Show Posts
61
General Discussions / Re: Ismaeel or Ishaaq (PBUT)
« on: September 11, 2018, 11:12:34 PM »
Dear Br. Student,
Wa alaikumus salaam,
Without overlooking what has been shared by Br. Duster (Jazakallah for the contribution), see my responses below.
You say:
"I did not raise question on 2nd part of the story at all - whether the command was/wasn't from God"
Originally, you said, I quote “...passage seems to clearly implies it was from God as I see it”
In my opinion, the follow-up phrases you cited were earlier aptly responded to by Br. Duster, to which I feel you haven’t given a befitting rebuttal. See my response below to your question “Did Quran say the dream was from Satan?”
"I did not raise question on 2nd part of the story at all - whether the command was/wasn't from God"
Kindly refer to my response to your question ‘1.’ above please.
"I am here as a humble student of the Quran befitting my user/profile name , not other way around "
Nor is anyone claiming to be a teacher dear brother. We all are students of the Qur’an which, in the main, should be the criterion (teacher for that matter) as God’s word in our midst - the Prophet (pbuh) is not here to rest authority over a particular position on certain issues (16:44). Therefore, please, let’s keep the discussions. Where we seem not to reconcile, let’s just simply agree to disagree.
"This is exactly what I wanted to see as an answer to my question (rephrasing here): Whom/what do you think the source of the dream was?"
My response was given above to which you even expressed some little conviction as quoted below.
"I must admit the answer is more convincing than all those lengthy discussions...however I'm still not 100% convinced it wasn't from God simply because I don't see/take this command as an evil/unethical/immoral at all. It was a momentary but momentous test for a lesson for believers captured in OT and Quran for posterity."
Respectfully, I find it strange that you seem to expect short responses yet some of your comments appear much protracted like this one which has covered other acutely unrelated topics below. One can’t always have set pet replies that address specific subjects. Even where there is, elaborations are essential since different people could interpret a particular verse differently given their theological backgrounds, lines of thought, information so far accessed, etc. Anyways, you may choose to pass over some if you feel obliged to.
Being seemingly evil or not, the contention is that it was not from God (6:151, 4:29, 5:32). You haven't either substantiated your claim that it "was a momentary but momentous test for a lesson for believers captured in OT and Quran for posterity"
If you still disagree with that argument then how would you explain the following?
Did Quran say the dream was from Satan?
With due respect, I see this as actually a case of shifting the burden of proof. The original position is that it was just a dream that was never meant to be interpreted as a command from God. Now, if your response is on the affirmative as regards whether the command in the dream was from God, you are the one to prove it. As for the dream in itself as a dream (inherently), I think Br. Duster clarified above. Even if somethings is as a result of Satan’s whispers, God is the ultimate Decreer of its manifestation. Now, this doesn’t amount to ‘it was from God.’
What was the original dream before Satan's corruption? In your words: He makes prevail His will (no actual sacrifice) - what was God's original will in this whole incident?
I didn’t say that there was an ‘original will’ of God nor an ‘original dream.’ I just meant that the ‘decision’ made out of the dream was never approved by God and therefore, this (disapproval) was actually actioned through preventing it (the sacrifice) happening.
Why did God allow satanic inspiration to the point of slaughtering?
As believers, I don’t think it is appropriate for us to question God why He does decree things at certain points of time and not others. The basic and vital understanding is that He actually does such and such things, no matter where and when. For that matter, one could even ask as to why God allowed Prophet Yusuf (pbuh) to get to the verge of being given into his Master’s wife (wahamma biha) where he was ‘shown’ his Lord’s proof (12:24).
Why didn't God correct the corrupted story of OT in the Quran and allowed to remain ambiguous for dual interpretation?
For the sake of the discussion, I would be more inclined to ask as to why God would even cite Prophet Isa’s (pbuh) verbatim mentioning the Prophet (pbuh) by his name (Ahmad) in the Qur’an (61:6) whereas it was never captured in any historical manuscript before in that form. As a result, ‘multiple’ interpretations are made and read into the Bible by Muslim apologetics. See also Br. Duster’s citation of Br. Joseph’s argument in another thread above.
Anyways, as a believer, I do find respite in 5:15.
“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our messenger making clear to you much of what you used to hide of the scripture and overlooking much (waya’fu ‘an kathirin)...” (Qur’an, Al-Ma’idah 5:15)
Did Quran say they "submitted in purpose" or simply"submitted"?
Now, this seems to be an act of academic dishonesty on your part. It appears odd denouncing/dismissing this position while you actually used the same interpretation earlier when you vouched for a particular understanding. I quote:
“Why can’t we interpret the dream was shown from God (as a lesson for posterity) to demonstrate Ibrahim’s AS true love & devotion in purpose and never in actuality as in His knowledge God would have intervened the slaughter anyway?”
After all, the word is ‘aslama’ literally ‘submitted.’ In this case, it would mean that they had ‘mutually agreed on a particular decision into something.’ Purely with the term ‘submitted,’ one would say ‘in purpose’ or ‘submitted unanimously into it’ just with a view to get an appropriate meaning/best interpretation.
If the command was from Satan and not God as captured in OT, why Quran only corrected the direct command part and said it was a dream without mentioning the source (which was implied in Ismaeel's words as is the style of Quran)?
‘af’alu ma tu’maru’ - ‘do as you are commanded’ still has to do with the ‘aslama’ (a unanimous decision into carrying out the sacrifice). In fact, this is the only place in the narration that points to the fact that both (Prophet Ibrahim and his son (pbut)) had mistaken the dream to be a command from God. However, the ‘aslama’ in this context should not necessarily be translated as ‘submission’ to God’s command rather, a ‘unanimous decision/submission’ into something (carrying out the sacrifice).
When Christian Monks took upon themselves celibacy Quran not only mentions it but corrected it saying God never imposed but allowed it - why did God not say the similar to Ibrahim AS or addressing us saying Ibrahim associated it to Us while it wasn't from Me or something of that sort?
Again, this is another acutely inconsistent analogy if assessed carefully. While Prophet Ibrahim’s (pbuh) case is that of submission into mistaken God’s command (not of personal ‘volition’), the ‘Christian monks’ monasticism was a matter of ‘volition’ to seek God’s approval - not done as a ‘command’ from God though (57:27). Kindly see also my response below to your ‘Purpose of creation’ argument for this issue of ‘volition.’
Lastly, in Sir Joseph's words Furthermore, the Quran often states that it is also a 'confirmation' (musaddiq) of the previous scriptures, certainly implying the overlap of narratives and the theological understanding prevalent during the Prophetic ministry amongst the People of the Book.
'tasdiq' – “but it is a confirmation of what is before it” (10:37); 'musaddiq' – “that I have sent down, confirming that which is with you” (2:41), et al.
Therefore, one may ask the valid question whether the Quran was confirming the prevalent views of the Jewish and Christian communities with regards the source of the command (being divine & direct) to Ibrahim AS??
Actually, you can relate this contention to the response given by Br. Duster above.
You may find parallel in the grand scheme/purpose of creation (creation of Satan and his progeny as they're and Adam and his progeny as we're) - isn't creation of Satan and allowing him to mislead mankind to the brim of Hell more evil (Nauzubillah) than a father's test of love and loyalty?
Respectfully, what you cite is relatively an orthogonal instance of an event to that one under discussion. Firstly, I actually find this approach of yours one that casts God into the similitude of His creation. Secondly, as I shared earlier, as believers, we do restrictively understand God from what is said about Him in the Scriptures. Other than that, it is just ‘speculative’ thoughts. We can thus not claim to fully grasp the wisdom behind the vast ‘grand scheme’ of creation other than what is pointed out to us in scripture.
Now, particularly on the above incident;
1). God did not inherently create beings evil/wicked
2). God did not order ‘Iblis’ to resort to wickedness or vow to mislead humankind (7:16-17)
This whole narrative revolves around ‘free will’ or rather ‘volition’ (15:32-40).
To start with, God seldom does intervene to prevent an evil act intended at ‘voluntarily’ from taking place. ‘Volition’ is a great virtue that is entrusted to some of His creation. It is this same ‘virtue’ that shall mainly be the standard upon which we shall be judged. This is left for that Day (of Recompense).
Therefore, for a sin committed, a befitting recompense awaits one in the Hereafter and thus, God is not obliged to prevent it from transpiring, only for where He wishes. As a result, while Iblis’s vow and pledge was purely out of ‘volition,’ Prophet Ibrahim’s (pbuh) decision was mistaken for Allah’s command. These are completely two different unrelated scenarios.
Your explanation of 18:74 is still unsatisfactory from ordinary human and even from a great Prophet's perspective and to your own standard of "justified killing", regardless of theme killing an innocent boy is still shocking and an event of mocking God for the atheist and disbelievers alike for the same reason as yours.
As regards 18:74, on my part, I don’t find a need to explain it any other way when the verses (18:80-81) are clear on what justified such a ‘killing.’
“...and we feared he would overburden them (his parents) with transgression (thwughyanan) and disbelief (kufran). So we wanted their Lord to replace him with someone better in purity, and closer to mercy.” (Qur’an, Al-Kahf 18:80-81)
Other than that, we can never get the ‘full’ picture of the ‘future’ (3:179) of the boy nor get privy to the remit of the set of parameters upon which God made such an order. These are matters of ‘ghayb’ which we can’t fully fathom (10:20, 6:59).
Seeing this conundrum people like br Wakas are forced to interpret the whole event completely out of box
In the end we're all good Alhumdulillah, those who see it as evil disassociate it from God and those (like me) in the grand scheme of things doesn't necessarily see it as an evil at all but a test (2:155) for ordinary and direct and severe for extra-ordinary like Ibrahim AS.
Respectfully, as a student of the Qur’an and more importantly as a believer, albeit I admit that we can simply agree to disagree on some issues, I don’t think we should rest our sincere academic viewpoints on the perceptions of ‘good.’ This is especially if we assert that our views are purely qur’anic.
In conclusion, dear brother Student, can I kindly ask you to please provide proof from the Qur’an for the claims in those two questions I raised above. The burden of proof is on you and not me, Br. Joseph, or any other one who holds the position I do regarding the topic at hand. You seem to dismiss or rather not rebut responses made to you as regards your contentions. In my opinion, you have also hitherto not given any unambiguous qur’anic reference to back up your claims. Instead, you reply with additional questions each time you comment without defending your previous ones. This is unwarranted in my opinion.
With all due respect, if you can’t provide any references for your claimed position above, may I kindly end our discussion here. Possibly, Br. Joseph (to whom you originally solicited his opinion) and other members can proceed with the discussion.
Regards,
Athman.
Wa alaikumus salaam,
Without overlooking what has been shared by Br. Duster (Jazakallah for the contribution), see my responses below.
You say:
"I did not raise question on 2nd part of the story at all - whether the command was/wasn't from God"
Originally, you said, I quote “...passage seems to clearly implies it was from God as I see it”
In my opinion, the follow-up phrases you cited were earlier aptly responded to by Br. Duster, to which I feel you haven’t given a befitting rebuttal. See my response below to your question “Did Quran say the dream was from Satan?”
"I did not raise question on 2nd part of the story at all - whether the command was/wasn't from God"
Kindly refer to my response to your question ‘1.’ above please.
"I am here as a humble student of the Quran befitting my user/profile name , not other way around "
Nor is anyone claiming to be a teacher dear brother. We all are students of the Qur’an which, in the main, should be the criterion (teacher for that matter) as God’s word in our midst - the Prophet (pbuh) is not here to rest authority over a particular position on certain issues (16:44). Therefore, please, let’s keep the discussions. Where we seem not to reconcile, let’s just simply agree to disagree.
"This is exactly what I wanted to see as an answer to my question (rephrasing here): Whom/what do you think the source of the dream was?"
My response was given above to which you even expressed some little conviction as quoted below.
"I must admit the answer is more convincing than all those lengthy discussions...however I'm still not 100% convinced it wasn't from God simply because I don't see/take this command as an evil/unethical/immoral at all. It was a momentary but momentous test for a lesson for believers captured in OT and Quran for posterity."
Respectfully, I find it strange that you seem to expect short responses yet some of your comments appear much protracted like this one which has covered other acutely unrelated topics below. One can’t always have set pet replies that address specific subjects. Even where there is, elaborations are essential since different people could interpret a particular verse differently given their theological backgrounds, lines of thought, information so far accessed, etc. Anyways, you may choose to pass over some if you feel obliged to.
Being seemingly evil or not, the contention is that it was not from God (6:151, 4:29, 5:32). You haven't either substantiated your claim that it "was a momentary but momentous test for a lesson for believers captured in OT and Quran for posterity"
If you still disagree with that argument then how would you explain the following?
Did Quran say the dream was from Satan?
With due respect, I see this as actually a case of shifting the burden of proof. The original position is that it was just a dream that was never meant to be interpreted as a command from God. Now, if your response is on the affirmative as regards whether the command in the dream was from God, you are the one to prove it. As for the dream in itself as a dream (inherently), I think Br. Duster clarified above. Even if somethings is as a result of Satan’s whispers, God is the ultimate Decreer of its manifestation. Now, this doesn’t amount to ‘it was from God.’
What was the original dream before Satan's corruption? In your words: He makes prevail His will (no actual sacrifice) - what was God's original will in this whole incident?
I didn’t say that there was an ‘original will’ of God nor an ‘original dream.’ I just meant that the ‘decision’ made out of the dream was never approved by God and therefore, this (disapproval) was actually actioned through preventing it (the sacrifice) happening.
Why did God allow satanic inspiration to the point of slaughtering?
As believers, I don’t think it is appropriate for us to question God why He does decree things at certain points of time and not others. The basic and vital understanding is that He actually does such and such things, no matter where and when. For that matter, one could even ask as to why God allowed Prophet Yusuf (pbuh) to get to the verge of being given into his Master’s wife (wahamma biha) where he was ‘shown’ his Lord’s proof (12:24).
Why didn't God correct the corrupted story of OT in the Quran and allowed to remain ambiguous for dual interpretation?
For the sake of the discussion, I would be more inclined to ask as to why God would even cite Prophet Isa’s (pbuh) verbatim mentioning the Prophet (pbuh) by his name (Ahmad) in the Qur’an (61:6) whereas it was never captured in any historical manuscript before in that form. As a result, ‘multiple’ interpretations are made and read into the Bible by Muslim apologetics. See also Br. Duster’s citation of Br. Joseph’s argument in another thread above.
Anyways, as a believer, I do find respite in 5:15.
“O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our messenger making clear to you much of what you used to hide of the scripture and overlooking much (waya’fu ‘an kathirin)...” (Qur’an, Al-Ma’idah 5:15)
Did Quran say they "submitted in purpose" or simply"submitted"?
Now, this seems to be an act of academic dishonesty on your part. It appears odd denouncing/dismissing this position while you actually used the same interpretation earlier when you vouched for a particular understanding. I quote:
“Why can’t we interpret the dream was shown from God (as a lesson for posterity) to demonstrate Ibrahim’s AS true love & devotion in purpose and never in actuality as in His knowledge God would have intervened the slaughter anyway?”
After all, the word is ‘aslama’ literally ‘submitted.’ In this case, it would mean that they had ‘mutually agreed on a particular decision into something.’ Purely with the term ‘submitted,’ one would say ‘in purpose’ or ‘submitted unanimously into it’ just with a view to get an appropriate meaning/best interpretation.
If the command was from Satan and not God as captured in OT, why Quran only corrected the direct command part and said it was a dream without mentioning the source (which was implied in Ismaeel's words as is the style of Quran)?
‘af’alu ma tu’maru’ - ‘do as you are commanded’ still has to do with the ‘aslama’ (a unanimous decision into carrying out the sacrifice). In fact, this is the only place in the narration that points to the fact that both (Prophet Ibrahim and his son (pbut)) had mistaken the dream to be a command from God. However, the ‘aslama’ in this context should not necessarily be translated as ‘submission’ to God’s command rather, a ‘unanimous decision/submission’ into something (carrying out the sacrifice).
When Christian Monks took upon themselves celibacy Quran not only mentions it but corrected it saying God never imposed but allowed it - why did God not say the similar to Ibrahim AS or addressing us saying Ibrahim associated it to Us while it wasn't from Me or something of that sort?
Again, this is another acutely inconsistent analogy if assessed carefully. While Prophet Ibrahim’s (pbuh) case is that of submission into mistaken God’s command (not of personal ‘volition’), the ‘Christian monks’ monasticism was a matter of ‘volition’ to seek God’s approval - not done as a ‘command’ from God though (57:27). Kindly see also my response below to your ‘Purpose of creation’ argument for this issue of ‘volition.’
Lastly, in Sir Joseph's words Furthermore, the Quran often states that it is also a 'confirmation' (musaddiq) of the previous scriptures, certainly implying the overlap of narratives and the theological understanding prevalent during the Prophetic ministry amongst the People of the Book.
'tasdiq' – “but it is a confirmation of what is before it” (10:37); 'musaddiq' – “that I have sent down, confirming that which is with you” (2:41), et al.
Therefore, one may ask the valid question whether the Quran was confirming the prevalent views of the Jewish and Christian communities with regards the source of the command (being divine & direct) to Ibrahim AS??
Actually, you can relate this contention to the response given by Br. Duster above.
You may find parallel in the grand scheme/purpose of creation (creation of Satan and his progeny as they're and Adam and his progeny as we're) - isn't creation of Satan and allowing him to mislead mankind to the brim of Hell more evil (Nauzubillah) than a father's test of love and loyalty?
Respectfully, what you cite is relatively an orthogonal instance of an event to that one under discussion. Firstly, I actually find this approach of yours one that casts God into the similitude of His creation. Secondly, as I shared earlier, as believers, we do restrictively understand God from what is said about Him in the Scriptures. Other than that, it is just ‘speculative’ thoughts. We can thus not claim to fully grasp the wisdom behind the vast ‘grand scheme’ of creation other than what is pointed out to us in scripture.
Now, particularly on the above incident;
1). God did not inherently create beings evil/wicked
2). God did not order ‘Iblis’ to resort to wickedness or vow to mislead humankind (7:16-17)
This whole narrative revolves around ‘free will’ or rather ‘volition’ (15:32-40).
To start with, God seldom does intervene to prevent an evil act intended at ‘voluntarily’ from taking place. ‘Volition’ is a great virtue that is entrusted to some of His creation. It is this same ‘virtue’ that shall mainly be the standard upon which we shall be judged. This is left for that Day (of Recompense).
Therefore, for a sin committed, a befitting recompense awaits one in the Hereafter and thus, God is not obliged to prevent it from transpiring, only for where He wishes. As a result, while Iblis’s vow and pledge was purely out of ‘volition,’ Prophet Ibrahim’s (pbuh) decision was mistaken for Allah’s command. These are completely two different unrelated scenarios.
Your explanation of 18:74 is still unsatisfactory from ordinary human and even from a great Prophet's perspective and to your own standard of "justified killing", regardless of theme killing an innocent boy is still shocking and an event of mocking God for the atheist and disbelievers alike for the same reason as yours.
As regards 18:74, on my part, I don’t find a need to explain it any other way when the verses (18:80-81) are clear on what justified such a ‘killing.’
“...and we feared he would overburden them (his parents) with transgression (thwughyanan) and disbelief (kufran). So we wanted their Lord to replace him with someone better in purity, and closer to mercy.” (Qur’an, Al-Kahf 18:80-81)
Other than that, we can never get the ‘full’ picture of the ‘future’ (3:179) of the boy nor get privy to the remit of the set of parameters upon which God made such an order. These are matters of ‘ghayb’ which we can’t fully fathom (10:20, 6:59).
Seeing this conundrum people like br Wakas are forced to interpret the whole event completely out of box
In the end we're all good Alhumdulillah, those who see it as evil disassociate it from God and those (like me) in the grand scheme of things doesn't necessarily see it as an evil at all but a test (2:155) for ordinary and direct and severe for extra-ordinary like Ibrahim AS.
Respectfully, as a student of the Qur’an and more importantly as a believer, albeit I admit that we can simply agree to disagree on some issues, I don’t think we should rest our sincere academic viewpoints on the perceptions of ‘good.’ This is especially if we assert that our views are purely qur’anic.
In conclusion, dear brother Student, can I kindly ask you to please provide proof from the Qur’an for the claims in those two questions I raised above. The burden of proof is on you and not me, Br. Joseph, or any other one who holds the position I do regarding the topic at hand. You seem to dismiss or rather not rebut responses made to you as regards your contentions. In my opinion, you have also hitherto not given any unambiguous qur’anic reference to back up your claims. Instead, you reply with additional questions each time you comment without defending your previous ones. This is unwarranted in my opinion.
With all due respect, if you can’t provide any references for your claimed position above, may I kindly end our discussion here. Possibly, Br. Joseph (to whom you originally solicited his opinion) and other members can proceed with the discussion.
Regards,
Athman.
, etc.