QM Forum
The Quran => General Discussions => Topic started by: Shahmatt on August 17, 2012, 03:40:17 PM
-
Dear Joseph Islam,
A colleague of mine who believes in the hadith suggested to me that the Quran was not the only means by which information was transmitted to the prophet. He cites 66:03 of evidence of other communications to the prophet which, he believes, has been captured in the books of hadith.
This verse does seem to suggest to me that extra Quranic communications with the prophet has happened. I've always somehow assumed that the Quran was the only method through which information was transmitted to the prophet - that what we read and understood is what he and his people read and understood. But this seems to me to be not the case.
What is your opinion on this?
-
Salamun Alaikum,
Please see my responses in the Q&A section to a similar question.
Did Prophet Receive Revelations?
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=97.msg286#msg286
I hope that helps, God willing.
Joseph.
-
Salamun alaikum,
I would like to make one comment. Everything that human beings ordinarily learn or which can be learned by normal means, many a time can be attributed to Allah. For example in 5:4, the method of training dogs has been attributed to Allah, even though it is common knowledge that any man who has learnt how, can teach the dogs. (Similarly see 2:282; 96:4-5; 55:4.). It is quite possible that the prophet learned about the information through some other means, in the normal circumstances, through ordinary means. And it was not required for the prophet to tell his wife the actual means by which he he came to know about the information. Therefore, the prophet’s comment is just normal in the circumstances. The verse does not refer to any extra quranic ‘revelation’.
Kind regards
Optimist
-
@ Joseph Islam,
Thanks very much for the explanation.
@ Optimist
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/66/3/default.htm (http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/66/3/default.htm)
I'm not sure if the communication could have been indirect or through ordinary means for this case. The information was passed on to the wife in confidence. In the verse, the wife asks the prophet where he learned the information. This may have been because it was perhaps not probable that he could have learned of it through ordinary means.
Therefore I would bank on the prophet finding out through direct means from God - whatever those lines of communication may have been. Dreams perhaps?
-
@ Joseph Islam,
Thanks very much for the explanation.
@ Optimist
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/66/3/default.htm (http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/66/3/default.htm)
I'm not sure if the communication could have been indirect or through ordinary means for this case. The information was passed on to the wife in confidence. In the verse, the wife asks the prophet where he learned the information. This may have been because it was perhaps not probable that he could have learned of it through ordinary means.
Therefore I would bank on the prophet finding out through direct means from God - whatever those lines of communication may have been. Dreams perhaps?
When I say ordinary means, it means it was made known to the prophet either through the other wife herself, or through someone person the other wife may have informed, even the prophet may have understood the same from other circumstances (like actions of the other wife to whom the secret was divulged)....which would perfectly justify prophet's comment. To interpret the said verse to mean Allah informed the prophet through direct means is problamatic. It would mean prophet received other revelations (traditionalists say un-recited revelation) other than the Quran which is contrary to the teachings of the Quran.
-
Salaam Optomist,
The verse is not problematic at all because, as Joseph mentioned, the inspiration was on a personal level. It was not for Quranic 'revelation'.
God manifests the truth in direct and indirect ways. In order to expose the situation He could have indeed revealed it through another person therefore bringing it to the prophet's attention or it could have been direct.
For you then, the verse about prophet Moses's mother being inspired to put the baby down will surely be more problematic because that is clearly direct communication.
You have this notion that you have made clear in other posts, that God does not intervene in the course of our lives so obviously verses like the above will give you cause for concern.
-
Salaam Optomist,
The verse is not problematic at all because, as Joseph mentioned, the inspiration was on a personal level. It was not for Quranic 'revelation'.
God manifests the truth in direct and indirect ways. In order to expose the situation He could have indeed revealed it through another person therefore bringing it to the prophet's attention or it could have been direct.
For you then, the verse about prophet Moses's mother being inspired to put the baby down will surely be more problematic because that is clearly direct communication.
You have this notion that you have made clear in other posts, that God does not intervene in the course of our lives so obviously verses like the above will give you cause for concern.
Wa'alaikumussalam,
Firstly, kindly note, the topic is not miracles, but Revelation from Allah. Therefore Allah’s "intervention" through revelation need not mixed with intervention we already discussed.
To say prophet received inspiration on a personal level, not for Quranic 'revelation', is contrary to the teachings of the Quran. The revelation the prophet received is nothing but Quran.
"Ha Mim: A Revelation from (Allah), Most Gracious, Most Merciful;- A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;- A REVELATION from the Beneficent, the Merciful Allah (41:1-3).
The prophet himself is made to confirm that the Wahi he is receiving is only Quran:
‘And this Qur'an has been revealed to me [uhiya ilayya ha_zal Qur'an] that with it I may warn you and whomsoever it reaches?’ (6:19)
Even the hypocrites were afraid "lest a Sura should be sent down about them, showing them what is (really passing) in their hearts."9:64. If prophet used to receive other "revelations" there is no substance in worrying just about Sura. I can quote for your several other verses also that negates any revelation other than Quran.
For you then, the verse about prophet Moses's mother being inspired to put the baby down will surely be more problematic because that is clearly direct communication.
The verses; إِذْ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ أُمِّكَ مَا يُوحَىٰ "Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration, the message"(20:38), also in 28:7 وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ أُمِّ مُوسَىٰ do not refer to Allah sending a direct wahi to the mother of Moses. Look a similar verse;
"And behold! I inspired the disciples وَإِذْ أَوْحَيْتُ إِلَى الْحَوَارِيِّينَ to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, 'We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'".(5:111)
To send wahi towards Isa’s hawariyeen or friends in the above verse means to send order towards them (through prophet Isa). In the same way to send wahi towards the mother of Hazrat Moosa would mean to send an order or news through a messenger to her. To believe from the word auhaina that a common human being could also receive the wahi like the prophets, is to go against the teachings of the Qur’an.
وَمَا كَانَ لِبَشَرٍ أَنْ يُكَلِّمَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَّا وَحْيًا أَوْ مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ أَوْ يُرْسِلَ رَسُولًا فَيُوحِيَ بِإِذْنِهِ مَا يَشَاءُ إِنَّهُ عَلِيٌّ حَكِيمٌ (42:51
Allah mentions in the above verse how He ‘speaks’ to man: basher or man is of two kinds: the prophets and other than the prophets (the common men): the first kind, that is, the prophets receive the message or wahi through Gabrial (example our Prophet) or a voice is directly heard like from behind a curtain (as in the case of Moses): as for the second class of humans, they only receive the wahi through the prophets, by sending an apostle to reveal, by His leave.
This is all for now
Kind regards
Optimist
-
Salamun Alaikum Optimist,
Thank you so much for your comments :)
I trust that you appreciate that no one is disputing Prophetic ‘wahi’ but I humbly do find some of your assertions unproven and without warrant. In my humble opinion, it also seems that you may be confusing the different types of 'wahi' (inspiration) that an individual may receive.
The verses; إِذْ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ أُمِّكَ مَا يُوحَىٰ "Behold! We sent to thy mother, by inspiration, the message"(20:38), also in 28:7 وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ أُمِّ مُوسَىٰ do not refer to Allah sending a direct wahi to the mother of Moses. Look a similar verse;
"And behold! I inspired the disciples وَإِذْ أَوْحَيْتُ إِلَى الْحَوَارِيِّينَ to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, 'We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'".(5:111)
To send wahi towards Isa’s hawariyeen or friends in the above verse means to send order towards them (through prophet Isa). In the same way to send wahi towards the mother of Hazrat Moosa would mean to send an order or news through a messenger to her. To believe from the word auhaina that a common human being could also receive the wahi like the prophets, is to go against the teachings of the Qur’an.
I feel your use of 5:111 to support your understanding of 20:38 is wholly misplaced. The Quran does not say that the disciples were inspired 'through' Prophet Jesus. I find that you are interpolating comments into the Arabic which do not exist and similarly limiting your interpretation of verse 42:51 with regards how God speaks to 'bashar'. Please see my humble perspective of 42:51 and the scope of 'Wahi' in the article below [1]
In my humble opinion, verse 28:7 is absolutely clear that direct wahi was sent to the mother of Prophet Moses.
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
With respect, your usage of 5:111 does not support your case in my humble opinion. You have 'interpolated' the need of a 'proxy / Prophetic involvement' in the specific context of 5:111 when the Quran gives you no warrant to do so, and then used your 'interpolation' to provide support for your interpretation of 28:7. This is respectfully unwarranted.
(2) Also please can you prove this statement from the Quran and inform which messenger sent such an 'order' to the mother of Prophet Moses?
In the same way to send wahi towards the mother of Hazrat Moosa would mean to send an order or news through a messenger to her.
Also, may I kindly request that this time you do not make exclusive use of 'Ghulam Parwez's' works to make your case. Clear evidence from the Quran and your explanations would respectfully suffice. I hope you will respect the sincere request.
Regards,
Joseph.
RELATED ARTICLE:
[1] UNDERSTANDING VERSE 42:51 - WHO CAN RECEIVE 'WAHI'?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/wahi%20FM3.htm
-
The Quran does not say that the disciples were inspired 'through' Prophet Jesus. I find that you are interpolating comments into the Arabic which do not exist
Salamun alaikum,
So are you telling me that the disciples were directly inspired by Allah and all of them responded to the “inspiration” saying, “We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are Muslims" (Pickthall translation)?. Please confirm this point keeping also the following points;
1. The collective response of the disciples of Jesus expressing their willingness to support Allah’s cause in response to the call from Jesus in 61:14.
2. The issue mentioned in the verse is a clear case of REVELATION (WAHI), a clear instruction to believe in Allah and his messenger and subsequent uniform response, and from the context it is clear that it is not related putting any “thought”, “suggestions”, 'manifestation of truth', etc sometimes I have seen you use to explain 'wahi' to ordinary people.
Similarly limiting your interpretation of verse 42:51 with regards how God speaks to 'bashar'.
Again I would require a confirmation of your view point that the term “basher” (related to first two communications mentioned in the verse, communication through wahi and voice is directly heard like from behind a curtain) is applicable to all humans AND NOT just Allah’s choosen bashar (the prophets).
"It is not (possible) that a man لِبَشَرٍ , to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the prophetic office, should say to people: "Be ye my worshippers rather than Allah's" (3:79)
Your question number (1) and (2) I will be responding later after I receive your comments for the above points, Insha Allah.
Kind regards
Optimist
-
Peace Optimist.
Please kindly do not answer a question with a question. There is no need to get emotional :) You have made specific assertions interpolating clear Arabic text which has been a theme of many of your posts on this forum which I have consistently, yet respectfully highlighted. Therefore once again, the burden of proof is with you to provide evidence for your assertions.
Please kindly provide your evidence.
If you cannot back up your claims, with respect I will have to (once again) end this discussion with you on lack of evidence.
Regards,
Joseph.
-
Salaam Optomist,
I was not talking about miracles, just about God's intervention which I know from other posts that you also have issues with.
A scriptural revelation is for specific types of humans, we all know this. However a human is also perfectly able to receive inspiration that is of a non revelation / scriptural nature.
I clearly mentioned the mother of Moses but you seem to put forward an alternative interpretation for this and other verses also.
If she was inspired directly, why would you take issue with this. It is perfectly plausible and is not at odds with 42.51. She simply received a message in a capacity as a mother.
It is clear to me that you have a standpoint and want verses to fit in with your concepts, regardless of the fact that it not present in the Arabic.
Thanks
-
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
Wa' alaikumussalam,
“AND [only] those who are devoid of knowledge say, "Why does God not speak unto us, nor is a [miraculous] sign shown to us?" Even thus, like unto what they say, spoke those who lived before their time: their hearts are all alike. Indeed, We have made all the signs manifest unto people who are endowed with inner certainty.” (2:118) - Muhammed Asad
The above verse contains two specific points raised by those who are devoid of knowledge, (1) what is the reason God does not speak to them (notice the same word يُكَلِّمَهُ اللَّهُ is used here as in the verse 42:51) and (2) what is the reason why no miracles are shown to them. The clear inference we can make out from their question is that they have been clearly told God does not speak directly (through Wahi or behind a curtain) to ordinary people and there will be no miracles shown to them. Quran further states, such a demand had also been made in the past by people with a similar mentality which shows that same questions had been repeated by ignorant people in the past. Can you explain the above verse without interpolation?
I have a humble request not to think everytime I raise a point I am bringing up Parwez (ofcourse I am attracted the reasoning of parwez in many cases). Leave that scholar now.....I do not know whether parwez used this verse to support any point of view. This is myown question. I want to know whether this verse can be understood differently.
I will make further comments later, Insha Allah
Kind regards
Optimist
-
Peace Optimist.
Thank you for your response.
Verse 42:51 can easily be read as a clarification verse to other verses such as 2:118. With respect, I feel this is not unequivocal proof of your assertion.
The question posed by the ignorant folk as to why God did not 'speak' to them could encompass an expectation of a direct form of address where God could be heard. There is no reason to 'restrict' what was meant by their expectation of 'speech' from God. If you imply a 'restriction', then once again the burden of proof is with you to provide the evidence for the restricted interpretation.
Verse 42:51 simply elaborates how good speaks to man. This verse does not confirm that God does not speak to man directly.
The verse makes it clear that communications from God reach humans ...
- Through inspiration / suggestions / indications etc (wahi) directly
- Behind a veil (Hijab) - (See Prophet Moses's example below)
- By sending a messenger
Please do not forget the Arabic li'basharin with the prefixed prep 'lam' and the indefinite noun in 42:52 is clearly a reference to any human. It can be clearly argued that 42:51 is a clarification of how God communicates. It is not proof that he does not communicate directly with humans. Please also note that God spoke to Prophet Moses directly (4:164) but was never seen (behind a veil 42:51 - Hijab) and could not be seen (7:143).
Therefore, with respect, I repeat my question.
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
Regards,
Joseph.
-
****
-
The question posed by the ignorant folk as to why God did not 'speak' to them could encompass an expectation of a direct form of address where God could be heard.
Salam,
Do you then agree (at the least) that the second mode of communication, a voice is heard from behind a curtain in 42:51, is not applicable for ordinary human being? It is clear from their question that the ignorant people would be satisfied with a revelation from Allah directly to them even as received by prophet himself (without a voice could be heard), for their expectation of “speech” from Allah.
There is no reason to 'restrict' what was meant by their expectation of 'speech' from God. If you imply a 'restriction', then once again the burden of proof is with you to provide the evidence for the restricted interpretation.
I did not restrict what was meant by their expectation of “speech” from God. To make my point clear again, the ignorant people were looking for direct communication from Allah to them (similar like the normal wahi received by the prophet or a voice heard from behind a curtain as happened in the case of Moses) and Allah strongly refutes such a request as complete ignorance, imitating ignorant people of past. But if you say (not very clear from your comments) it is something related to “God could be heard only” they were demanding (not even a direct wahi similar like the prophet received) you will be restricting their expectation.
Verse 42:51 simply elaborates how good speaks to man. This verse does not confirm that God does not speak to man directly
I agree with you verse 42:51 simply elaborates how good speaks to man (includes ordinary people and the prophets). I am pointing out verse 2:118 where the ignorant people say “Why does God not speak unto us” to confirm that God does not speak to man (ordinary people) directly.
-
Just to continue from my previous post, in addition to verse 2:118, kindly refer to the following verse;
He [alone] knows that which is beyond the reach of a created being's perception, and to none does He disclose aught of the mysteries of His Own unfathomable knowledge unless it be to an apostle whom He has been pleased to elect [therefor] (72:27) - Mohammed Asad
He (alone) knows the Unseen, nor does He make any one acquainted with His Mysteries,-"Except a messenger whom He has chosen (72:27) – Yousuf Ali
He is the Knower of the unseen; and He reveals not His secrets to anyone, Except to a Messenger of His whom He chooses. (72:27) – Sher Ali
Only He knows the future; and He does not divulge His secrets to anyone else; (except that) Through Wahi, He tells the person who is chosen as His Rasool, only what He wants (to tell).(72:27) - Parwez
I would like your comments also for the above verse.
Kind regards
Abdul Samad
-
I feel your use of 5:111 to support your understanding of 20:38 is wholly misplaced. The Quran does not say that the disciples were inspired 'through' Prophet Jesus. I find that you are interpolating comments into the Arabic which do not exist
Salam,
While I await comments for my earlier post, one more point. Sorry my comments are given in three seperate posts.
Suppose if we say, “what has been revealed unto those who believe” آمِنُوا بِالَّذِي أُنْزِلَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا in verse 3:72 means what has been revealed to the believers through prophet muhammed in Quran, will we be interpolating comments into the Arabic which do not exist? Quran does not say here 'through' Prophet Muhammed.
Kind regards,
Optimist
-
Peace Optimist,
Sadly, but with all due respect, you have once again not provided coherent, unequivocal proof of your position. I sadly find your posts incoherent and do nothing but to obfuscate the request for simple evidence.
Let me humbly repeat, verse 2:118 does not patently disprove that God does not speak to man directly. All it proves is that ignorant folks always have asked for God to speak to them (How is not defined). Verse 42:51 clearly elaborates how God interacts with potentially any human (li-basharin) and one of the methods is via wahi (inspiration - of all kinds). You are restricting this ‘wahi’ to prophetic wahi which is not warranted by the text and then imposing this interpolation on to your understanding of verse 2:118.
So I ask you the first question (of two) once again:
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
Please brother, a simple straight forward answer will suffice.
If you cannot provide coherent proof from the Quran, then I kindly request that you revisit the theology that your understanding of the Quran is based on and be humble enough to at least consider that your understanding 'may' be wrong and without warrant.
Regards,
Joseph.
-
Let me humbly repeat, verse 2:118 does not patently disprove that God does not speak to man directly. All it proves is that ignorant folks always have asked for God to speak to them (How is not defined). Verse 42:51 clearly elaborates how God interacts with potentially any human (li-basharin) and one of the methods is via wahi (inspiration - of all kinds). You are restricting this ‘wahi’ to prophetic wahi which is not warranted by the text and then imposing this interpolation on to your understanding of verse 2:118.
Peace brother Joseph,
I did not restrict li-basharin in 42:51 to refer to wahi received by prophets only. Such an assumption is unwarranted. This was what I said. Bashar includes both oridinay people and prophets (prophets are also human beings like us). The first two modes of communication mentioned in the verse refer to Allah's speech to prophets (being basher) and the third one mentioned in the verse refers to Allah's speech to ordinary people. It need not necessarily mean all the modes of communication should be applicable for all types of bashar at same time since the language used is "or", and therefore, even if one is applicable to ordinary people the verse will not be contradicted (for example, we know our prophet did not receive a communication like a voice being heard from behind a curtain as happened in the case of prophet Moses)
Let me quote 42:51 again, the highligted in blue refers to communication to prophets and the highlighted in red refers to communication to oridinary people.
It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak يُكَلِّمَهُ اللَّهُ to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil, or by the sending of a messenger to reveal, with Allah's permission, what Allah wills: for He is Most High, Most Wise.(yousuf Ali) (42:51)
Here comes the relevance of 2:118, the complaint of ignorant people as to “why God does not speak يُكَلِّمُنَا اللَّهُ to them?”. If Allah had used to speak to ordinary bashar directly without a messenger sending to them as you claim based on 42:51, it would not have been mentioned about such people as completely ignorant people following the footsteps of ingnorant people of the past. Your comment that this verse “does not patently disprove that God does not speak to man directly” goes against the verbal meaning of the verse. You are trying to interpolate the verse to conform to your view. To say that it is possible for ordinary people to receive wahi and it is possible Allah speaking to them like a voice heard from behind a curtain, etc is a dangerous interpolation which is a major diversion and corruption in Islam all along. You are indirectly (without intention) promoting such corruption.
So I ask you the first question (of two) once again:
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
Please brother, a simple straight forward answer will suffice.
The following verse is the unequivocal proof for God does not inspire ordinary people directly (except through a messenger);
"He [alone] knows that which is beyond the reach of a created being's perception, and to none does He disclose aught of the mysteries of His Own unfathomable knowledge unless it be to an apostle whom He has been pleased to elect [therefor]" (72:27) - Mohammed Asad
Kind regards
Optimist
-
Peace Optimist,
If you accept by your own admission that "Bashar includes both oridinay people and prophets (prophets are also human beings like us)", then why do you deny that wahi (different types) can potentially come to any human directly as God wills as clearly stated by the verse 42:51?
Prophetic wahi is only one type of 'wahi'. There are other suggestions, inclinations etc that can be a form of ‘wahi’ from God for example, the mother of Prophet Moses who received 'awha' to put her baby into the river and not to fear (28:7).
Your use of 42:51 to make your case is completely unwarranted. Even if 42:51 is accepted to necessitate the requirement of a 'messenger', this still does not disprove that on the basis of 42:51, God cannot inspire humans in many different ways, of which 'prophetic revelation' is one part.
Verse 72:27 only speaks of 'Prophetic wahi'. This does not provide any evidence for the negation of other types of wahi such as the one received by Prophet Moses's mother which is encompassed in 42:51.
So once again I ask you the same two questions due to lack of proof from you to support your position.
(1) Please can you provide clear unequivocal evidence that God does not inspire His servants directly in whatever way if He so wishes without any interpolations.
(2) Please provide evidence from the Quran that a messenger was sent to the mother of Prophet Moses to put the baby in the river. (20:38)
Regards,
Joseph.
-
Salamun Alaikum brother Joseph Islam,
I will make a final comment later, since I feel like our discussion is going in a circle.....Insha Allah.
Well, I came across the following hadith. It is true that hadiths can not be a source of guidance due to human effort in the collection and basically not sanctioned by Allah and his messenger. But the collection of hadith contains many truths no one can deny. Here is one hadith attributed to Ali (r);
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 283:
Narrated Abu Juhaifa: I asked Ali, "Do you have the knowledge of any Divine Inspiration besides what is in Allah's Book?" 'Ali replied, "No, by Him Who splits the grain of corn and creates the soul. I don't think we have such knowledge, but we have the ability of understanding which Allah may endow a person with, so that he may understand the Qur'an, and we have what is written in this paper as well." I asked, "What is written in this paper?" He replied, "(The regulations of) blood-money, the freeing of captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel."
http://www.muslimaccess.com/sunnah/hadeeth/bukhari/052.html
Any thoughts?
With immense respect to you always.
Optimist
-
Peace Optimist,
With respect, the sheer desperation of your position and your inability to provide unequivocal proof from the Quran for your position is clearly evidenced by the fact that you have had to use a 'BUKHARI HADITH' to make your case supporting it with your equally desperate comment:
But the collection of hadith contains many truths no one can deny. Here is one hadith attributed to Ali (r);
I have nothing more to add on this topic with you which readers can assess for themselves. I once again humbly and sincerely request that you revisit the precepts on which your theology is based.
Please accept this post as my final say on this topic.
With utmost respect,
Joseph