QM Forum
The Quran => General Discussions => Topic started by: adnan11_in on January 16, 2016, 08:20:35 PM
-
I was just reading Quran to see, what it talks about water ?
And I came to know, Water was Created before Big Bang (11:7)
In fact, Water is the first Product after Pen (the program and documentation of creation plan)
And I analyzed form other verses, Allah SWT is so supreme energy, temper and Power that Nothing can exist in his direct presence.
So Allah SWT first created Water, as a filter, barrier and a shield from himself, that Big Bang can take place in a stable atmosphere and temperature. (11:7)
Low temperature and low energy state, than that of Allah's world and Throne.
And the Products of Big Bang was Stars made of exploding elements and planets made of Lava and sterile rocks,
But, they was at different temperatures as sun and earth (lava n Rocks).
And at the temperature of Big Bang, water cannot be produced or stable.
And that temperature produces just sterile lava, burning and exploding elements and rocks.(41:39)
And among His Signs in this: you see the earth barren and desolate; (2.5 Billion years ago)
but when We send down rain to it,(450 million years ago as icy Meteorites and asteroids)
it is stirred to life (single cell and multi-cell life 400 million year ago) and yields increase (multi cellular, bisexual live, 100 million years ago).
Truly, He Who gives life to the (dead) earth, can surely give life, to (men) who are dead.
For He has power over all things. (41:39)
Then, water was added forcefully, to bring down temperature and produce organic molecules and life.
And form this organic molecules, The Microbes, The animal and The plant life was produced.(2:27- 29:20)
Then form the death and decay of this Microbes, Animals and Plants, "Teen, Slsaal, Hama, Labiz" or decaying stinking earth was made, and form this earth Adam AS was made.15:26 -23:12 - 2:29
This Gives room to Theory of Evolution and Existence of Dinosaurs world, as Preparation measures for "Teen, Slsaal, Hama, Labiz" and then Placing of Adam AS on perfected Earth.(2:29)
And the Theory of evolution and Dinosaurs World was exterminated after they perform their purpose.
And where ever Quran talks about water and rain, it is not the water cycle or clouds and rain, But water form shield of Universe, from Barrier of Allah SWT, as Icy meteorites and asteroids showers and bombardments on just planet earth.
This is my Analysis and Allah knows the Best
-
I was just reading Quran to see, what it talks about water ?
And I came to know, Water was Created before Big Bang (11:7)
In fact, Water is the first Product after Pen (the program and documentation of creation plan)
And I analyzed form other verses, Allah SWT is so supreme energy, temper and Power that Nothing can exist in his direct presence.
So Allah SWT first created Water, as a filter, barrier and a shield from himself, that Big Bang can take place in a stable atmosphere and temperature. (11:7)
Low temperature and low energy state, than that of Allah's world and Throne.
And the Products of Big Bang was Stars made of exploding elements and planets made of Lava and sterile rocks,
But, they was at different temperatures as sun and earth (lava n Rocks).
And at the temperature of Big Bang, water cannot be produced or stable.
And that temperature produces just sterile lava, burning and exploding elements and rocks.(41:39)
And among His Signs in this: you see the earth barren and desolate; (2.5 Billion years ago)
but when We send down rain to it,(450 million years ago as icy Meteorites and asteroids)
it is stirred to life (single cell and multi-cell life 400 million year ago) and yields increase (multi cellular, bisexual live, 100 million years ago).
Truly, He Who gives life to the (dead) earth, can surely give life, to (men) who are dead.
For He has power over all things. (41:39)
Then, water was added forcefully, to bring down temperature and produce organic molecules and life.
And form this organic molecules, The Microbes, The animal and The plant life was produced.(2:27- 29:20)
Then form the death and decay of this Microbes, Animals and Plants, "Teen, Slsaal, Hama, Labiz" or decaying stinking earth was made, and form this earth Adam AS was made.15:26 -23:12 - 2:29
This Gives room to Theory of Evolution and Existence of Dinosaurs world, as Preparation measures for "Teen, Slsaal, Hama, Labiz" and then Placing of Adam AS on perfected Earth.(2:29)
And the Theory of evolution and Dinosaurs World was exterminated after they perform their purpose.
And where ever Quran talks about water and rain, it is not the water cycle or clouds and rain, But water form shield of Universe, from Barrier of Allah SWT, as Icy meteorites and asteroids showers and bombardments on just planet earth.
This is my Analysis and Allah knows the Best
Quran doesn't support Big Bang Theory or Theory of Evolution. The water and earth (without form) were present before God created the heavens and earth. There is no reliable evidence to say that the earth is billions of years old. Best to wait until there is credible evidence - same goes for Theory of Evolution.
Go to any place where it is barren and desolate today and you will observe life springing into being after rainfall. I accept some will say that the land contains seed but technically seeds are dead. It is God who makes them split and grow. This is a miracle that can be observed clearly again and again. It's not a natural phenomena.
-
Salaam samson,
You said:
Quran doesn't support Big Bang Theory or Theory of Evolution
With regards to the theory of evolution the following article, in my opinion, makes a good argument for it from a Quran perspective:
THEORY OF EVOLUTION AND THE QURAN
http://quransmessage.com/articles/evolution%20FM3.htm
With that said, I would like to ask why you (and hicham9) insist on throwing-out the window ever (science related) issue which the Quran either fails to speak on (or is silent on)? Bear in mind that the Quran, though it imparts creative signs of God from human creativity to cosmic space (etc), is not a science book; the Quran was not meant to touch on every issue under the sun. The purpose of the Quran, I believe, is to provide us spiritual guidance.
There are many issues which the Quran is silent on. But this silence neither means that the Quran is incomplete nor that those issue are non-existent. Consider for example the existence of dinosaurs. The Quran is silent on whether they existed or not; but this silence should not be interpreted as absence. In other words, just because the Quran is silent on the existence dinosaurs should not, therefore, be interpreted as dinosaurs having never existed.
So, with respect to issues such as the big bang theory, the existence of dinosaurs, the age of the earth, etc some of them we may find support for in the Quran and others the Quran is silent on. But in any case, the Quran admonishes the believers to to seek knowledge and learn about God's creations in the heavens and the earth; and that is what we must done. We should not dismiss an issue simply because the Quran is silent on it.
You also said:
There is no reliable evidence to say that the earth is billions of years old.
It depends on what you mean by reliable evidence? I can cite you ample scientific evidence which supports the earth being billions of years old, as well as evidence to support the big bang theory, the existence of dinosaurs,etc.
Again, on the age of the earth I would like to cite you the following quote (accompanied by and illustration) from one of Joseph Islams article:
"It is to be appreciated that out of a total of 6 periods (which could be any number of large epochs), it took four of them to create the Earth's contents. This clearly does not indicate an instantaneous creation.
"And He placed therein (Earth), mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings therein (on the Earth), and measured therein its sustenance in four periods (Arabic: ayyamin), in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance)" [Quran 41:10].
"Please note in the above verse the mention of sustenance for all God's creatures of all kinds and complexities. It is important to remember that one creature in the food web is often a means of sustenance for another within the animal kingdom. This whole process to create them took 4 periods out of the total of the 6 periods to create the universe."
http://quransmessage.com/charts%20and%20illustrations/six%20periods/six%20periods%20FM2.htm
Peace.
-
With regards to the theory of evolution the following article, in my opinion, makes a good argument for it from a Quran perspective:
THEORY OF EVOLUTION AND THE QURAN
http://quransmessage.com/articles/evolution%20FM3.htm
With that said, I would like to ask why you (and hicham9) insist on throwing-out the window ever (science related) issue which the Quran either fails to speak on (or is silent on)? Bear in mind that the Quran, though it imparts creative signs of God from human creativity to cosmic space (etc), is not a science book; the Quran was not meant to touch on every issue under the sun. The purpose of the Quran, I believe, is to provide us spiritual guidance.
I can't speak for hicham9 but I myself believe the Quran clearly explains that God created life and all the variety of it miraculously. It may not have happened instantly but I believe it took days as in 24h days to do it. Many believers will accept that God can do anything and if He wanted to he could have done it instantly or over a number 24h days. But I think some of those believers are hesitant to believe in it as they feel overwhelmed by the so called "scientific evidence". They're overwhelmed because they don't really understand Evolution/Theory of Evolution and what DNA/Fossil evidence is actually evidence of.
The Quran clearly describes the creation of Adam and makes absolutely no mention of it taking many years or of him gradually "evolving". Adam is created and then he is presented before the angels. The Quran also says that the similitude of Jesus is that of Adam.
"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was. - 3:59 Yusufali"
From the above verse no one can deny that Jesus was created pretty much instantly - this is very clear from the above verse. So while I agree with Joseph Islam on a lot of things I can't agree with his understanding on this area.
The vast majority of believers who accept that humans evolved from a common ancestor confuse Evolution with Common Ancestry. They are 2 different areas. Evolution is a fact. We can observe it happen. Common Ancestry has never been observed and in fact observations show that there are barriers to it.
When it comes to science you need to be precise and clear what you observing, how you are measuring, what the parameters are, what your methods are, etc. That's proper science. So when it comes to understanding Evolution you need to have a definition of evolution and if your observations fit the definition and it's repeatable then you can say it's a scientific fact. Hence Evolution is a fact but Common Ancestry is assumption and very weak one at that.
-
Salaam samson,
you said:
I myself believe the Quran clearly explains that God created life and all the variety of it miraculously.
As do I. I am not disputing this fact.
It may not have happened instantly but I believe it took days as in 24h days to do it
What lead/leads you to this believe? What evidence do you have to share with me to back up that assertion?
Many believers will accept that God can do anything and if He wanted to he could have done it instantly or over a number 24h days.
Again, I don't dispute this fact. But you must understand that God is not bound by human concepts of time. A 'yaum' (period) can represent any number of years or earthly time. Consider the following verses which supports this:
""And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and God will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you number" [Quran 22:47]
""To Him ascend the angels and the Spirit in a day the measure of which is fifty thousand years" [Quran 7:4].
As evident by the above verses, God exists outside time and space; therefore time is meaningless. I don't wish to regurgitate the same arguments Joseph Islam already laid out in one of his articles pertaining to this subject, so I kindly advice to read it then, afterwards, share with me your disputation.
The Quran clearly describes the creation of Adam and makes absolutely no mention of it taking many years or of him gradually "evolving".
Again, please take into account the fact that God is not bound by human concept of time. So while a certain issue may occur in an instant with God, to us it may come about come about in a long and gradual process.
With respect to God's word of 'be and it is, it is merely a means that a command has been executed. So when God says 'kun', all it refers to is the execution of His command. Whether this is an instant or part of a billion year process, they all have God’s ‘kun’ behind it.
Lastly, your usage of 33:59 as 'evidence' of Adams (and therefore Human-beings) extant creation is, in my opinion, inaccurate. Nether that verse (and others like it which use the term be and it issuggest/s that Adam (or Prophet Jesus) were created in an instant. Bear in mind that Prophet Jesus had to undergo a gestation period in his mother's (Mary) womb. Clearly this is not an instant. Similarly, humans, too, had to evolve in their physiological state (bashar) before God's Divine energy (ruh) could be breathed into them and before they became 'insaan'. (as in the case of Adam).
THEORY OF EVOLUTION AND THE QURAN
http://quransmessage.com/articles/evolution%20FM3.htm
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=370.0
They are 2 different areas. Evolution is a fact. We can observe it happen. Common Ancestry has never been observed and in fact observations show that there are barriers to it.
I fully concur. I am not making the argument that we, as humans, descended from monkeys; nor is that what is meant by the term 'common ancestry. Common ancestry simply means that both humans and monkeys share a 'common ancestor'. This is different from the proposition that man has evolved from monkeys.
Peace.
-
Salaam all,
I agree with Hassan A and his comments. We cannot find every answer to science in the Quran but it has alluded to several scientific processes.
Hassan has mentioned about time being relative and provided verses to confirm this.
Evolution is not far fetched either and I do request that you read the articles by Joseph to get a better understanding of the nuances in the words.
Thanks
-
Lastly, your usage of 33:59 as 'evidence' of Adams (and therefore Human-beings) extant creation is, in my opinion, inaccurate. Nether that verse (and others like it which use the term be and it issuggest/s that Adam (or Prophet Jesus) were created in an instant. Bear in mind that Prophet Jesus had to undergo a gestation period in his mother's (Mary) womb. Clearly this is not an instant. Similarly, humans, too, had to evolve in their physiological state (bashar) before God's Divine energy (ruh) could be breathed into them and before they became 'insaan'. (as in the case of Adam).
I fully concur. I am not making the argument that we, as humans, descended from monkeys; nor is that what is meant by the term 'common ancestry. Common ancestry simply means that both humans and monkeys share a 'common ancestor'. This is different from the proposition that man has evolved from monkeys.
Sorry but I'm rather confused here. You're saying that "Common ancestry simply means that both humans and monkeys share a 'common ancestor'" yet that does not mean we humans descended from monkeys. The term "monkey" simply refers to a group of animals which share certain traits. Now depending on which science book/video you take a look at and what the current "scientific evidence" is at the time humans could indeed have evolved from an animal from the monkey group. As of now I think the popular assumption is that it was some form of primate - but as you know with science that assumption could change in an instant.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter whether it was a primate or a monkey popular science is saying humans evolved from a less intelligent and quite a different looking animal. The question is how and why do you as a believer accept that? Are you swayed by the so called scientific evidence? If so please let me know what the evidence is as I certainly haven't seen any.
Even if you accept that Jesus spent 9 months in gestation that is still quick compared to millions of years. The fact that we spend around 9 months in gestation is in itself a miracle but because people have become accustomed to observing/knowing about births happening all the time it's absolutely natural and not something which should be regarded as a miracle. For me this is just as miraculous as Moses parting the sea if not a "bigger miracle"
We mustn't forget that something must have fertilized the egg in Mary's womb. I think you would find it hard to accept that whatever it was could have taken days or months. I'm of the opinion that it was in an instant. And then the Quran states that Jesus spoke as a baby. Also in other verses of the Quran it says God brings the dead back to life in moments or cures those who are ill/blind instantly. When you take all of these things together then it's very difficult to accept that the Quran supports Theory of Evolution.
-
Evolution is not far fetched either and I do request that you read the articles by Joseph to get a better understanding of the nuances in the words.
I'm sorry but Theory of Evolution is a far fetched idea. There is absolutely no evidence of it. Take one of the first steps of the Theory of Evolution where single celled organisms evolve into multi-celled organisms. This cannot be reproduce in the lab. They've been trying for ages, it just doesn't happen.
When you observe the real world there are in fact barriers to Theory of Evolution as in animals just aren't able to reproduce with one another.
-
As evident by the above verses, God exists outside time and space; therefore time is meaningless. I don't wish to regurgitate the same arguments Joseph Islam already laid out in one of his articles pertaining to this subject, so I kindly advice to read it then, afterwards, share with me your disputation.
God created the heavens and the earth in six days. The seventh day I believe he "rested" - as stated in the Bible. The six days plus one for "rest" making seven is something we humans are familiar with. I think if God had meant that each day was thousands of years then He would have clarified it by saying that each day was thousands of years as He did in those other verses.
-
God created the heavens and the earth in six days. The seventh day I believe he "rested"
With respect to God having rested on the seventh day, I disagree with you. To suggest He rested is to suggest that He felt fatigued after having created the universe; which is not a view I subscript to.
I think if God had meant that each day was thousands of years then He would have clarified it by saying that each day was thousands of years as He did in those other verses.
First off, even if God were to clarify it and say a thousand years, it still would not mean a thousand years in our reckoning; because, as evident by the verses I've cited you earlier, God is outside of time and space. A day with God is a thousand years with us. So, if a day with God is a thousand years with us, one can (only) assume that a thousand years with God would translate into something like a million (if not more) years with us.
And secondly, on what grounds can you assert that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) automatically means six(6) human days? I am of the opinion that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) means six periods or epochs, and not six human days.
So when the Quran says that Allah created the universe in six days, that would mean six days with Allah, but for us it would be mean six periods or epochs.
I'm sorry but Theory of Evolution is a far fetched idea. There is absolutely no evidence of it.
Again, this depends on what you mean by evidence. As alluded to earlier, I can cite you (at the drop of a hat) ample scientific evidence to support that theory.
-
Sorry but I'm rather confused here. You're saying that "Common ancestry simply means that both humans and monkeys share a 'common ancestor'" yet that does not mean we humans descended from monkeys.
Am not sure what part of that statement I made confused you. Common ancestry does not, as alluded to earlier, suggest that we, as humans, evolved from monkeys. It simply means what it sounds like - i.e we and monkeys share a common ancestor. Majority of the worlds scientists agree that we evolved from an ancestor that lived some 29-28 million years ago and diverged into two lineages. One of those lineages evolved to become what is known as 'Old World monkeys', the other evolved to become us.
We mustn't forget that something must have fertilized the egg in Mary's womb. I think you would find it hard to accept that whatever it was could have taken days or months. I'm of the opinion that it was in an instant.
Then upon you is the burden to prove this.
Also in other verses of the Quran it says God brings the dead back to life in moments or cures those who are ill/blind instantly.
Would you be so kind as to cite the verses which suggest that those acts occur in an instant?
-
Asalamu Alykum Br. Samson
I think what Br. Hassan is telling you is that the common ancestor between monkeys and humans could be anything that was before them. Since the Quran tells us that God created man from sounding clay (Arabic: salsalin) from black mud (Arabic: ham-in) altered. This may or may not be the ancestor. It may be that God also created the animal kingdom from the same roots(black mud). Or even maybe not. But the scientific world see's there is evidence of evolution. May or may not. The article that was written about evolution by Br. Joseph has two purposes:
To provide a brief historical context of the theory of evolution
To briefly consider whether there is any support in the Quran for such a theory
026:007
"Do they not see the earth, how many of every noble kind We have caused to grow in it (Arabic: Anbatna)"?
For example only. The Earth contains many fruits and vegetables. How did these diverse fruits and vegetables get on earth. Were they created instantly and popped on earth each in its different places? Imagine yourself painting a picture. You drew a earth, then placed tress in different places.
Or did they evolve from something slowly from what ever was before it? And at times that very something can evolve into numerous other things. This could of took a very look time in the way we recognize time or it could of happened instantly. Either way it was caused by the demand and order of God. (2:117)"Be and it is."
I don't believe anyone is disputing the fact that God could create anything in a instant. For example, He may create the Earth in a instant from nothing with just sand covering the surface. Then He may create a human on that Earth from nothing again in a instant. By saying Be and it is. But the question is does the Quran suggest this? yes no maybe. In the end of course only God knows the truth.
At the same time if God willed He may created a cell and tell that cell evolve over time(billions of years in how we can observe in order to see the complexity and signs). He may make that cell show the signs of God by how God executed to make it evolve into space and matter and time. From that space matter and time evolves galaxies, from the galaxies evolved minerals and gases. And from the gases and minerals there evolved planets stars moons an earth. The earth evolved or grew into a form which may have rocks, sand, water, grass, plants, clay. From clay was evolved and formed a specie. From the same clay another type of specie or many types of species. But it could be from those species one is completely different(example humans). From grass evolved trees maybe many different trees.
A process like this could be executed by God saying "Be and it is" to the very first cell that He created, or whatever it was or isn't. Governing every step or creating the very first step and making it do what ever it was meant to do till the end.
All the above is just a mere example and should be seen only as a example and has no facts behind it. I'm just explaining that is what evolution can be. This in my view is something more complex to vision.
Peace and Blessings Insha'Allah
-
Am not sure what part of that statement I made confused you. Common ancestry does not, as alluded to earlier, suggest that we, as humans, evolved from monkeys. It simply means what it sounds like - i.e we and monkeys share a common ancestor. Majority of the worlds scientists agree that we evolved from an ancestor that lived some 29-28 million years ago and diverged into two lineages. One of those lineages evolved to become what is known as 'Old World monkeys', the other evolved to become us.
This common ancestor - what do you/science think it looked like? My understanding is that it closely resembled the apes we have today both in physical features and intelligence. God in the Quran says he created "Man" and not something which resembles man.
-
It depends on what you mean by reliable evidence? I can cite you ample scientific evidence which supports the earth being billions of years old, as well as evidence to support the big bang theory, the existence of dinosaurs,etc.
Yes, please cite the scientific evidence.
-
Also in other verses of the Quran it says God brings the dead back to life in moments or cures those who are ill/blind instantly.
Would you be so kind as to cite the verses which suggest that those acts occur in an instant?
So We said: "Strike the (body) with a piece of the (heifer)." Thus Allah bringeth the dead to life and showeth you His Signs: Perchance ye may understand. - 2:73
- Dead body brought back to life after being struck.
“Or like the one who passed by a town and it had tumbled over its roofs. He said: “Oh! How will Allah ever bring it to life after its death?” So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him up (again). He said: “How long did you remain (dead)?” He (the man) said: “(Perhaps) I remained (dead) a day or part of a day”. He said: “Nay, you have remained (dead) for a hundred years, look at your food and your drink, they show no change; and look at your donkey! And thus We have made of you a sign for the people. Look at the bones, how We bring them together and clothe them with flesh”. When this was clearly shown to him, he said, “I know (now) that Allah is Able to do all things.”” 2:259
-Dead man brought back to life after 100 years and shown bones being brought together and being clothed with flesh.
“And (remember) when Ibrahim said, “My Lord! Show me how You give life to the dead.” He (Allah) said: “Do you not believe?” He [Ibrahim] said: “Yes (I believe), but to be stronger in Faith.” He said: “Take four birds, then cause them to incline towards you (then slaughter them, cut them into pieces), and then put a portion of them on every hill, and call them, they will come to you in haste. And know that Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.”” 2:260
-Dead birds brought back to life.
“And will make him [Isa] a Messenger to the Children of Israel (saying): “I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, that I design for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s Leave; and I heal him who was born blind, and the leper, and I bring the dead to life by Allah’s Leave. And I inform you of what you eat, and what you store in your houses. Surely, therein is a sign for you, if you believe.” 3:49
-Clay bird brought to life.
All of the above are examples of miraculous phenomena which happened in moments. Some maybe a second or few seconds and some maybe minutes.
-
This common ancestor - what do you/science think it looked like?
As Br. Hamzeh has already alluded to, the common ancestry could be anything from sounding clay (Arabic: salsalin) from black mud (Arabic: ham-in) altered.
With respect to the verses you cited me, please bear in mind that I have never stated that God cannot do things (anything) instantly; indeed He can. My argument was simply that what may have occurred at an instant with/to God may, not have come about so instantly to us. So, I was calling you out on your usage of the phrase Be and it is as example of the instant creation of the universe.
By the way, 2:259 actually supports my argument that God is outside the bounds of time and space.
Furthermore, no-where in those verses you cited suggest that those things which occurred, occurred in an instant; nor that they occurred over a long period of time. Those verses are mute as to the process and length said acts had to undergo.
With respect to the scientific evidence I was referring to in earlier post, I am going to need to ask you to bear patient with me and I shall cite you ample evidence.
-
With respect to the verses you cited me, please bear in mind that I have never stated that God cannot do things (anything) instantly; indeed He can.
I accept that you never denied that God can't do things in instant. I was simply responding to the below.
Also in other verses of the Quran it says God brings the dead back to life in moments or cures those who are ill/blind instantly.
Would you be so kind as to cite the verses which suggest that those acts occur in an instant?
As Br. Hamzeh has already alluded to, the common ancestry could be anything from sounding clay (Arabic: salsalin) from black mud (Arabic: ham-in) altered.
The above is very vague.
My argument was simply that what may have occurred at an instant with/to God may, not have come about so instantly to us. So, I was calling you out on your usage of the phrase Be and it is as example of the instant creation of the universe.
As I said earlier, I believe "six" days is of significance and the fact that there is no further confirmation that those days are thousands or tens of thousands of years or more. It's "six" days because it confirms Genesis in the Bible and something we can relate to in terms of a week.
Science is already shaky on Big Bang theory, just a matter of time before it's thrown in the bin.
With respect to the scientific evidence I was referring to in earlier post, I am going to need to ask you to bear patient with me and I shall cite you ample evidence.
Just one or 2 evidences will do for now as if too many is listed it's hard to take it all in and respond to them.
Thanks
-
As I said earlier, I believe "six" days is of significance and the fact that there is no further confirmation that those days are thousands or tens of thousands of years or more.
But again, on what grounds can you assert that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) automatically means six(6) human days? I am of the opinion that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) means six periods or epochs, and not six human days; but if you say otherwise, then the burden is on you to prove said assertion from the Quran.
So when the Quran says that Allah created the universe in six days, that would mean six days with Allah, but for us it would be mean six periods or epochs.
Just one or 2 evidences will do for now as if too many is listed it's hard to take it all in and respond to them.
I will bear that in mind.
-
Salaam samson,
Off topic question: Do you know anything about the OT and the NT?
-
Salaam samson,
Off topic question: Do you know anything about the OT and the NT?
Yes i've read them.
-
With regard to 2:73 I strongly recommend point 13 here:
http://www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html#part1
And as for 2:260:
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=15458.0
-
With regard to 2:73 I strongly recommend point 13 here:
http://www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html#part1
And as for 2:260:
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=15458.0
Both interpretations are weak and bizarre in my opinion. Thankfully they're not common.
-
Six Mil (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608080.msg380387#msg380387)lennia (22:47)
for the heavens, the earth, and that which lies in-between.
-
With that said, I would like to ask why you (and hicham9) insist on throwing-out the window ever (science related) issue which the Quran either fails to speak on (or is silent on)?
The messenger of ALLH, the Qurān, does not "fail" at conveying the Truth, andor accurately describing Reality !!! Heliocentricity, the big bang, (macro)evolution, dinosaurs, and the rest of BUNK (that you & the Maj. adhere to) belong to PSEUDO-science.
Wakey wakey :\/
-
The messenger of ALLH, the Qurān, does not "fail" at conveying the Truth
Ok, considering I have never mad such statement, so...
The fact that I was trying to convey, which you'll have a hard time disputing, is the fact that the Quran does not (nor was it intended) to touch on every subject under the sun. The Quran is neither a book of history nor of science; it is book of guidance. Its subject matter is not to record or present history of humanity or of a certain people. The purpose of its revelation is also not to teach people science of the things that they can explore and learn on their own through observation, experimentation, and trial/error. Its subject matter is guidance – teaching human being how to live in this world so that they have the most optimum personality (individually) and the most optimum society (collectively) in this world and so that they will be successful in the Hereafter.
One should not foolishly dismiss an issue simply because the Quran is silent on said issue.
Heliocentricity, the big bang, (macro)evolution, dinosaurs, and the rest of BUNK (that you & the Maj. adhere to) belong to PSEUDO-science.
You're more than welcome to hold to your diluted beliefs (as am I), but, with all due respect, don't expect me to squander my time debating someone who (as evident in a previous debate) presents "evidence" (manly pictures) when it suites his interest but dismisses the evidence/pictures others present.
-
The messenger of ALLH, the Qurān, does not "fail" at conveying the Truth
Ok, considering I have never mad such statement, so...
The fact that I was trying to convey, which you'll have a hard time disputing, is the fact that the Quran does not (nor was it intended) to touch on every subject under the sun. The Quran is neither a book of history nor of science; it is book of guidance. Its subject matter is not to record or present history of humanity or of a certain people. The purpose of its revelation is also not to teach people science of the things that they can explore and learn on their own through observation, experimentation, and trial/error. Its subject matter is guidance – teaching human being how to live in this world so that they have the most optimum personality (individually) and the most optimum society (collectively) in this world and so that they will be successful in the Hereafter. One should not foolishly dismiss an issue simply because the Quran is silent on said issue.
Why did you cut out the part about the Qurān accurately describing reality ?!?
Heliocentricity, the big bang, (macro)evolution, dinosaurs, and the rest of BUNK (that you & the Maj. adhere to) belong to PSEUDO-science.
You're more than welcome to hold to your diluted beliefs (as am I), but, with all due respect, don't expect me to squander my time debating someone who (as evident in a previous debate) presents "evidence" (manly pictures) when it suites his interest but dismisses the evidence/pictures others present.
Actually, beside Q88:20, i also presented you with a clear and stable, RAW footage (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tvhFbvY_99o) (with a rectilinear lens) showing the FLAT earth from a high-altitude of 120,000 ft, along with a scientific paper (http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf) by the Optical Society of America, testifying that the required elevation for detecting earth's alleged curvature is somewhat between 14,000 and 35,000 ft high !
You couldn't even address this one single argument :/
-
Why did you delete the part about the Qurān accurately describing reality ?!?
Ok. Apologies, I guess? Nonetheless, my (previous) argument still stands.
Actually, i also presented you with a clear and stable, RAW footage (with a rectilinear lens) showing the FLAT earth from a high-altitude of 120,000 ft, along with a scientific paper by the Optical Society of America,
I am not here to re-engage you regarding the shape of the earth and its position in our solar-system. But I will say this: for every "evidence" you presented, I (and others) have presented evidence of our own yet you fail deaf to them by either failing to address them nor acknowledged that they were legitimate proof; rather you invoked a conspiratorial argument and dismissed them as part of the Freemasons.
With respect to 88:20, go back and re-read my explanation of it in our previous "debate", because I find it unfit to waste my time regurgitating that argument I made.
You couldn't even address this one single argument
Go back and visit that debate t and you know that I ( and others) have done the best we could to address those arguments you presented. Furthermore, you're being dishonest in suggesting I/we were the only once failing to address the arguments you presented. If, again, you go back and revisit that "debate" we had, you will realize that you, as well, shrunk from addressing some of the arguments/evidence we presented.
-
Why did you delete the part about the Qurān accurately describing reality ?!?
Nonetheless, my (previous) argument still stands.
Nop.
I am not here to re-engage you regarding the earth being flat. But I will say this: for every "evidence" you presented, I (and others) have presented evidence of our own yet you either failed to address them nor acknowledged that they were legitimate proof; rather you invoked a conspiratorial argument and dismissed them as part of the Freemasons.
Go back and visit that debate t and you know that I ( and others) have done the best we could to address those arguments you presented. Furthermore, you're being dishonest in suggesting I/we were the only once failing to address the arguments you presented. If, again, you go back and revisit that "debate" we had, you will realize that you, as well, shrunk from addressing some of the arguments/evidence we presented.
You still can't refute this one single argument !
Nor this (http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1778.msg8305#msg8305) one, for that matter.
Plz don't waste my time.
-
You still can't refute this one single argument
Sure. Whatever helps you sleeper easier at night, sr.
"A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." -L e o n F e s t i n g e.
Plz don't waste my time
I ask the same of you.
-
Parroting "Festinge" doesn't refute the arguments at hand, body !
-
Parroting "F e s t i n g e" doesn't refute the arguments at hand, body
True. But that quote from him accurately describes you.
Peace.
-
True. But that quote from him perfectly describes you.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, kid !
-
Actually, beside Q88:20, i also presented you with a clear and stable, RAW footage (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tvhFbvY_99o) (with a rectilinear lens) showing the FLAT earth from a high-altitude of 120,000 ft, along with a scientific paper (http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf) by the Optical Society of America, testifying that the required elevation for detecting earth's alleged curvature is somewhat between 14,000 and 35,000 ft high !
Hicham,
I actually hold the view that geocentric is model is correct but I find it hard to accept that the earth is flat but I'm open to should there be more convincing evidence than you've already cited.
My question to you is, let's say the earth is flat and geocentrism is true, is there much point in trying to convince believers in God of this?
-
Dear all,
This topic has been exhausted and the tone has descended into personal digs which is against forum policy 2a and 2b.
Therefore I am closing this thread and request that there be no further discussions on the Earth being flat or not.
Thanks
-
Salam Hassan,
It was hilariously entertaining to watch your debate with Hicham9. Anyway, I have an actual question about this. The earth's age is 1/3 the age of the universe (4.5 bil years vs. 13.5 bil years).
"Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in TWO Days
And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
+
He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it,
and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measured therein all things
4 to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR Days
in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).
Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky,
and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth:
"Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly."
They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."
+
2 So He completed them as seven firmaments in TWO Days,
and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command.
And We adorned the lower heaven with lights,
and (provided it) with guard.
Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge. "
-- Sura 41:9-12 (Yusuf Ali)
The Quran says the earth was created in 2 periods and it took 6 days to create the whole universe. This fits with what we know about the age of the universe.
However, it says the earth's sustenance was "measured in FOUR days." I think this could mean its sustenance was PREDETERMINED before any of it was created, and these 4 days occurred BEFORE the heavens and the earth were actually created. This would make more sense than saying the earth's sustenance was created in 4 out of the 6 days, right?
What do you think of this interpretation?
Mariyah
-
Salaam Mia 666,
I am not sure if you read the other topic, but Hicham9 has been removed from this forum.
Other members are free to carry on with this topic.
Thanks
-
As I said earlier, I believe "six" days is of significance and the fact that there is no further confirmation that those days are thousands or tens of thousands of years or more.
But again, on what grounds can you assert that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) automatically means six(6) human days? I am of the opinion that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) means six periods or epochs, and not six human days; but if you say otherwise, then the burden is on you to prove said assertion from the Quran.
So when the Quran says that Allah created the universe in six days, that would mean six days with Allah, but for us it would be mean six periods or epochs.
Just one or 2 evidences will do for now as if too many is listed it's hard to take it all in and respond to them.
I will bear that in mind.
Hassan are you done with the above or are you still gathering the evidence?
-
Salaam samson,
No I am not done with our discussion. School resumed, so I've been burden with school-work.
God-willing I shall cite you those sources I was referring to. Apologies for the wait.
In the mean time, have a look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dalrymple/scientific_age_earth.html
Peace.
-
Salaam mia666,
You said:
I have an actual question about this. The earth's age is 1/3 the age of the universe (4.5 bil years vs. 13.5 bil years).
"Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in TWO Days
And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
+
He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it,
and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measured therein all things
4 to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR Days
in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).
Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky,
and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth:
"Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly."
They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."
+
2 So He completed them as seven firmaments in TWO Days,
and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command.
And We adorned the lower heaven with lights,
and (provided it) with guard.
Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge. "
-- Sura 41:9-12 (Yusuf Ali)
The Quran says the earth was created in 2 periods and it took 6 days to create the whole universe. This fits with what we know about the age of the universe.
However, it says the earth's sustenance was "measured in FOUR days." I think this could mean its sustenance was PREDETERMINED before any of it was created, and these 4 days occurred BEFORE the heavens and the earth were actually created. This would make more sense than saying the earth's sustenance was created in 4 out of the 6 days, right?
What do you think of this interpretation?
I concur with the/a answer given by a former member of this forum when he/she said the following about the above:
This verse does not use the conjunction "then", it uses "and" so it is not saying that after he created the earth he put mountains on it etc.. Rather he is saying that he created the Earth in two days and he placed mountains and he blessed it and..etc. There is no "then". He is just describing his creation.
Furthermore, Allah determined the creatures sustenance in four days. This does not mean that he took 2 days to create the Earth and then another 4 in sustaining the Earth. This is because of the lack of usage of "then" or "thumma".
Rather it means that Allah determined/measured/decreed the sustenance of creatures in 4 days.
Peace.
-
Salaam samson,
No I am not done with our discussion. School resumed, so I've been burden with school-work.
God-willing I shall cite you those sources I was referring to. Apologies for the wait.
In the mean time, have a look at this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dalrymple/scientific_age_earth.html
Peace.
No problem, school is important.
Lets start with the basics. How do planets/stars/asteroids etc. form? It's not accretion. If you think it is then show me real experoments which prove this.
-
How do planets/stars/asteroids etc. form?
I think the following two sites will suffice
How stars form:
http://www.universetoday.com/24190/how-does-a-star-form/
How planets form:
http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/discovering_planets_beyond/how-do-planets-form
Forgive me for asking, but do you by any chance adhere to the young earth creationist view of with regards to the age of the earth and universe? If yes, what theory, if any, do you have with respect to the 'true' age of the earth/universe?
-
How do planets/stars/asteroids etc. form?
I think the following two sites will suffice
How stars form:
http://www.universetoday.com/24190/how-does-a-star-form/
How planets form:
http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/discovering_planets_beyond/how-do-planets-form
Forgive me for asking, but do you by any chance adhere to the young earth creationist view of with regards to the age of the earth and universe? If yes, what theory, if any, do you have with respect to the 'true' age of the earth/universe?
Good research. However like the vast majority of people you've been mislead by articles such as this. They come across as providing a scientific explanation yet there is no citation of experiments to prove/demonstrate their explanation.
Take a look at the following link which involves actual real experimentation.
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/wisdom/extrasolar/Canup.pdf
I think it helps to understand what the facts are first before going on to making speculations about what may/may not have happened in the past which we have no idea of proving beyond doubt.
-
I will take A look at the article you cited me and will then raise any concerns/question/disagreements I may have with it.
However like the vast majority of people you've been mislead by articles such as this
With all due respect, I can say the same of you.
I think it helps to understand what the facts are first before going on to making speculations about what may/may not have happened in the past which we have no idea of proving beyond doubt.
There exists a contradiction in that statement. If there can be no way of proving past event beyond a doubt, then how can we truly know what the facts are? Furthermore, If we (can have) no why of proving past events then that not only dismisses my argument but it dismiss your as well, and makes both our theories and understandings nothing more than mere speculations.
-
Salam :)
I'm not entirely sure what Hassan and Samson are debating about, but anyway, I'm not here ro comment on that :D ... I just wanted to reply to Hassan's interpretation. It seems like it agrees with mine, and the actual sequence of events is not specified in this verse. This seems like intentional vagueness and is not incidental. Just a thought
-
Hassan, the link below may make for easier reading.
https://ay201b.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/formation-of-planetesimals/ - Section "The first half of the story: from dust to planetesimals"
The key paragraphs are:
"But what about the first chapters: how do we even get planetesimals in the first place? How do tiny dust particles build up to create compact solids a kilometer in diameter? This is one of the major questions remaining in planet formation research and although much progress has been made, the first half of the book as yet to be written."
and
"Growth of planetesimals gets increasingly difficult as sizes approach a meter because binding energies decline while relative velocities increase. According to Chambers (2010), with turbulence disruptive collisions between a meter-sized and a much smaller planetesimal are frequent because relative speeds of 100 m/s are often reached and it is difficult to get larger bodies. Youdin (2008) also discusses other issues (both theoretical and observation) with growing large bodies via collisions. Since we need kilometer-sized planetesimals to proceed with the second half of our story, we have a problem which is usually called the “meter-size barrier” in the literature."
To summarise, dust does not naturally collect and form a larger and larger mass.
-
Salaam Alaykum Hassan,
I am relatively new to posting on this forum. However, I did a search on the topic of the 6 days of creation to see the various perspectives on six human days and 6 GOD-days (periods), so to speak. I have posted your comment below mainly to help with your recollection of your earlier discussion. Here it is:
As I said earlier, I believe "six" days is of significance and the fact that there is no further confirmation that those days are thousands or tens of thousands of years or more.
But again, on what grounds can you assert that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) automatically means six(6) human days? I am of the opinion that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) means six periods or epochs, and not six human days; but if you say otherwise, then the burden is on you to prove said assertion from the Quran.
So when the Quran says that Allah created the universe in six days, that would mean six days with Allah, but for us it would be mean six periods or epochs.
Just one or 2 evidences will do for now as if too many is listed it's hard to take it all in and respond to them.
I will bear that in mind.
I came across a verse in the Quran that appears to allude to a 24-hour day given the context of the verse. I'm not an Arabic expert so, I'm posting my observation for others to validate. The verse in question 9:36. I've looked at the Arabic and every possible translation I could find (http://www.islamawakened.org/quran/9/36/default.htm (http://www.islamawakened.org/quran/9/36/default.htm)), and they, essentially, all are saying the same thing. Here is an excerpt of the segment in question:
[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran) according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...
I study the Qu'ran from the assumption there are zero contradictions whereby any contradiction that is found is not the Qu'ran that is incorrect, but our interpretation. Having said that, 9:36 is directly referring to a 12-month 'human' year (so to speak) and this has been the law 'from the day' (yawma) HE created the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth.
I see three possible ways to interpret this:
1) it refers to the last day (day six) when everything was completed (earth, life, 7 heavens) allowing the 'period' interpretation, or
2) the first day when the heaven (l-samāi) and the earth were literally brought into existence (joined entity separated as per 21:30) prior to the fine-tuning, perfecting over the remaining 5 'days', or
3) the 'day' GOD actually said to the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth 'to come into existence willingly or unwilling' which upon careful study would be the second day of creation.
If 9:36 is referring to the last 'day' (sixth day) this would allow for the six 'periods' of 'GOD-days' interpretation. This would confirm the usage of the plural 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) in 9:36. Although, the usage of '(from the) day' (yawmi) seems to create some issues for a couple of reasons:
A) As far as I am aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), 'yawma' (day) has never been used in the Quran to signify anything other than a 24-hour human day, unlike 'ayyāmin' which could mean 'days' or 'periods.' Yet, it is used here.
B) Irrespective of our interpretation of 'day', The Qu'ran indicates a six-day creation duration, not a one-day duration, which would seem to allude to the specific 'day' when both the 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) and the earth came into existence. That would be 'day two' when GOD said to the heavens and the earth come into existence willingly or unwillingly (see 41:11).
[41:11] Then He turned to the smoke, when it was still gas, and said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] In two days He determined them seven heavens, and He revealed to each heaven its commands. We decorated the lowest heaven with lamps and preserve them. Such is the decree of the Almighty, the Knower.
Based on the above, the first interpretation does not appear to align with 9:36 in light of other verses. The second interpretation cannot be correct because in the first 'day' there was only ONE heaven and the earth. The verse (9:36) clearly mentions 'heavens' (l-samāwāti), therefore it cannot be referring to the first day of creation. This leaves us with the aforementioned third interpretation focusing on the actual 'day' the heavenS (l-samāwāti) and the earth were created, which would be day 2. At this point, it is appropriate to post 41:9-12.
[41:9] Say, "You disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days, and you set up idols to rank with Him, though He is Lord of the worlds."
[41:10] He placed therein firmly-set mountains, made it productive, and He calculated its provisions in four equal alike for those who ask.
[41:11] Then He turned to the heaven while it was still smoke, and He said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] Thus, He completed seven universes in two days, and set up the laws for every heaven. And we adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and (to) guard. That is the decree of the Almighty, All-Knower.
From what I can see, the 'heavenS' and the earth were created in a single day, namely Day two. This would leave us with the remaining four days/periods to fill the earth with life after the heavens and the earth was made. This brings us back to my initial question of whether the six days of creation were 24-hour days or GOD-days (periods). Since 9:36 indicates the count of months is 12 since the day the heavens and the earth were created, that would mean after the second day of creation we were on a 24-hour clock in order to calculate 12 months.
[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran) according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...
This would make sense as the sun (lamp) and the moon would have been created by the second day of Creation allowing us to calculate time.
[10:5] He (is) the One Who made the sun a shining light, and the moon a reflected light and determined for it phases, THAT YOU MANY KNOW (the) number (of) the YEARS and the count (of time). Not created Allah that except in truth. He explains the Signs for a people (who) know.
Based on the above, I have come to the conclusion the six days of Creation were, in fact, 24-hour days, not 'epochs/periods'. Otherwise, contradictions would arise in the Quran. Furthermore, this confirms the previous scripture's account (Genesis 1). If I have missed something in 9:36 please kindly point it out.
Regards, Mike
-
Peace!
Something to think about ....
Usually, /as-samaawti wal ard/ is attempted to be interpreted as the planet earth and the rest of the universe. And the verses about creation are attempted to be interpreted as _not_ referring to the instant of the creation of the cosmos itself [and prescription of its laws], but rather to the subsequent evolution of the planet earth as a habitable planet in the more recent past.
I disagree with this approach. The word /ard/ literally means 'land'. This planet earth is too insignificant to be described as a separate creation. There are billions on earth-like planets in the universe capable of sustaining life. The Quran [42:29] says that God has spread out living creatures throughout /as-samaawti wal ard/ (literally 'the skies and the land'). All rocky planets in the universe also have 'land', just as on earth. So 'land' is any place capable of originating or sustaining life: basically any stellar system made of matter, since we are all made out of star dust. Any place that humans can migrate to, live on or survive, or any stellar system where life can exist is /ard/. The primordial gas clouds, or matter that God created, from which stellar systems evolved was also /ard/.
The word /samaa`a/ literally means 'sky' - the space/vacuum around us that we can seen from land/matter. The plural /samawaat/ means 'skies'. Quran says that God created the 7 skies in 'layers' (67:3, 71:5). What we can observe is /samaa ad-duniya/: the 'sky of this world' or 'the lowest sky', adorned with 'lamps' (the stars we see when we gaze the sky) [67:3-5, 41:9-12]. Other skies (universes) are beyond our observable sky (universe).
41:12 tells us that each such sky/space/layer has its own physical laws (/amr/). It may be different from what we experience in our space, God knows best.
Also, the Quran teaches us that first God created the universes, and subsequently (/thumma/) assigned them their laws [balanced (/istawa/) the throne/dominion] (10:3, 2:29, 7:54, 25:59, 32:4, 57:4). The universe is governed by a system of equations or the balance that everything should adhere to, that was prescribed after the vacuum and matter were created.
Given this background, the "six days" refers to the very instant of creation itself. What is its significance? God known best. God says He creates in the 'blink of an eye' [54:49-50], so "six days" can not be understood literally as the day we experience on the planet earth today.
http://journal_of_submission.homestead.com/Quran.htm
Indeed your Lord is God, the One who created the skies and the land in six days then He established balance over the dominion. He decides all matters. ... [10:3]
Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly. He then completed them as seven vacua in two days, and He inspired in each vacuum its law. And We adorned the lowest vacuum with lamps, and placed therein guards. Such is the design of The Almighty, The All Knowing. [41:11-12]
-
Peace Niaz,
Thank you for your response. I have reflected on the interpretation you presented. In fact, it has been my traditional interpretation for quite some time. The reason I posted my original comments was because I am of the firm conviction there are not any contradictions in the Qu'ran, only in our interpretations. As such, if an interpretation ends up contradicting, or appears to contradict, other verses it should be studied more deeply to ascertain an interpretation that accounts for the information present in all verses.
I understand what the current cosmology theory of the universe says. However, those in academic circles will tell you the current Big Bang Inflationary universe model is in serious trouble given the constant discovery of anomalous organizations of heavenly structures (ie: distribution of Quasars, galaxies, CMB etc) that challenge the current paradigm. Of course, this makes sense and 'science' has a terrible track record demonstrated by the constant change of theories since the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment. This reality about the 'science' should help us appreciate that it science cannot disprove scripture (Qu'ran), but scripture CAN confirm accurate science. Having said that, your response was not addressing my question about the content in the actual verses, but rather your perspective. Although, I do appreciate you sharing your perspective, I was really looking more for an analysis of my points which appear to indicate a possible contradiction with the 6 'periods' interpretation. As you said (which I fully agree) GOD can create the heavens and the earth instantly, over 6 twenty-four hour days, over 6 periods, or any number of periods. Knowing this, please kindly have another look at my previous post and try to factor out current scientific theories, which may or may not be completely accurate, to ensure a truly unbias study based on the content of the verses.
I have found that many of us, (unfortunately) myself included, have the tendency to translate or interpret verses to conform to current (constantly being updating) scientific theories rather than just look at the verses actually say and then formulating and interpretation. This can create a potentially serious problem for those of us who have 'science' as the 'determiner of truth' rather than the Creator (via Qu'ran), because their faith could be severely shaken when currently accepted scientific theories become falsified and thus, discarded for new theories. Whereas, if we look at the verses exactly as they are written without imposing our predispositions of how things aught to be, our faith, God willing, will never be shaken by agnostic and materialism-based philosophies that currently plague scientific interpretations of data. Especially, when it comes to theories on the origin of life and origin of the universe.
Peace,
Mike
-
Peace Mike,
I am in complete agreement with your last paragraph, about the perils of constantly trying to reinterpret the Quran based on half baked scientific theories. And on looking "at the verses exactly as they are written without imposing our predispositions of how things aught to be".
My approach is to keep it very simple. We can use established scientific knowledge to inform our understanding of the Quran, but we should not try to deliberately "fit" interpretations around evolving scientific theories. When the Quran does indeed confirm scientific understanding, it will be very evident. For whatever is not, we don't need to try to force one.
I don't see the need for an interpretation as "6 periods". For reasons I described in my previous post, I understand the Quran as describing the creation of space and matter itself in the “six days”, not specifically to the evolution of our planet earth. And I am not trying to relate this to any cosmology, since no cosmology captures how the cosmos was created. Scientific laws as we know them break down at the instant of creation. That is because God only prescribed the laws for our universe at this point.
Since there is no scientific theory that currently addresses this (and possibly never, since it lies beyond the scope of empiricism), I don't see a need to fit any specific scientific theory.
I also disagree that 'day' in the context of creation means 24 hours. Since meaning of "24 hours" is meaningless before the solar system evolved (only ~4.5 bya, which was about 9 billion years after creation). And "days" were not always 24 hours. The earth used to spin a lot faster before, and has been steadily slowing down. In the early earth, a day lasted only about 6 hours.
To understand where you are coming from - do you dispute these timelines or durations? Is it part of the cosmology theory you expressed skepticism about?
-
Dear Islamic Mike,
Salaam,
Welcome to the forum.
Kindly see my responses in italics to your comments in bold.
I came across a verse in the Quran that appears to allude to a 24-hour day given the context of the verse. I'm not an Arabic expert so, I'm posting my observation for others to validate. The verse in question 9:36. I've looked at the Arabic and every possible translation I could find (http://www.islamawakened.org/quran/9/36/default.htm), and they, essentially, all are saying the same thing. Here is an excerpt of the segment in question:
[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran) according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...
I study the Qu'ran from the assumption there are zero contradictions whereby any contradiction that is found is not the Qu'ran that is incorrect, but our interpretation. Having said that, 9:36 is directly referring to a 12-month 'human' year (so to speak) and this has been the law 'from the day' (yawma) HE created the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth.
Of course the Qur’an should be studied with such a proviso such that disparities in understanding/interpretations would well be appreciated as resultant from individuals’ fallible approaches. In my opinion, the above translation of the Arabic verse 9:36 captures the key overall interpretation. However, such an understanding of an allusion of a 24-hour day in 9:36 is untenable within the context. That a ‘12-month lunar year’ referred to in the verse as we recognize today (12-month 'human' year) gives way to acknowledge a ‘24-hour day’ interpretation of the ‘ayyam’ in the verse is not an explicit understanding to advance. For example, today, we know that 4-months are ‘sacred’ and that they are the ones in which pilgrimage is prescribed, as since the advent of prophet Ibrahim (22:26-32). However, for instance, as you may agree, claiming that pilgrimage started since ‘the day Allah created the heavens and the earth’ just because the ‘four sacred months’ appear in that verse would lead us to a faulty conclusion.
I see three possible ways to interpret this:
1) it refers to the last day (day six) when everything was completed (earth, life, 7 heavens) allowing the 'period' interpretation, or
2) the first day when the heaven (l-samāi) and the earth were literally brought into existence (joined entity separated as per 21:30) prior to the fine-tuning, perfecting over the remaining 5 'days', or
3) the 'day' GOD actually said to the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth 'to come into existence willingly or unwilling' which upon careful study would be the second day of creation.
In my humble opinion, if 70:4,32:5,22:47 are taken into consideration, one can appreciate why ‘ayyam’ is used in 9:36 in its essence as a slice of time expressed to give some human relevance, as Br. Joseph states in a thread [1] referenced below.
If 9:36 is referring to the last 'day' (sixth day) this would allow for the six 'periods' of 'GOD-days' interpretation. This would confirm the usage of the plural 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) in 9:36. Although, the usage of '(from the) day' (yawmi) seems to create some issues for a couple of reasons:
A) As far as I am aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), 'yawma' (day) has never been used in the Quran to signify anything other than a 24-hour human day, unlike 'ayyāmin' which could mean 'days' or 'periods.' Yet, it is used here.
I think as far as being aware of a thing is concerned, a sincere confirmation of the same has to be assured before assuming a conviction from it. From several examples that could be quoted, I believe a clear contrast can be made between verses (62:9,5:3) and (70:4,32:5,22:47) or at least (11:103,1:4) where while the former allude to ‘our today’s 24-hour day,’ the latter refer to ‘epochs’ or long ‘periods’ of time. I trust that you don’t take the ‘Day of Judgement’ to be a regular ‘24-hour’ day at least from all that which is expected to take place within its entirety (Judgement of ‘all’ creation).
B) Irrespective of our interpretation of 'day', The Qu'ran indicates a six-day creation duration, not a one-day duration, which would seem to allude to the specific 'day' when both the 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) and the earth came into existence. That would be 'day two' when GOD said to the heavens and the earth come into existence willingly or unwillingly (see 41:11).
I think the difficulty in appreciating the holistic reference to the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 when Allah created the heavens and the earth lies at the fact that a conditional restriction has been made that the ‘yaum’ should be at least a ‘day’ amongst the 6 ‘ayyams’ of creation. In my opinion, this is unwarranted.
[41:11] Then He turned to the smoke, when it was still gas, and said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] In two days He determined them seven heavens, and He revealed to each heaven its commands. We decorated the lowest heaven with lamps and preserve them. Such is the decree of the Almighty, the Knower.
Based on the above, the first interpretation does not appear to align with 9:36 in light of other verses. The second interpretation cannot be correct because in the first 'day' there was only ONE heaven and the earth. The verse (9:36) clearly mentions 'heavens' (l-samāwāti), therefore it cannot be referring to the first day of creation. This leaves us with the aforementioned third interpretation focusing on the actual 'day' the heavenS (l-samāwāti) and the earth were created, which would be day 2. At this point, it is appropriate to post 41:9-12.
[41:9] Say, "You disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days, and you set up idols to rank with Him, though He is Lord of the worlds."
[41:10] He placed therein firmly-set mountains, made it productive, and He calculated its provisions in four equal alike for those who ask.
[41:11] Then He turned to the heaven while it was still smoke, and He said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] Thus, He completed seven universes in two days, and set up the laws for every heaven. And we adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and (to) guard. That is the decree of the Almighty, All-Knower.
With such a premise to expect the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 as a ‘day’ from the 6 ‘distinct’ ayyams, you unnecessarily single out the ‘second’ distinct day to be the ‘yaum’ (9:36) owing to the completion of ‘the heavens’ by an assumed ‘day two’ (41:12). This is again unwarranted in my opinion. I fail to see why you conclude that only ‘one heaven’ was existing by the end of the ‘first’ ayyam, by simply inferring from 41:11-12, which is not explicitly clear to ‘affirm.’
From what I can see, the 'heavenS' and the earth were created in a single day, namely Day two. This would leave us with the remaining four days/periods to fill the earth with life after the heavens and the earth was made. This brings us back to my initial question of whether the six days of creation were 24-hour days or GOD-days (periods). Since 9:36 indicates the count of months is 12 since the day the heavens and the earth were created, that would mean after the second day of creation we were on a 24-hour clock in order to calculate 12 months.
From your conclusion of ‘day two’ being the time when ‘heavens and earth’ had been completely created, you say that a 24-hour day was initiated and hence ‘we’ were able to do the count as from then. This ‘theory’ assumes that ‘man’ was fully existing when this was ordained or at least sometimes before it. This is not something that can explicitly be confirmed from the Qur’an.
[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran) according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...
This would make sense as the sun (lamp) and the moon would have been created by the second day of Creation allowing us to calculate time.
In my humble opinion, as much as this somehow scientifically makes sense, it is however not a conclusion that can be explicitly confirmed as mentioned in the Qur’an.
[10:5] He (is) the One Who made the sun a shining light, and the moon a reflected light and determined for it phases, THAT YOU MANY KNOW (the) number (of) the YEARS and the count (of time). Not created Allah that except in truth. He explains the Signs for a people (who) know.
Based on the above, I have come to the conclusion the six days of Creation were, in fact, 24-hour days, not 'epochs/periods'. Otherwise, contradictions would arise in the Quran. Furthermore, this confirms the previous scripture's account (Genesis 1). If I have missed something in 9:36 please kindly point it out.
In my humble view, I still see no warrant for such a conclusion based on the premise that the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 has to be a ‘yaum’ from among the ‘6 ayyams’ in 4:9-12 and that sequential ‘day two’ is the ‘yaum’ in which the heavens and the earth had fully been created hence a 24-hour day provenance for ‘existing’ human beings to make reference to. To the contrary, I believe a ‘holistic’ reference is made to ‘when’ the heavens and the earth were created in 9:36 hence the number of months are 12 in a year, ‘from time immemorial,’ / ‘from the beginning of time.’
Hopefully that helps in some small way.
Regards,
Athman.
References:
[1]. Is Allah’s Day Equivalent to 1,000 yrs or 50,000 yrs?
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=405.0
-
Dear niaz,
Salaamun Alaikum,
Albeit I agree with you that ‘the earth’ in the oft-quoted reference of ‘the heavens and the earth’ (7:54) or rather ‘the earth and the heavens’ (20:4) in the Qur'an can be understood to be quintessential of other earth-like habitable stellar planets (65:12) with a side-note of an alternative meaning of ‘land,’ I see it as an unwarranted assertion to assume an always such general inference for each and every occurrence of the phrase 'the heavens and the earth' in the Qur'an. In fact, the other possibility could arguably be averred for, that is, the traditional understanding of 'the earth' being 'our planet earth' (2:29-30) especially with such a context of 'the earth' in 2:29 being an abode for Adam (2:30-31) as our progenitor. As a primary reference, 'the earth' (41:9) was created within 2 ayyams as well as 'the heavens' (41:12) with its/their 'laws' within the same 2 ayyams. In my humble opinion, the 2 ayyams would still possibly be the time bracket for the creation of the other earth-like habitable planets in 65:12, as well as would the 4 ayyams in 41:10 for the 'ordainment' of 'rawasiya' and 'aqwat' on 'the earth' also apply for some essential 'ordainment' on the other earth-like habitable planets.
In my humble opinion, as much as the term 'ardh' is implicitly being assumed to have a general meaning of 'any place capable of originating or sustaining life: basically any stellar system made of matter,' and 'the primordial gas clouds, or matter that God created, from which stellar systems evolved,' credence has to be given to the contextual reference of the term in the Qur'an along with its classical or well-known meaning given such context. The same applies to what 'samaa/samawat' would be taken to refer to. As long as this is concerned, I don't concur with your conclusive redefinition of 'samaa/samawat' or 'ardh' to 'vacuum/vacua(space)' and 'matter' respectively.
On the other hand, arguing from such a premise of the above redefinition of the terms 'samaa' and 'ardh', you make an extension of the idea to advocate for an 'instant' interpretation of the 6-ayyams hence not the actual evolutionary process of 'the heavens and the earth,' rather some infinitesimally instantaneous provenance of matter and space. In my opinion, this approach ignores the elaborations given in 41:9-12, especially with respect to how the 'ayyams' are distributed, supported by those of 79:27-33. Such descriptions are essentially alluding to some significance of the mention of 6 ayyams in the first place, aptly making up to the count (6 ayyams) as a general reference from the other 7 places mentioned in the Qur'an. The significance of its value (6) is only known to Allah as you intimated.
That the subsequent evolutionary process of 'the heavens and the earth' after the momentary 'decree' would conflict the fact that 'universal/scientific laws' found provenance at the 'instant' of the decree is not a plausible counter-argument in my opinion. The ‘inspiration’ of the ‘amr’ for each ‘samaa’(41:12) needs not necessarily be ‘after’ their complete creation.
With regards interpretation of the verses as referring to the subsequent evolutionary process of ‘the heavens and the earth’ after its ‘decree,’ I see this as a cogent proposition as compared to that of an instantaneous occurrence of 6 ayyams especially with such a summarized elucidatory description of how the 6 ayyams were distributed over the evolutionary events (41:9-12). As to whether this is taken to refer some process of ‘some more recent past,’ this doesn’t deny the fact that 6 ayyams were over which ‘the heavens and the earth’ and what exists in between ordained. Relative to any point in time and whatever the referential time system/frame, the ‘heavens and the earth’ took 6 ayyams to ‘materialize.’ The equivalent standard of a single ‘yaum’ would in effect depend on the point of reference in time. The exact distinct equivalent of a ‘yaum’ as given in the verses is only known to Allah. This can as well be supported by such relativeness of ‘yaum’ as in 70:4, 32:5, or 22:47.
Regards,
Athman.
-
Athman, Salaamun 'alaikum
Thanks for sharing.
Regarding 2:29-30, I do not see it as restricted to the planet earth. 2:30 is fulfilled in 2:31-39 that follow.
2:31-35 happen in paradise (some place outside our current universe), where we all were once there (2:38, 7:172, 33:72).
2:36-38 talk about the eviction of our parents and ourselves to "the land" (in this current universe). It tells us how we came here for a temporary stay (from paradise), and what our purpose in life should be in order to be successful here ("when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance ...." in 2:38).
It covers land in this universe, on the planet earth, and wherever humans may colonize by God's will in the future. Very soon, humans could be colonizing Mars and other places in our universe. The planet earth itself is neither special nor remarkable in the grand scheme of our universe.
-
Athman, salaamun 'alaikum
Also, the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe. Now as we know more a lot more than what was known back then, we update our understanding accordingly.
Regarding 41:9-12, yes the verses describe a breakdown of 'days' for creating matter (two), and making matter sustainable for life (four) ... i.e., decreed the laws that are fine tuned for life; and the creation of all the seven vacua/spaces/universes (two).
I am not saying it is necessarily "instantaneous". I am only saying the description is of the very beginning of creation, not the of the 9 or 10 billion years it took for this planet earth to form and become habitable. I do not know the timescale involved, or understand whether a time scale has any significance, since time itself was created when space and matter were created.
Peace.
-
Dear niaz,
Wa alaikumus salaam,
You shared:
“Thanks for sharing.
Regarding 2:29-30, I do not see it as restricted to the planet earth. 2:30 is fulfilled in 2:31-39 that follow.
2:31-35 happen in paradise (some place outside our current universe), where we all were once there (2:38, 7:172, 33:72).
2:36-38 talk about the eviction of our parents and ourselves to "the land" (in this current universe). It tells us how we came here for a temporary stay (from paradise), and what our purpose in life should be in order to be successful here ("when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance ...." in 2:38).
It covers land in this universe, on the planet earth, and wherever humans may colonize by God's will in the future. Very soon, humans could be colonizing Mars and other places in our universe. The planet earth itself is neither special nor remarkable in the grand scheme of our universe.”
I am sure the following article by Br. Joseph addresses some of your contentions above. On a side-note, identifying ‘the earth’ as ‘our planet earth’ in some of the instances it appears as mentioned in the Qur’an does not deem it so special or remarkable as you put it rather at least the relevant ‘world’ in which we live and whose inhabitants are directly addressed by the Qur’an. Other ‘lands,’ possibly Mars inclusive, are not whose ‘possible’ inhabitants find direct and primary address from the Quran’s way of address especially with such notable and well-known places on ‘our earth’ like Makkah, Rome, Midian, etc., mentioned therein.
http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm
You then commented:
Also, the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe. Now as we know more a lot more than what was known back then, we update our understanding accordingly.
In as much as your proposition that ‘the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe’ assumably holds, it can as well be arguably asserted that the Qur’an primarily addresses the contemporaneous classical audience, in a manner familiar to what would readily be appreciated in that context.
You again shared:
I am not saying it is necessarily "instantaneous". I am only saying the description is of the very beginning of creation, not the of the 9 or 10 billion years it took for this planet earth to form and become habitable. I do not know the timescale involved, or understand whether a time scale has any significance, since time itself was created when space and matter were created.
Respectfully, I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ I readily accept that space, time and matter were created. However, I acknowledge that words have meanings and their use is more significantly relevant to whom they are primarily addressed. I believe that ‘yaum’ (plural - ayyam) would not be an exception, with at least a time connotation, specifically ‘an expressed slice of time that gives some human relevance.’
Therefore, ‘6 ayyam’ would refer to ‘time periods,’ the actual timescale for such a ‘yaum’ not relevant to us, at least as deemed by the Qur’an in such a context. However, at least some relativeness of such-like ‘ayyam’ is alluded to in other verses from different contexts (23:112-113,32:5,10:45,2:196,2:203) and thus to have some human relevance, and as to why they are even deemed worth of mention for the Quran’s audience, interpreting them to be ‘aeons’ would not conflict the overarching Qur’anic aspect of time. You may also at least agree with me that a decree for ‘materialization’ of something by Allah could either be ‘momentary’ or ‘over time,’ at least from our perspective (time-bound).
On the other hand, I don’t subscribe to any advocacy of such theories describing the creation like that ‘of the 9 or 10 billion years,’ unless it is a theory that would find some unequivocal support from the Qur’an, at most something clear (18:22). However, accepting or rejecting them as truth or proof is another matter, and would arguably be debateable from my humble point of view.
Regards,
Athman.
-
Salaamun 'alaikum Athman,
Regarding your query, "I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ ", ... what I meant is that in the very beginning there was nothing. Then suddenly there was something (or more accurately, 'everything'). There was space-time and matter. And then there were laws governing how they interacted (fundamental forces, and whatever else). I understand the creation verses as referring to bringing this 'everything' that we see around us into existence.
Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but let me try one more time, to phrase my thoughts in a different way.
I must confess that I previously understood أَيَّامٍ in the context of the creation verses as periods or aeons, for almost 30 years, ever since I read Bucaille as a 12 year old. Verses like 41:11 [Bucaille's translation below] did not completely make sense when understood with the meaning is restricted to the planet earth. But I still managed to put away and ignore these minor nagging questions (see below), and move on.
"Moreover (tumma) He turned to heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth: come willingly or unwillingly! They said: we come in willing obedience.
Why would it refer to the actual formation of the tiny insignificant speck (planet earth) along with formation of the rest of the universe? Especially when the speck is no different. The same 100+ elements found on earth are the same elements found everywhere else. And the sun is a rather young star, its planets, including the earth are recent formations. Long before our sun and the earth formed, billions of other stars with billions of planets were already in existence. Is this verse really describing the formation of the earth (insignificant speck) and the sky (everything else in the universe besides this speck) in the same breath?
Until I came across an alternate reading of 41:11 recently, based on the meaning of أَرْضُ as land ... any land made of these 100+ elements; and سَّمَاءِ as space/vacuum around it [as in the translation from godalone.org, below]. And 41:11 made full sense to me instantly. As did other verses on creation.
Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly.
And this is far more profound and mystifying than one particular trivial instance of a planet condensing around a star.
I would like to also state that I do not consider this as a "proposition" or a "redefinition" of the Arabic words سَمَوَاتٍ and أَرْضُ, or a radical theory or idea. I see it as the simple process of refining my understanding of a verse and related verses [specifically the verses addressing creation of the cosmos], as I continue reading the Quran. The occurrence of these words in other verses do not have to be understood the exact same way. There are nuances in meaning of words, in certain contexts they can take different meanings than in other contexts. I am not saying that أَرْضُ does not mean or can never be understood as earth. That would be a very dumb thing to say. I am referring specifically to the creation verses only. When God is describing the creation of the cosmos to us, through human language of Arabic, the language that was spoken by Muhammad and his community, we should not restrict the meanings to those based on geocentric or anthropomorphic perspectives. Of course, in other verses, that relate to our experiences as humans [e.g., your reference to Makkah, Rome, Midian], it is perfectly acceptable to do that.
On 2:30, you can also understand it as planet earth. I only said I see no need to restrict the meaning to earth. But you can also read it as earth if you want. I read Joseph's article on Jannah ... thats a separate topic, that has no direct bearing on this discussion. I can comment on it another time.
And yes, if you say ayyam connotates a 'slice of time', thats perfectly fine (without grappling wth the idea that time itself was also created).
Finally, I would like to state that I think it does not matter much what one's final conclusion is on this question ... whether it is six 24-hour days, six periods or aeons stretching out until this planet earth formed ~4.5 bya, or six 'days'/stages until matter and space-time were created. Finally what is most important is the spiritual message of the Quran - to worship God alone. Thanks for considering my understanding as worthy of this discussion ... hopefully it has been fruitful. And hope we do not miss the forest for the trees as we stay zoomed into this particular topic.
Peace.
-
Athman, and completely switching topics, since you asked me to check out the article on whether جَنَّةَ was on earth (this is orthogonal to the discussion on the limits on the meaning of أرْضِ).
The basic premise of the article is that ".... there is no direct evidence in the Quran for such an assertion", meaning that the Quran is silent on this question, and hence either viewpoint is equally valid. And on the basis of this premise, it evaluates reasons that can favor the idea that جَنَّةَ could have been on earth.
But based on a simple, in context, sequential reading of the verses 2:35-36, I have to conclude that جَنَّةَ (paradise) is not in الأرْضِ (the land/earth). Since in 2:35 Adam, with his wife, are invited to live in paradise. Then after the original sin, Adam, his wife, and all of us, are evicted from paradise and then sent to earth (2:36). Which means that we were not in the earth to begin with. I consider this direct evidence.
And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise - جَنَّةَ - , you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors.
However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land/earth - الأرْضِ - shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile.
Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful.
We said, go down from here all of you. Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.
[2:35-38]
A second problem is that we were also in جَنَّةَ (this is alluded to in 2:36, and reconfirmed in 2:38; also see 33:72, 7:172). If جَنَّةَ were on earth, it would mean that we reincarnated on the earth.
A third problem is that the earth is only a temporary abode "for awhile" (إِلَى حِي). Our primary existence was in جَنَّةَ, this world is just a sojourn to make amends for the incident described in 2:36. The جَنَّةَ we return to is other wordly. The جَنَّةَ near which Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15). The جَنَّةَ we came from should also be expected to be other worldly.
Peace.
-
Dear Br. niaz,
Wa alaikumus salaam,
Thanks for your detailed and informative reply.
Kindly see my responses in blue italics to your comments.
Regarding your query, "I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ ", ... what I meant is that in the very beginning there was nothing. Then suddenly there was something (or more accurately, 'everything'). There was space-time and matter. And then there were laws governing how they interacted (fundamental forces, and whatever else). I understand the creation verses as referring to bringing this 'everything' that we see around us into existence.
What I have been contending with your idea of ‘everything suddenly appearing’ is that this doesn’t have to necessarily be understood as ‘suddenly’ in the sense of the word. With such descriptive elaborations in chapters 41 and 79, and use of ‘time-connotative’ ayyam (singular-yaum), one is inclined to interpret the creation as spread over ‘periods’ of time, at least from human perspective.
Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but let me try one more time, to phrase my thoughts in a different way.
I must confess that I previously understood أَيَّامٍ in the context of the creation verses as periods or aeons, for almost 30 years, ever since I read Bucaille as a 12 year old. Verses like 41:11 [Bucaille's translation below] did not completely make sense when understood with the meaning is restricted to the planet earth. But I still managed to put away and ignore these minor nagging questions (see below), and move on.
"Moreover (tumma) He turned to heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth: come willingly or unwillingly! They said: we come in willing obedience.
Why would it refer to the actual formation of the tiny insignificant speck (planet earth) along with formation of the rest of the universe? Especially when the speck is no different. The same 100+ elements found on earth are the same elements found everywhere else. And the sun is a rather young star, its planets, including the earth are recent formations. Long before our sun and the earth formed, billions of other stars with billions of planets were already in existence. Is this verse really describing the formation of the earth (insignificant speck) and the sky (everything else in the universe besides this speck) in the same breath?
It's Okay, no need to be sorry brother. You are actually clear. Sure. The ‘Earth’ is insignificant when considering the grand whole Universe. As I intimated earlier, the ‘Earth’ could be regarded archetypical of other ‘lands’ (65:12) and so ‘ardh’ doesn’t necessarily and restrictively refer to Planet Earth. However, the opposite also stands as far as the relevant Qur’anic references are concerned. Furthermore, what the 7th Century Arabian audience would readily relate to as far as the term ‘ardh’ is concerned would be what had been classically extant. This would arguably also acknowledge their limited scope and ambit on what incorporates the Cosmos, at that time.
Until I came across an alternate reading of 41:11 recently, based on the meaning of أَرْضُ as land ... any land made of these 100+ elements; and سَّمَاءِ as space/vacuum around it [as in the translation from godalone.org, below]. And 41:11 made full sense to me instantly. As did other verses on creation.
Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly.
And this is far more profound and mystifying than one particular trivial instance of a planet condensing around a star.
I would like to also state that I do not consider this as a "proposition" or a "redefinition" of the Arabic words سَمَوَاتٍ and أَرْضُ, or a radical theory or idea. I see it as the simple process of refining my understanding of a verse and related verses [specifically the verses addressing creation of the cosmos], as I continue reading the Quran.
As much as the above is respectfully appreciated, one has to be cautious accepting a ‘sense-making’
refined understanding that might otherwise be tantamount to a somehow whole redefinition of the term especially as classically understood or even with modern-day extant nuance. Unless a citation of some unequivocal Qur’anic support is made, or else from well-known classical Arabic lexicons or references, a ‘one’ organization website interpretation would be untenable from my humble opinion, despite it somehow making sense especially as regards some theological scruples over some understanding.
The occurrence of these words in other verses do not have to be understood the exact same way. There are nuances in meaning of words, in certain contexts they can take different meanings than in other contexts. I am not saying that أَرْضُ does not mean or can never be understood as earth. That would be a very dumb thing to say. I am referring specifically to the creation verses only. When God is describing the creation of the cosmos to us, through human language of Arabic, the language that was spoken by Muhammad and his community, we should not restrict the meanings to those based on geocentric or anthropomorphic perspectives. Of course, in other verses, that relate to our experiences as humans [e.g., your reference to Makkah, Rome, Midian], it is perfectly acceptable to do that.
I concur. As an addition, I would still assert that the 7th Century Arabian context has to be appreciated, especially the ambit of their know-how pertaining Cosmos during the Quran’s revelation, when understanding such terms.
On 2:30, you can also understand it as planet earth. I only said I see no need to restrict the meaning to earth. But you can also read it as earth if you want. I read Joseph's article on Jannah ... thats a separate topic, that has no direct bearing on this discussion. I can comment on it another time.
With Br. Joseph’s article, of which I don’t have any qualms with as far as the subject matter is concerned, replete with relevant Qur’anic verses and well presented, you would agree with me that your statement ‘in paradise (some place outside our current universe),’ would best be argued against using such an exposition as that in the article.
And yes, if you say ayyam connotates a 'slice of time', thats perfectly fine (without grappling wth the idea that time itself was also created).
Finally, I would like to state that I think it does not matter much what one's final conclusion is on this question ... whether it is six 24-hour days, six periods or aeons stretching out until this planet earth formed ~4.5 bya, or six 'days'/stages until matter and space-time were created. Finally what is most important is the spiritual message of the Quran - to worship God alone. Thanks for considering my understanding as worthy of this discussion ... hopefully it has been fruitful. And hope we do not miss the forest for the trees as we stay zoomed into this particular topic.
Of course brother it has been much fruitful especially with your insights. As far as this discussion is concerned, I don’t agree with your summarized conclusion per se. I do fully appreciate that the ultimate goal is to grasp the spiritual message of the Qur’an. However, I find it necessary that as a believer, one has an obligation to do the best they can in striving towards truth upholding the same, honestly within their ambit of knowledge. It matters having a fully convinced conclusion presented as a rational argument against some topic in an academic discussion towards pursuit of knowledge, especially as one supported by the Qur’an.
Athman, and completely switching topics, since you asked me to check out the article on whether جَنَّةَ was on earth (this is orthogonal to the discussion on the limits on the meaning of أرْضِ).
The basic premise of the article is that ".... there is no direct evidence in the Quran for such an assertion", meaning that the Quran is silent on this question, and hence either viewpoint is equally valid. And on the basis of this premise, it evaluates reasons that can favor the idea that جَنَّةَ could have been on earth.
You may also want to reconsider the ‘Final Thoughts’ of the article [1] by Br. Joseph as referenced below: “Given the discussions above it appears that both Adam (pbuh) and his spouse were created for the purposes to reside on Earth as vicegerents. What changed was the state of felicity that they initially acquired and after sinning, were subsequently banished from it till a term appointed.”
But based on a simple, in context, sequential reading of the verses 2:35-36, I have to conclude that جَنَّةَ (paradise) is not in الأرْضِ (the land/earth). Since in 2:35 Adam, with his wife, are invited to live in paradise. Then after the original sin, Adam, his wife, and all of us, are evicted from paradise and then sent to earth (2:36). Which means that we were not in the earth to begin with. I consider this direct evidence.
And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise - جَنَّةَ - , you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors.
I recommend the section ‘ADAM (pbuh) WAS MADE FOR THE EARTH’ in the article [1].
However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land/earth - الأرْضِ - shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile.
Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful.
We said, go down from here all of you. Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.
[2:35-38]
A second problem is that we were also in جَنَّةَ (this is alluded to in 2:36, and reconfirmed in 2:38; also see 33:72, 7:172). If جَنَّةَ were on earth, it would mean that we reincarnated on the earth.
I hope that the section 'GO DOWN' in the article [1] addresses your contention. Specifically, I trust that understanding Adam and His spouse as representative (quintessential) of all of Humankind would make it easy appreciating the use of the phrase ‘ba’dhukum liba’dhi ‘aduwwun’ – as enemies to one another (2:36).
A third problem is that the earth is only a temporary abode "for awhile" (إِلَى حِي). Our primary existence was in جَنَّةَ, this world is just a sojourn to make amends for the incident described in 2:36. The جَنَّةَ we return to is other wordly. The جَنَّةَ near which Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15). The جَنَّةَ we came from should also be expected to be other worldly.
I think that as much as your argument for the ‘Adam’s destined abode’ in the Universe is concerned, you make some assumptions and quote some Qur’anic verses that open up to other topics (e.g, Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15), also see 33:72, 7:172 ) of which would be out of scope of this discussion. On the other hand, referring you to some articles for reference of the same is interpreted as being orthogonal to this discussion. In my humble view, as far as this discussion is concerned, I would advise that you try to reconsider your Qur’anic verses quoted in support of the contention you try to make lest it seemingly turns to being unrelated to the subject matter of the foregoing discussion.
Regards,
Athman.
References:
[1]. ADAM (pbuh) AND JANNAH - AN EARTHLY ABODE OR PARADISE?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm
-
Salaam Athman. Thanks for the response. You have shared your perspective, and I had shared mine. We can trust that each of us will "consider" and "reconsider" what the other has said and form our own views, in our own course of time, without feeling the need to make each other agree.
For the meaning of السَّمَوَتِ وَالأرْضَ in the verses on creation (e.g., 41:11), I don't have anything further to add, beyond what I have already stated before. Just a comment on considering the context of a "7th century Arabian" ... I agree in many cases, it is judicious to do so; e.g., when God tells us not to eat the meat of the خِنْزِيرِ (pig) or to observe the صَّلَوٰةَ (contact prayer) or perform the سُّجُودِ (prostration) etc. there is no reason to pretend not to know the meaning, or ask silly questions on how to follow the commandment. We just "hear and obey" using the known, established meaning of the word, just like the 7th century Arab would have been expected to simply obey without questioning the meaning himself.
At the same time, the Quran is a living book, and God continues to reveal His signs in nature and scripture to every generation. What we know now on natural phenomena, by God's leave, may be a lot more than what previous generations or 7th century Arabs knew, and we shape our understanding of the Quran accordingly, especially if the old interpretation or ascribed meaning contradicts or makes little sense in the light of what we now know. For example, today, we can understand عَلَقٍ [e.g., 96:2] as the embryo that is 'implanted' or 'hanging' on the uterine wall. The 7th century Arab may have understood it as 'blood clot'. We can look at the range of meanings of the word, and revise our understanding based on our current knowledge, without restricting ourselves to what might have been known in the 7th century.
On جَنَّةَ (paradise) being on earth, I had read through the article when you first cited it, and the arguments I raised were specifically those that were not addressed in the article to begin with. Then referring me back to the article is of little help. My main point is that the destination of the relocation is clearly mentioned as الأرْضِ (earth). If you are told that you are going down from place A, and your dwelling is now going to be in place B for some time, it is obvious / common sense that place A is not already in place B. There is no reference to this made in the article.
And as a matter of general approach to understanding the Quran, I advocate reading the Quran sequentially [verse after verse], and in context, and take the simple, evident, common sense meaning that is imported by a whole passage or series of verses. The simple meaning here is that we were in some place جَنَّةَ, and as a consequence of the original sin, we were relocated from that place to this earth. Of course, this was in accordance with God's plan (2:30). Now if we make inferences and try to extrapolate interpretations [تَأْوِيلِ] from Quranic verses, and claim that those interpretations contradict the simple meaning of a Quranic passage, in my view, there is a problem with those interpretations, and the simple meaning of the passage is what we need to accept. What is the reason in the first place to dispute or question what the passage is telling us? What is the relevance of this question? How does it matter?
I personally considered this idea (of paradise on earth) at a time when I [mistakenly] thought that it made the event compatible with the theory of evolution. And later abandoned it when I realized that the spiritual message, and the import on the purpose of our life, was lost; and it was not what the passage was literally saying.
A second matter that I had mentioned, that was not addressed in the article either, is that all of us, including you and me, were also in جَنَّةَ. This is clear from 2:38, which is addressed to each of us, until the end of time. Just because the article did not address it does not make it "out of the scope of this discussion". The further verses I quoted, were only to establish what 2:38 already made very clear. And the idea that Adam and his wife are 'representative' of humankind would only strengthens this, and not contradict it, as it would mean that all of humankind were in جَنَّةَ, just like Adam and his wife.
[2:38] We said, go down from here all of you. Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.
Peace.
-
Br. niaz,
Salaamun Alaikum,
Dear brother, it is not my intention to make you agree to my perspective nor somebody else’s. I am humbly parting with my view as regards the subject of this thread, trying as much possible to align my opinions to the best meaning I can get from the Qur’anic verses and as consistent possible. Telling you to ‘reconsider’ the final thoughts of Br. Joseph’s article is just because personally, I feel that you seem to cherry-pick some statements made therein, others as claimed premise of the article, and others overlooking their context. Rather, the ‘Final Thoughts’ stand at a better position to summarize the discourse. To reconsider your Qur’anic citations is just so that you don’t feel I’m making you switch topics nor insinuating some orthogonal discussions, rather addressing your supporting references which seem to be addressed somewhere else in detail.
I agree with your understanding of considering a 7th Century Arabian context - as regards placing certain Qur’anic extracts in their appropriate context, and refining our understanding of certain concepts and terminologies. I’m just trying to be cautious not to ‘redefine’ terms or render their ‘essential’ purport vague. In my humble opinion, if not how a concept is used as reiterated in some of the Qur’anic discourses, the classical understanding would better place the ‘essence’ of such a concept at its appropriate context - the essence.
With ‘Adam’s destined abode,’ referring you to the article is not intended necessarily to be of much help somehow as you would expect, but because I personally feel that your arguments are addressed therein and because you continuously assert that ‘no reference’ is made to the effect, I still have to refer you to the same article [1].
Respectfully Br. niaz, I haven’t seen any unequivocal Qur’anic support you have given hitherto to support your conclusive assertion that some prior ‘sinning’ had to take place before Adam could be ‘transported’ to their ‘destined abode’ in the first place (2:30). As stated in the article, ‘there is no disconnect in the theme of the Quranic narrative and therefore there is no reason to assume that the location has changed.’ (2:30-35) About ‘what we need to accept,’ I don’t think there’s any extrapolation of interpretation made whatsoever but the Qur’anic narrative is made use of as appears in the Qur’an, as regards an advanced theme and plot.
Personally, I see the discourse made as per the Qur’anic narrative and not a pre-conceived assumption to conflate some theological perspective nor a world-wide or scientific view like that of evolution.
Regarding the scope of this discussion, whether or not we are also included in 2:36-38 is not relevant. However, it is relevant to the ‘Adam’s destined abode’ topic - out of scope of this one, and as I pointed out earlier, ‘ba’dhukum liba’dhi ‘aduwwun’ - as enemies to one another (2:36) can essentially be understood as referring to the two spouses - Adam & his partner (...fa azallahuma...fa akhrajahuma - 2:36), as representative of the Humankind. Similarly, you may want to understand ‘ihbithu minha jami’a’ as referring to the ‘representative’ couple (2:36) or rather with Iblees (7:13) - not necessarily with ‘all’ of Humankind - ‘us’ actually being the audience.
In the main dear Br. niaz, we just have to part with our sincere understandings as primarily evidenced from the Qur’an and try stay as consistent possible holistically with a rational approach. We may consider and reconsider the views of others as we try to filter and discern with the criterial Qur’an and as well agree to disagree at some point if it warrants.
Regards,
Athman.
REFERENCE:
[1]. ADAM (pbuh) AND JANNAH - AN EARTHLY ABODE OR PARADISE?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm
-
Salaam Athman,
I did the best I could to highlight/bold the source and destination locations, which are clearly and separately identified, to get your attention to this, which I personally consider the "direct evidence" that the article made the claim as missing. I rest my case with this post, insha allah; I'll try to summarize my takeaway from the passage, and the other passages in the Quran that relate the same history. And yes, we were destined to be here, but the pre-destination does not contradict the fact that we are here as a consequence of the original sin. I don't know if you are suggesting that we are not here as a result of it. The pharaoh was predestined to drown in the sea, but his drowning was also a consequence of his tyrannical ways he led his life on earth. The event is also repeated in 7:10-25, 20:115-127. In both these cases, just like in 2:30-39, it is first prefaced by the 'destined' end result (as in 2:30) - that humanity was established on the land/earth (7:10), and how Adam forgot the covenant he had with God, because he did not stand firm to satan (20:115). Then all three accounts proceed to detail the logical sequence of events, starting from our creation, and God's commandment to the angels to acknowledge or honor us for the intellectual capabilities God bestowed upon us ....
(0) Preface (2:30, 7:10, 20:115), introducing God's plan to place a substitute or successor on the land/earth, and the result: that Adam broke God's covenant under the influence of satan; and that we are established upon the earth [fulfilled through events (3) or (4) below].
(1) Creation of Adam and each of us (7:11), God's command to the angels, and the disobedience and fall of satan
(2) Dwelling of Adam/wife in paradise and the commandment of the tree
(3) Satan tricking Adam/wife into breaking the commandment of the tree.
(4) The expulsion of Adam/wife and satan, with "all of you" (addressing the audience of the Quran) to another place - the earth - as a temporary abode.
(5) Then during his earthly life, Adam receives words/guidance from God; and God accepts Adam's repentance.
(6) The purpose of our temporary existence here on this on earth, outlined for the rest of us ("all of you" ... the audience of the Quran) ...- that we will receive guidance from God, and whoever among us will follow God's guidance has nothing to fear or grieve. If we turn to God, our repentance will be accepted, just as Adam's was.
- And if we reject/ignore God's reminder/proofs when it comes to us, we will end up among those who are ignored on the Day of Judgement.
This is the best answer we have to the deepest and most fundamental question in the mind of every human ... why are we here on earth? what is the purpose of our existence here? And this is a logical sequence - (4) was a consequence of (3), and (5) the atonement (tawba) for what happened in (3). If we don't read it as a simple and logical narrative, and break it up and make conclusions that are contradictory to this narrative, the message is lost. You have clarified that you do not have 'a pre-conceived assumption to conflate some theological perspective nor a world-wide or scientific view ...', but I failed to see the underlying reason to dispute or offer a counter narrative to the simple, logical, narration of events.
I admit I would have come across as opinionated .... my goal was not to badger, but to communicate my thoughts, and highlight the gaps in our perspectives. This has been an interesting and enlightening discussion, and thanks to you for that.
Peace.
أعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
[2:30-39]And when your Lord said to the angels, I am the appointer of a substitute on the land, they said will You appoint someone therein who will spread corruption and shed blood, while we glorify and praise You and consider You sacred? He said I have complete knowledge while you do not know. And He taught Adam all the names, afterwards, He presented them to the angels and said, inform Me of these names if you are truthful. They said, glory be to You, we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, You are The All Knowing, The All Wise. He said, O Adam; inform them of their names. Once he informed them of their names, He said, did I not tell you that I fully know the secret of the vacua and matter and fully know what you declare and what you conceal. And when We said to the angels; honor Adam, they all honored him, except Iblis who refused; he turned arrogant and became a disbeliever. And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise, you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors. However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile. Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful. We said, go down from here all of you. Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve. As for those who are unfaithful and rejected Our proofs, they are dwellers of Hell. They will abide therein eternally.
[7:10-25] And, We certainly established you on the land and provided for you therein sustenance. Indeed very few are grateful. And indeed, We created you, then We designed you, We then said to the angels to honor Adam, they immediately honored him except Iblees who was not one of the honorers. He said; what prevented you from honoring him when I commanded you? He said; I am better than he, You created me from fire and you created him from clay. He said; then you shall go down therefrom, for you shall never be arrogant therein, therefore, get out, for indeed you are lowly. He said; respite me until the Day of Resurrection. He said; you shall have a respite. He said; since you have enticed me, I will surely divert them from Your straight path. Then I will surely come to them from their front and their back and their right and their left; and You will find most of them ungrateful. He said; get out therefrom debased and expelled. Indeed those among them who follow you, I will surely fill Gehenna with you altogether. As for you O Adam, you shall settle, you and your wife in Paradise, and eat from whatever the two of you desire, however, do not approach this one tree, lest you will transgress. Thereafter, Satan duped them in order to reveal what was hidden of their bodies and said; your Lord did not forbid you from this tree except to prevent you from becoming angels or becoming immortal. And he swore by both that indeed I am giving you good advice. He therefore caused their fall with a lie. Consequently, once both tasted the tree, their bodies became visible to them and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise. And their Lord called upon them; did I not forbid this tree for the two of you and did I not tell you both that Satan is your most ardent enemy? They said, our Lord, we have been unjust towards our own souls and if You do not forgive us and do not have mercy upon us, we will surely end up losers. He said; go down as enemies of one another. And the land will be your abode and sustenance for a while. He said; in it you will live and in it you will die and from it you will come out.
[20:115-127] And indeed We made an agreement with Adam previously, he then forgot, We did not find him resolute. And when We said to the angels, honor Adam, they all did, except Iblis who refused. We then said; O Adam, indeed he is an enemy of you and your wife, he would cause your eviction from Paradise and you will suffer hardship. Indeed you will never suffer hunger therein nor will you ever be naked. And indeed you will never thirst therein and never suffer the heat of the sun. Then Satan enticed them saying; O Adam shall I show you the tree of eternity and everlasting kingship? Then they both ate from it, whereupon their bodies became visible to them and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise. And Adam disobeyed his Lord and he then became a transgressor. Then his Lord chose him, accepted his repentance and guided him. He said the two of you get out therefrom with the rest as enemies of one another. Therefore, when guidance comes to you from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he will never go astray nor will he suffer any hardship. And whoever rejects My reminder, he will then surely have a life of hardship, and We will summon him on the Day of Resurrection blind. He said, my Lord why did you summon me blind when I used to be a seer. He said; because when Our proofs came to you, you chose to ignore them, and you are thus ignored today. And We thus requite the one who transgresses and does not believe in the signs of his Lord. And indeed the suffering of the Hereafter is far more severe and everlasting.
-
Dear Br. niaz,
Salaam,
Kindly see my comments to your italicized sentiments below.
And yes, we were destined to be here, but the pre-destination does not contradict the fact that we are here as a consequence of the original sin. I don't know if you are suggesting that we are not here as a result of it. The pharaoh was predestined to drown in the sea, but his drowning was also a consequence of his tyrannical ways he led his life on earth.
In my humble opinion, I don't see Adam's sin the reason why we are all here on Planet Earth, rather it was Allah's plan that we be here in the first place (2:30) to test us (29:2-3) continuously to establish those faithful and steadfast as contrasted to those disbelievers and faithless (47:31, 67:2). All this also having some basis in 33:72 in the first place, and not due to Adam's sin. On the other hand, Adam and his spouse's misconduct should not have any bearing on us (2:134). In the main, as Bani Adam, we were meant to be here in our current statii and with the trials we do encounter in our lives, to establish our true resolve and be judged after an appointed term. About Pharaoh and his fate, I trust that you would acknowledge the difference between a case where actions are put forth as a result of free-will and choice amounting to a deserved consequence and a case of Allah's original plan in ordaining something, as mentioned in the Qur'an. While the former has an attached individual's accountability apart from Allah's knowledge of it and its decree, the latter is attached to no one except Allah, His independent plan, with none else being there in the 'beginning' except Himself.
Then all three accounts proceed to detail the logical sequence of events, starting from our creation, and God's commandment to the angels to acknowledge or honor us for the intellectual capabilities God bestowed upon us ....
This should not form the basis for our being on earth though. The misconduct of our progenitors here on earth just incurred them some degradation of their high status, promised and granted after being created, from that privileged status of felicity to a lower one. Br. Joseph's article summarizes this.
(0) Preface (2:30, 7:10, 20:115), introducing God's plan to place a substitute or successor on the land/earth, and the result: that Adam broke God's covenant under the influence of satan; and that we are established upon the earth [fulfilled through events (3) or (4) below].
(1) Creation of Adam and each of us (7:11), God's command to the angels, and the disobedience and fall of satan
(2) Dwelling of Adam/wife in paradise and the commandment of the tree
(3) Satan tricking Adam/wife into breaking the commandment of the tree.
(4) The expulsion of Adam/wife and satan, with "all of you" (addressing the audience of the Quran) to another place - the earth - as a temporary abode.
(5) Then during his earthly life, Adam receives words/guidance from God; and God accepts Adam's repentance.
(6) The purpose of our temporary existence here on this on earth, outlined for the rest of us ("all of you" ... the audience of the Quran) ...that we will receive guidance from God, and whoever among us will follow God's guidance has nothing to fear or grieve. If we turn to God, our repentance will be accepted, just as Adam's was.And if we reject/ignore God's reminder/proofs when it comes to us, we will end up among those who are ignored on the Day of Judgement.
This is the best answer we have to the deepest and most fundamental question in the mind of every human ... why are we here on earth? what is the purpose of our existence here? And this is a logical sequence - (4) was a consequence of (3), and (5) the atonement (tawba) for what happened in (3). If we don't read it as a simple and logical narrative, and break it up and make conclusions that are contradictory to this narrative, the message is lost. You have clarified that you do not have 'a pre-conceived assumption to conflate some theological perspective nor a world-wide or scientific view ...', but I failed to see the underlying reason to dispute or offer a counter narrative to the simple, logical, narration of events.
I hope my response above addresses this issue of our purpose on earth (6:165) as opposed to an 'Original Sin' concept propounded by you, which is outrightly negated by 2:134.
I admit I would have come across as opinionated .... my goal was not to badger, but to communicate my thoughts, and highlight the gaps in our perspectives. This has been an interesting and enlightening discussion, and thanks to you for that.
Thanks brother for your insights, I appreciate too. However, I think I respectfully have to ask you that you accept this as my last response to you on this matter. I would recommend that you propound a dedicated critique on Br. Joseph's article above in a separate thread if you have any contentions against it, that is if you feel that's Okay with you. I may as well comment from there if need be. This is to avoid this thread appearing indefinitely protracted into multiple topics. Personally, I do concur with Br. Joseph's perspective in the article as far as the Qur'an is concerned.
Pertaining the subject matter of this thread, I think we both have presented our cases above. We may just agree to disagree on some points.
Regards,
Athman.
-
Salaam Athman,
Thank you. I can leave it there too. Not to continue the discussion any further, but only a quick clarification [since you mentioned 2:134], and I don't want the thread to end on a core misunderstanding about my perspective ... I am not saying we are responsible for something that only Adam did, in which we had no involvement - that would be negated by many verses, including 2:134. From my perspective, we are obviously equal participants in the original sin.
I don't want to write a critique on Joseph's article. I do have disagreements [and agreements] with different articles from different people, I don't intend to be writing critiques to all of them. Since you brought it up, I responded to you about it. But I can insha allah write an article summarizing my understanding on the passages, and addressing possible misconceptions and challenges, using the material in this thread as a reference. That may be a better starting point, than this thread.
Peace.