Monasticsm in Quran, Advanced the Protestant Reformation?

[marealta]

Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah . But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.
QS. 57:27

To me, it means the Quran, knows that monasticism was an innovation (gnostic influenced), not prescribed by God, way long before Protestant Reformation developed (around 14th century). And that many of the monastics, namely the Priests, were disobedient of Allah. Or where there already an issue on monasticism as innovation in 6th-7th century Arabia? Any thoughts?
Probably this verse is also a sign, a fingerprint of authority in Quran.

[Ismail]

Salaam.

It has been my humble opinion that Al Qur'an does not condemn Monasticism altogether. (57:27)

Of course, it condemns the waywardness of a section of the Monks.

In (5:82), it has actually praised the (well meaning people, among) Priests and Monks, who were far from being proud or arrogant.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

[marealta]

Dear Ismail,

That is true. It simply stated that it is not required by God, even in a priestly life, because not everyone has the ability to live a monastic life. And if one wants to live such an ascetic life, it is not forbidden too, because living in a simple life worshiping God makes people humble.
I am just wondering, whether the Quran advanced the Protestant Reformation by about 700 years..

Regards
Alta Marea

[Mubashir]

Dear Alta

The Quran, in my humble opinion, was referring to a current verifiable practice. History, being what it is, has it's controversies and quite debatable when did this practice emerge among the Christians.

Just my two cents !

[Zack]

Dear Alta

The Quran, in my humble opinion, was referring to a current verifiable practice. History, being what it is, has it's controversies and quite debatable when did this practice emerge among the Christians.

Just my two cents !

I believe the Qur'ans positiveness towards Monks should not at all be see relating to the Catholic Church. Muhammad had no exposure to the Catholic Church and they were basically not present in Arabia. Instead the Prophet Muhammad had a close friendship, and mentoring, from the Monk Waraqa Bin Naufel, who officiated his wedding to Siti Khaddijah, and was the one who was sought out to verify that the revelations Muhammad received were from God. 

Waraqa represented the monotheists who Muhammad was close to, and where he would have observed these Monks separating themselves to isolated places. Waraqa represents a continuation of the culture and beliefs of the Hawariyuun. Despite this closeness, the revolutionary message was that the "Ummah" was not limited to one "group", but included all, as was the rule of Paul for every community of faith as explained in  1 Cor 7, which very much parralels Muhammad.

Wasalam

Daniel

[Mubashir]

Thanks for your response Brother Daniel.

We do not have a definitive biography of Muhammad that proves existence of Waraqa. What is reported may or may not be true. We find such stories in secondary sources that Waraqa the Christian was the one who confirmed the Nabuwwat of Muhammad and Moses was the one who sent Muhammad back in the Mairaj story to bargain with Allah to reduce the number of prayers from 50 to 5 !!

Seems these were planted to prove that importance of Christian and Jewish sources to the ministry of Muhammad !!

I refrain from commenting on such stories as I have no way of confirming how true they are. If I find some support in the Quran referring to an incident reported in history, I may consider the possibly of it being true keeping my eyes wide open to read what is the underlying message there. Historical references in the Quran, as you know are there for us to learn some lessons.

As Paul had no interaction with any Muslim, I respectfully fail to see how the verse you quoted would apply to Muslims. I do concede, that an inference may be drawn from it, which I suspect you have done.

Thanks anyway.

[Zack]

Thanks for your response Brother Daniel.

We do not have a definitive biography of Muhammad that proves existence of Waraqa. What is reported may or may not be true. We find such stories in secondary sources that Waraqa the Christian was the one who confirmed the Nabuwwat of Muhammad and Moses was the one who sent Muhammad back in the Mairaj story to bargain with Allah to reduce the number of prayers from 50 to 5 !!

Seems these were planted to prove that importance of Christian and Jewish sources to the ministry of Muhammad !!

I refrain from commenting on such stories as I have no way of confirming how true they are. If I find some support in the Quran referring to an incident reported in history, I may consider the possibly of it being true keeping my eyes wide open to read what is the underlying message there. Historical references in the Quran, as you know are there for us to learn some lessons.

As Paul had no interaction with any Muslim, I respectfully fail to see how the verse you quoted would apply to Muslims. I do concede, that an inference may be drawn from it, which I suspect you have done.

Thanks anyway.

Hmmmm. So the Qur'an-centric  approach means questions the existence of all that is not mentioned in the Qur'an? If that is what is meant by Qur'an-centric, I will constantly be questioning the existence of life around me. In that case, history becomes a meaningless load of waffle as someone who is Qur'an-centric. As to Waraqa "who confirmed the Nabuwwat of Muhammad and Moses", I have never come across such a thing.

"Seems these were planted to prove that importance of Christian and Jewish sources to the ministry of Muhammad"..... Firstly Waraqa was not a "Christian"....... that was the label for Rome based believers. And yes, I believe the heritage of Christian and Jewish sources were vitally important for Muhammad. In fact this is central to the Islamic faith, the pillars of faith are Hebrew! Muhammad valued this, and corrected the Christians when they departed from its origins.

"As Paul had no interaction with any Muslim, I respectfully fail to see how the verse you quoted would apply to Muslims." How are you using "Muslim" here, in a Quranic way, or in the modern sense? I would say Paul may just have been was a more devout "muslim" than any on this forum. (-:

Wasalam
Daniel

[Mubashir]

Salam Daniel

You wrote:

".... And yes, I believe the heritage of Christian and Jewish sources were vitally important for Muhammad. In fact this is central to the Islamic faith, the pillars of faith are Hebrew! Muhammad valued this, and corrected the Christians when they departed from its origins..."

We don't find any term by "Pillars of faith" in the Quran and you are probably referring to a hadith. Quran, being continuation of Allah sending revelations to mankind covers a lot of common ground between Muslims, Jews and Christians. It makes it a point to point to correct a few aberrations that crept in over time in what the people of the book believed. Muhammad  was, as Allah's Nabi  representing what was revealed to him and not "making corrections" on his own initiative.

Any version of history that we read pertaining to the life and times of Muhammad can be checked against the Quran, The Criterion. 

Thanks anyways!

[Zack]

Salam Daniel

You wrote:

We don't find any term by "Pillars of faith" in the Quran and you are probably referring to a hadith.
Thanks anyways!

I meant the articles of Faith for a Muslim; Believe in the Holy Books, Prophets etc... That is not an absolute with a Qur'an-centric approach?

Wasalam