shia ulema. 

Umayyad caliph Abdel Malik built what we know as Dome of the Rock and Aqsa. In fact Dome of the Rock is the earliest intact example of Islamic architecture (minus the golden dome, before that it was lead). Al Aqsa had been destroyed twice by earthquakes and rebuilt by Abassid and Fatimids.

The Ka'abaa after all had been destroyed (not completely) during the Umayyad seige and attack on Zubeyrid ruled Makkah and thus later rebuilt.

Edited by Propaganda_of_the_Deed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fink said:

Salam,

I'm not really sure. I don’t think we know conclusively, I did open a topic similar to this about Solomon's temple and if the Qur'an prophesies it. 

If Masjid Al-Aqsa isn't in Jerusalem, would that suggest the masjid discussed in your topic is somewhere else? If one was to go by this idea of Masjid Al-Aqsa being celestial or somewhere else on Earth other than Jerusalem, could the masjid conquered be Masjid Haram?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, aaaz1618 said:

If Masjid Al-Aqsa isn't in Jerusalem, would that suggest the masjid discussed in your topic is somewhere else? If one was to go by this idea of Masjid Al-Aqsa being celestial or somewhere else on Earth other than Jerusalem, could the masjid conquered be Masjid Haram?

So as it relates to the entrance of the unknown Masjid in surah Israh, no it wouldn't be Masjid Alharam for a few reasons. If that is what you're asking?

The only viable candidate in my opinion is some sort of Jewish temple that will be controlled by the Jewish people. 

The other issue which I think confuses some people is the Masjid Al-Aqsa mentioned in the first part of Surah Israh does not necessarily have anything to do with the Jewish Masjid that is referred to a few verses later. There's nothing to suggest otherwise from the Surah aside from the two topics being in the same Surah. 

Edited by Fink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot that I also came across this pdf document and posted it on my old thread on this topic. It is from a Shia site stating why Al Aqsa is Bait al Maqdis but in the heavens

https://hubeali.com/articles/BaytAlMamour_MasjidAlAqsa_BaytAlMaqdis.pdf

Edited by Propaganda_of_the_Deed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However below is the email reply I got from Sayid Muhammad Rizvi.

Interesting to note, there was not just one acsension but several.

I was also referring to the same narration as @aaaz1618 stated, in my initial email to him as it goes.

Quote

Salaamun 'alaykum

 
Thank you for your email, and also your question.
 
The hadith that you referred to, if that is the same that I looked into Bihar of al-Majlisi, it only talks about the journey to the heavens but does not negate the first part of the journey. There are many ahadith that talk about the first stage of the Prophet's mi'raj to al-Masjid al-Aqsa. Remember that it is not the same as the mosque built during the Umayyid time. It refers to the Jewish Temple which, at that time was in ruins. But remember that this journey and what the Prophet saw and those whom he met -- this was all miraculous and so the Temple being in ruins has no bearing on that event.
 
Moreover, the 27th of Rajab is celebration of one incident but in our ahadith from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt ((عليه السلام).), there are indications that the mi'raj took place more the once; surely twice. The first stage of the journey to Jerusalem refers to the firstincident; it is possible that the other occurrences of mi'raj would have been directly to the heavens. That will resolve the apparent contradiction between the ahadith.
 
Was-salaam,
Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi

 

Edited by Propaganda_of_the_Deed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Secrets About the Dome Of Time , Imam Hussein

Revealing a top secret about the Prophet Mohammed ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))

the secret of ahlolbait that no one should mention

The Kingdom of devil

سر القدس وفلسطين في إغتيال رسول الله (ص)

Secret of Quds and Palestine in Assassination of Rasul Allah (pbu) (in Arabic only) maybe @Ibn al-Hussain can explains it better

 expl

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

With all respect but isn't this just an attempt to widen the gap between Muslims even more?

Even Imam Khameini considers al-Aqsa to be the former Qibla and a commonality of both Sunni and Shia.

The next step is that the zionists will tell us that al-Aqsa is no Islamic holy place at all and that they should build their Temple without any resistance from us.

This same pro-Zionist trend emerged in Saudi Arabia as well. In diffirent ways and forms maybe but the essence is the same.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Faruk said:

Salam,

With all respect but isn't this just an attempt to widen the gap between Muslims even more?

Even Imam Khameini considers al-Aqsa to be the former Qibla and a commonality of both Sunni and Shia.

The next step is that the zionists will tell us that al-Aqsa is no Islamic holy place at all and that they should build their Temple without any resistance from us.

This same pro-Zionist trend emerged in Saudi Arabia as well. In diffirent ways and forms maybe but the essence is the same.

I get the sentiment, I do, but weren't people debating about the location hundreds, if not a thousand, years before Zionism and Saudi Arabia even existed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, aaaz1618 said:

I get the sentiment, I do, but weren't people debating about the location hundreds, if not a thousand, years before Zionism and Saudi Arabia even existed?

There were ofcourse diffirences between the umawi jamaat and those who stayed loyal to Imam Hussein (عليه السلام).

But I also believe there were willing and conscious attemps started thousands of years ago to widen the gap even more and to shape an identity to distinguish itself from the rest.

These attempts are used today at the advantage of zionism and imperialism.

Another thing is that we are not under the obligation to repeat that what our predecessors did in the past.

Traditionalism is good as long it serves us. If it has only sectarian motives then we should get rid of it.

Keep it pure, keep it plain, keep it sincere.

 

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...