Who is " He" in this Ayaah?

[Sardar Miyan]

عَبَسَ وَتَوَلَّى

He frowned and turned (his) back,

أَن جَاءَهُ الْأَعْمَىٰ

Because there came to him the blind man.

أَوْ يَذَّكَّرُ فَتَنفَعَهُ الذِّكْرَى


Or become reminded so that the reminder should profit him?
---------------------------------------------------------------------

[Sardar Miyan]

Salam All, who is "HE" in this Ayaah? Some say it is referred to Prophet Mohammad SA  & some say it is referring to our prophet. Can somebody clarify? Thanks

[Joseph Islam]

Dear Sardar,

Wa alaikum assalam

I have already shared an answer to this question from my humble perspective. Please see the link below.

Who Frowned Away in Surah Abasa (80.1)?
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=109.0

May I respectfully and kindly suggest that in future if you could please search the forum and also peruse the Q&As section below just to see if the question you have in mind has already been discussed or answered before.

Questions & Answers
http://quransmessage.com/articles/q&as%20FM3.htm

I hope that helps, God willing.

Kind regards,
Joseph

[Sardar Miyan]

Assalam Bro JAI, Thanks for telling about Question & Answers site. I got reply to my question. I very immensely appreciate your work about all subjects in your Articles & Q & A site. May Allah give you Ajare Azeem for your sincere & time taking task. Mashallah.

[optimist]

Salaaam!

Though the Quran uses 2nd person singular masculine 'anta' in 80:6 and 80:10, still, according to me, the first sentence need not necessarily to be linked to the prophet's action. 

1. The language of the Quranic text is very clear that the first verse is in the third person singular.

2. There is no reason why prophet cannot be addressed directly in verse 80:1, when prophet is directly addressed in the subsequent verses.

3.  The strong warnings mentioned in subsequent verses 80:3-10 could be linked to prophet's non-interference and keeping silence when the influential man from Quraish frowned and expressed strong displeasure at the blind person (may be the prophet could not decide quickly what to do at the circumstances, and if prophet had intervened quickly, it would have prevented the blind person getting humiliated).

4.  There is less possibility the influential man from Quraish did not express any displeasure and prophet expressed strong displeasure.  It is pertinent to note that this man from Quraish is already portrayed in the subsequent verses as very arrogant.

5.  The prophet's excellent character and exemplary conduct, certified so by the Quran itself, it is inconceivable that he would have behaved in such a undesirable manner.

Regards,
Optimist

[Joseph Islam]

Wa alaikum assalam Optimist

Please see my responses to your statements in blue italics.

1. The language of the Quranic text is very clear that the first verse is in the third person singular.

Even if the language of the first verse is non-specific, the remainder of the verses frame the context. This is simply a question of language and the style in which the Quran has parted a lesson of learning.

2. There is no reason why prophet cannot be addressed directly in verse 80:1, when prophet is directly addressed in the subsequent verses.

This does not negate the direct addresses in 80:3, 80:6, 80:7, 80:8 and 8:10 which frames the context of verse 80:1. Furthermore verse 80:7 arguably speaks to the prophet as it is he who is tasked with delivering the message. This resonates with many other verses where the prophet is clearly informed that it is not for him to guide but God. (28:56) In my mind there is no dispute other than a reason not to accept that the prophet would be addressed in this way.

3.  The strong warnings mentioned in subsequent verses 80:3-10 could be linked to prophet's non-interference and keeping silence when the influential man from Quraish frowned and expressed strong displeasure at the blind person (may be the prophet could not decide quickly what to do at the circumstances, and if prophet had intervened quickly, it would have prevented the blind person getting humiliated).

This is mere conjecture and interpolations. One cannot be expected to comment on 'could' and 'maybes' in a purely Quran-based academic discussion.

4.  There is less possibility the influential man from Quraish did not express any displeasure and prophet expressed strong displeasure.  It is pertinent to note that this man from Quraish is already portrayed in the subsequent verses as very arrogant.

Again, there is no mention of 'Quraish' in these verses. With respect, you are simply interpolating and building on your surmised premises.

5.  The prophet's excellent character and exemplary conduct, certified so by the Quran itself, it is inconceivable that he would have behaved in such a undesirable manner.

This appears to be the actual reason why you have formulated 1-4. Notwithstanding the prophet's excellent character, it appears you simply cannot accept that a prophet could make an error (or even a small lapse) of judgement and could be admonished for it by God. Such a premise finds absolutely no warrant from the Quran.

My intention is not to initiate a debate on this topic with you. You have shared your contentions with the opinions shared and I have respectfully responded to it. I trust that we can simply agree to disagree, God willing. 

Regards,
Joseph

[optimist]

Dear brother Joseph Islam,
Assalamu alaikum WR WB

In the second verse the Quran states

وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ لَعَلَّهُ يَزَّكَّىٰ

The verse is translated as And what would make thee know that he would purify himself. 

Who is HE in this verse? 

According to me;

1. Logically and even Linguistically, it is the the person who frowned and turned aside (mentioned in the first verse).   
2. This is the context of the subsequent warnings given to the prophet, i.e, even after noticing the arrogant man's actions the prophet kept on concentrating on him ignoring the blind.

Any comments? 

I will not get involved in further discussion.   Afterall, this is not a major issue of discussion.

Kind regards always
Optimist

[optimist]

..................To avoid misunderstanding about me, just to clarify a comment you have made "it appears you simply cannot accept that a prophet could make an error (or even a small lapse) of judgement", please note, I did not make any implication in my post that the prophet did not make any lapse in the above incident, and nor do I believe that the prophet did not/ can not commit any erros or lapses in his life (the Quran itself mentions such incidents).

Assalamu Alaikum WR WB

Regards
Optimist

[Joseph Islam]

Wa alaikum assalam brother Optimist

Please see my responses to your comments in blue italics.


1. Logically and even Linguistically, it is the person who frowned and turned aside (mentioned in the first verse).   

In the same verse that you have quoted (80:3) the 2nd person masculine singular object pronoun 'ka' in 'yudri'KA' (make you know) frames the context of:

• Who the direct addressee is (i.e. the Prophet  - the one expected to part the message and reminder , dhikr, see 80:4) and
• Links directly to the implicit subject pronoun that exists in the verb 'abasa' in verse 80:1, again referring to the prophet who frowned / scowled.

The pronoun 'hu' in 'la'allhu' (that he might /may) (80:3) is then clearly a reference to the earliest person (subject noun) given in the previous verse as an 'a'ma' which means one who is blind (in this case, a blind man).

It is quite common for the Quran to use such emotive language, where the implicit addressee is the prophet. For example, ‘yaayyuha’l-muzamil’ (O you who wraps himself – 73:1) is understood as the prophet given the context of the following verses.


2. This is the context of the subsequent warnings given to the prophet, i.e, even after noticing the arrogant man's actions the prophet kept on concentrating on him ignoring the blind.

With respect, there is absolutely no warrant for this either logically or linguistically and it appears to be based on surmise. Therefore, I would like to decline to comment.


I will not get involved in further discussion.   Afterall, this is not a major issue of discussion.

I trust that you will abide by your word. Thanks for your understanding. 


Finally, thank you for your clarification in your last post.

Regards,
Joseph