12
« on: February 24, 2021, 02:40:37 AM »
Dear ibn_a,
Salaam,
Kindly see below my responses to your comments in purple:
You wrote:
"Not sure how you compare those who believe in the numerical structure of the Quran to people who disbelieve in Allah and his messenger(pbuh) / kafaru bi Allah wa rasulihi (Quran 9:54)"
Dear brother, you are simply misrepresenting my position. Respectfully, I am not comparing any specific groups here. I simply responded to your concern which I re-quote here part of it: “…I don't think that those who disbelieve bother at all about their number, be it 19 or whatever number as they do not believe that the Quran is from God.” In response, I cited verse 9:54 which is a Qur’anic assertion that among those who confessed to have 'believed' from Prophet Muhammad’s (a.s) followers, some were actually ‘disbelievers.’ To elaborate and as food for thought, why would those who ‘kafaru billahi wa birasulihi’ approach prayer (ya’tuna swalata) in whatever manner? Why would they give charity (yunfiquna)? Why would they swear to be part of the Prophet’s followers (9:56)? Why would they criticize the Prophet with regards charity (sadaqah) - 9:58? The only answer to all these questions as clearly depicted by the context is that they were part of the Prophet’s congregation as professing believers.
"Not sure how you came to the asumption that interpreting a verse = denying a verse."
You are again misrepresenting what I wrote. I wrote “…if you don’t see it as a ‘fitna’ to those who ‘disbelieve,’ then that is denying a clear Qur’anic verse.” That was simply reproducing your own statement which I re-quote: “I do not see how being informed about their number/iddatahum would be a fitna /trial/confusion/test for those who disbelieve.”
"Even if the interpretation could be wrong."
I respectfully don’t find it a case of interpretation rather one where there’s a clear conditional denial of an assertion by the Qur’an.
"I would think that this was clear when i said:
Unless their number/iddatahum refers to a numerical structure of the Quran which disturbs / confuses those who disbelieve and increases the faith of those who believe."
I repeat: “From verse 74:31, there’s nothing that tells one that ‘their number’ (iddatahum - 19) is linked to a structure of the Qur’an nor that it should be extrapolated to some Qur’anic numerology. To me, that sounds like a great questionable leap in assumption into sheer fanaticism with numbers. After all, the verse concludes by asserting that none knows God’s agents/ armies (junud) but God. It still expects our understanding that ‘disbelievers’ will fuss around this ‘designated figure’ of angels guarding ‘saqar’ being 19 and not them being confused about it (iddat - 19) being established within the Qur’anic structure.”
"In my understanding it makes more sense being related to the numerical structure of the Quran in addition of the number of angels guarding hell being 19 rather than that what bothers those who disbelieve is just because the number of angels guarding hell is 19"
I entirely don’t agree with this approach. I can’t bet the truth or clarity of the message of a particular Qur’anic verse on simply personal sense-making based on an obscure extrapolation of an isolated Qur’anic phrase. How is the leap made from ‘over it (hell) are nineteen (angels)’ to ‘numerical structure of the Quran’ just so that a verse makes sense? Wouldn’t such an approach sanction freedom to the reader of the Qur’an to find any sense-making interpretation despite whether it is even hinted in context? Of course, disbelievers will fuss around this ‘designated figure’ of angels guarding ‘saqar’ being 19. This appears to be the expectation in verse 74:31 as it is asserted that none knows God’s agents/ armies (junud) but God. Whether you are ready to accept this as the verse's expectation is a prerogative of yours.
"When those who disbelieve are exposed to the the numerical structure of the Quran,
they either consider this and it could be a way to be guided or they discard it and it could be a way to go astray."
Respectfully, there’s no such elaboration in verse 74:31 of disbelievers going astray or them being guided aright by discarding or pursuing the notion of an alleged Qur’anic ‘numerical structure’ respectively. The term ‘kadhalika’ translates to ‘thus/ that way’ which alludes to a preceding exemplary scenario. From the foregoing narrative of verse 74:31, it is clear that true believers and those among people of the Book shall be guided harboring no doubts having been strengthened in belief and having attained certainty respectively. It is also clear that ‘those in whose hearts is disease’ and ‘disbelievers’ shall go astray by seeking to delve into the parable of ‘nineteen (19) angels over saqar’ asking why it is propounded. Thus, God leads astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills.
"Biside there being 19 angels guarding hell, a purpose was assigned to this number
jalnaa iddatahum /made their number
Nowhere did I say that it is 'insignificant'."
Nor did I say that you said it is insignificant. You again miss the point. In my opinion, pursuing an interpretation of 74:31 just because a reason for the citation of the parable has been cited simply portrays a great significance held to that parable by the one pursuing it. Otherwise, I would expect an individual to also pursue other parables cited in other verses regardless if a reason has been cited. Not doing so pronounces such parables insignificant in comparison to that of 74:31 in my opinion. Appealing to a cited reason in 74:31 is still inconclusive. As I have remarked: we do not however have datum to pursue it though we can easily relate to the message being shared in each of those parables cited.
"There is no reason to exclude the Quran from this, especially when the context is about "the message of their Lord"."
I didn’t exclude the Qur’an. The term ‘everything’ includes the Qur’an, the Gospel, the Torah, the Ketuvim and all possible Scriptures of God. It excludes none of God's creation. Rather, in your perspective, why should we single out the pursuit specifically on the Qur’an based on an isolated interpretation of verse 74:31?
"I do not see how you came to the conclusion that interpreting a verse = not accepting matters of ghayb."
Respectfully, you appear to consistently misrepresent my comments. If you won't mind, can you please show me where I made such an equation. I repeat: “I don’t expect a true believer to gloss over its interpretation. Rather, I expect them to accept matters of ‘ghayb’ and remain content with the level of detail shared by the Qur’an.”
"Why didn't you remain content with the level of detail shared by the Qur’an i.e.
(19 angels over 'saqar') rather than explaining that it exposes the disbelievers etc..."
Respectfully, I didn’t explain anything. If you can’t simply accept what verse 74:31 alludes to with regards leading those ‘diseased at heart’ and ‘disbelievers’ astray hence exposing them among professing believers as also ratified by 9:84ff then I don’t think you can accept any view that negates your position regardless if it is derived within context.
"From your replies you seem to know and explain why their number/ iddatahum is a fitna for those who disbelieve”
With all due respect, I didn’t explain anything beyond what I find as my sticking to the context of the verse and the message clearly imparted. As to why ‘iddatahum’ is a fitna to the disbelievers, yes, I know the reason. I repeat: the phrase ‘kadhalika yudhwilu Allahu man yashau wayahdi man yasha’ answers your original question which was ‘why’ and it is the same response which I gave as shared by the verse itself.
“and it seems also that you have identified those who disbelieve/alladhiena kafaru and explained why it/what increases the faith of those who believe and leave no doubt and cerainty for the People of the Book and the believers.”
I repeat: “I didn’t explain anything beyond what I find as my sticking to the context of the verse and the message clearly imparted.” In context of the verse, yes, I did identify those in whose hearts is a disease or disbelievers to be those who will fuss around this ‘designated figure’ of angels guarding ‘saqar’ being 19 as expected by the verse itself. It is purely an expectation within context - no extrapolation.
"But when you say that 74:31 is a mutashabihaat verse and not to be pursued, then it would be more logical to abstain from trying to explain this verse, as you cannot be sure about your explanation nor can you be sure that explanation of others are wrong."
Dear brother, I repeat: “I didn’t explain anything beyond what I find as my sticking to the context of the verse and the message clearly imparted.” It is as if you see what I do not intend to pass across as a sentiment. To reiterate, such citations of some particulars of the Hereafter (e.g, 19 angels over saqar) form part of the ‘mutashabihat’ verses to us since they are matters of ‘ghayb’ never to be pursued to reach a vivid detailed explanation. To stay true to the message, I didn’t explain the 19 angels over saqar nor did I pursue any explanation but rather accepted it as knowledge the details of which remain within God’s reach as asserted by the verse itself.
"In my opinion 3) makes most sense, and of course to each their own understanding."
I don’t have any problem with what you personally believe nor what you are ready to accept as truth. To be precise, I simply responded to your original question which I recognize that you have acknowledged. It is you who brought the notion of ‘over it are nineteen’ as being related to a numerical structure of the Qur’an. I also observe that you have misrepresented or rather misconstrued many of my previous comments to yours. Kindly do take your time to understand what is being shared before responding.
I hope that clarifies my position.
Regards,
Athman.
Show Posts