Doubts about 80:1

[ilker]

Assalamu alaikum guys

First, i must say that i've read the answer Brother Joseph posted under another topic about the same ayah.

(Here it is: http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=109.0 )

Although i find that answer to be rational enough, I don't feel quiet right about it. Because the other explanation, which claims that the man who frowned and turned away was not the Prophet (pbuh) but another man, has some arguments that i can't negate. (I'm not saying that the prophets were fault-free btw.) Here are my doubts about the subject:

 - We see expressions very similar to "abasa wa tawalla" (He frowned and turned away) also in the 74th surah:

18. Verily, he thought and plotted;

19. So let him be cursed! How he plotted!

20. And once more let him be cursed, how he plotted!

21. Then he thought;

22. Then he frowned and he looked in a bad tempered way;

23. Then he turned back and was proud;

24. Then he said: "This is nothing but magic from that of old;

25. "This is nothing but the word of a human being!"

26. I will cast him into Hell-fire


These expressions in bold are similar in meaning, and kinda shows anger and dissatisfaction. It sounds like an act of a sinner. There ARE warnings to the Prophet (pbuh) in the succeeding ayat in surah 80 (80:3,4,5 ...) but I think those warnings might not be due to the Prophet (pbuh) frowned and turned his back, but because he kept on talking to the man who frowned and turned away. Here is 80:5 - 6;

"...As for him who considers himself free from need,
To him do you address yourself."

Think about a person who has no knowledge of the narrations, ahadith about this event. That the Prophet (pbuh) was talking to some men from Quraish etc... How can this person understand 80:5 ?

One could ask "who is this man ? who is the one that thinks he is free from need ?"

Is it not possible that this man is described in 80:1-2 ? The one who considers himself free from need ? That's why he became unhappy when the blind man arrived ? Is it no possible that the Prophet (pbuh) kept on talking to this man so Allah (swt) warned him ? Warned him like "you should not turn to that man who frowned when the blind man came, you should fix your attention to the blind man instead ?

And think about the rest of the 80th surah ... what kind of people does Allah (swt) talk about ? Ayat like:

17. Be cursed (the disbelieving) man! How ungrateful he is!

18. From what thing did He create him?

19. From Nutfah (male and female semen drops) He created him, and then set him in due proportion ...

Who is this ungrateful man and most importantly Why does Allah (swt) talk about it just after He mentioned the incident that "abasa wa tawalla" occurred ?


Please write your precious comments brothers and sisters ...  sorry If I couldn't write this clear enough (because of English perhaps)


Salam...

[Joseph Islam]

Dear Ilker,

Wa alaikum assalam

I trust that you will kindly appreciate that it is not the 'similarity of the phrase' but 'the context' that determines who said what.

For example, in Surah Fateha which arguably billions of Muslims recite a number of times a day, the word 'dall' (astray, error, to be lost) is used generically.

001:007
"(The) path of those upon whom You have bestowed favours. Not (the path) of those who have earned Your wrath on themselves, nor of those who go astray (dall)."

However, the same word 'dall' has also been used for the prophet in verse 93:7. Does that now mean that the verse cannot be talking about the prophet when we know through context that it could not be anyone else?

093:007
"And find you 'dall' (astray, error, to be lost) and guide (you)?"

I shared in the link you cited that:

"The usage of the 2nd person singular masculine 'anta' in 80:6 and 80:10 almost certainly frames the context as this being directed to the Prophet. No other would have been spoken to this way directly apart from the person the scripture was inspired. It is also interesting to note that given the veneration, miraculous and infallible portrayals that many traditionalists advance with regards the Prophet, they were unable (majority) to interpret this narrative in any other way. The direct terms that have been used, in my humble view have stabilised the interpretation of the text."

In Surah 74, the context is clearly about a sinner. However, from the start of Surah 80 onwards, the context is about someone who is expected to preach and teach whilst being addressed directly with that expectation. This address is not atypical to the manner the prophet is addressed throughout the Quran.

Finally you cite verses 80:17ff which clearly switch to a generic address. This is also not atypical for the Quran that switches audience, address and context to support an underlying message.

Regards,
Joseph

[ilker]

Salam brother

Alhamdulillah and thank you for your kind reply. I really appreciate it.

I'm no expert on this I should say, but I'm studying and thinking on Quran, doing my research with Allah's help. So I don't claim to have all the right answers.

Yes, it is true that the "context" is the key.

Thank you for your nice example from the Surah Fateha. I think "to be guided" and "to be dall"  are antonyms. I know what path I should be on, what the right path is, so I'm guided. I have no idea what I'm gonna do, I'm lost and I can't find a way out so I'm dall (may Allah (swt) protect all of us from being one).

So we say;

01:06-07: Guide us to the straight path. The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have evoked [Your] anger or of those who are dall.

So the prophet was lost, he was confused maybe and he was guided by Allah (swt). I agree with you on this. So I'm not saying that the Prophet (pbuh) can't be the one who frowned and turned away in my question. Here I'm just questioning the other possibility and its validity.

When we see a word in the Quran that we feel we need to get a grip on, we often look to other places in the Quran to get the idea of the meaning, the usage of that word. The word "abasa" is for me one of those words. So when i look at 74:22, i can say that this facial expression is the result of "sadness, dissatisfaction, distress". But "tawalla" is more serious than "abasa". As far as I know "turning away" is generally used in the Quran when that person is "not interested in", "in denial of", "not accepting" a call, a message ...

Now as I've said in my original post, i don't think prophets are fault-free human beings. And again I'm not saying that the Prophet (pbuh) didn't make mistakes. What I think of "abasa wa tawalla" is maybe it's more serious than we think, and the reason Allah (swt) warned our Prophet (pbuh) is not because he frowned and turned away rather (I think) he kept on trying to reach to the man who frowned and turned away. This sounds reasonable to me when we think that Allah (swt) used the subject "he" in the first and second ayah and then "anta" in the third.

My understanding is there were these two men (besides the Prophet pbuh). One of them is the man who frowned and turned away, who considered himself free of need (80:5-6). He was the one our Prophet pbuh was trying to speak. And then the other man, who was blind. The man who was seeking knowledge, who was fearful of Allah (swt), who asked for help (80:8-9)

So in summary, I am on the same page with you Brother Joseph, that it certainly was our Prophet (pbuh) who got the warning. I'm not saying the opposite. I'm just thinking about the reason for that warning.

This is just an opinion but i wonder if i am 100% wrong about this idea of mine ? Isn't it possible ?

[relearning]

you can test your idea by answering the following question

to whom you think 80:6 80:10 verses addressing? the man who frowned and turned away? if it was not the prophet then quran talking to this man you think is the addressee? read it in this context then i think you will create more serious problems than you have in your mind just in order to fit prophet into the perfect image you have in your thoughts and beliefs.

[ilker]

salam relearning

With all due respect, you seem to have misunderstood me completely! Either you didn't even care to read my posts carefully or you didn't understand them correctly. It has to be one of these two because your post shows the result of this misunderstanding.

How many times do I have to tell you this:

From post 1: "(I'm not saying that the prophets were fault-free btw.)"

From post 2: "Now as I've said in my original post, i don't think prophets are fault-free human beings. And again I'm not saying that the Prophet (pbuh) didn't make mistakes. "

You said "whom you think 80:6 and 80:10 adresses" ? I gave the answer already bro ! Have you even read it ?

"So in summary, I am on the same page with you Brother Joseph, that it certainly was our Prophet (pbuh) who got the warning. I'm not saying the opposite. I'm just thinking about the reason for that warning."

I'm talking about the first and the second ayat. (He frowned and he turned away). I'm talking about a possibility here that "he" might be referring to the man who Prophet(pbuh) was talking to. I'm saying this man might be the man in 80:5-6 (who sees himself self-sufficient). Prophet (pbuh) could be distracted ofc but maybe he got warning because he kept trying to talk to this man, not taking care of the blind man.

It's just a different opinion. I'm not saying it's 100% true. I'm just asking if it's possible !

Please read carefully before you reply. I don't even want to talk about how this line of yours sounds offensive (quoting from you):

" i think you will create more serious problems than you have in your mind just in order to fit prophet into the perfect image you have in your thoughts and beliefs."

Come on man !

[relearning]

I do apologize and I am sorry for being mean to you.

[ilker]

no problem brother I'm sorry if i sounded a bit angry too.

[Athman]

Dear all,

Salaamun Aleikum,

Despite the fact that this is a thread in which the last input dates long before, I wish to impart some understanding from the foregoing discussion and seek any possible clarification to the contrary. I hope this is fine with the Moderators.

Notwithstanding all the sincere efforts made to argue for the traditional view, on this thread and some others in this forum pertaining to the subject matter, staying clear from the theological “axe-to-grind” mantra with regards the veneration of the Prophet such that a claim that 80:1-2 couldn’t have referred to the Prophet is advanced, in my humble view, I trust that Br. ilker’s understanding on the verses and the plot construct of the narrative sounds textually cogent within the context of chapter 80 and not necessarily with comparison to chapter 74.

I find the following conclusion to have contextual support from the text of chapter 80, and I sincerely admit that it’s not an understanding one would dismiss.

“My understanding is there were these two men (besides the Prophet pbuh). One of them is the man who frowned and turned away, who considered himself free of need (80:5-6). He was the one our Prophet pbuh was trying to speak. And then the other man, who was blind. The man who was seeking knowledge, who was fearful of Allah (swt), who asked for help (80:8-9)”

Though I agree with Br. Joseph on this “...This is also not atypical for the Quran that switches audience, address and context to support an underlying message,” I apparently find it, as from the plot construct of the narrative, more reasonable to argue for the following understanding by Br. ilker:

“This sounds reasonable to me when we think that Allah (swt) used the subject "he" in the first and second ayah and then "anta" in the third.”

Any explanation to outrightly argue for the exclusivity of the traditional view shall highly be appreciated.


Regards,

Athman.