17.59

[chadiga]

Salam
i see this question in an other forum and i like to know your thoughts about it:

Verse 17:59

وَمَا مَنَعَنَا أَن نُّرْسِلَ بِالْآيَاتِ إِلَّا أَن كَذَّبَ بِهَا الْأَوَّلُونَ

Transliteration : Wa ma manaAAana an nursila bialayati illa an kaththaba biha alawwaloona, …

Yusuf Ali: And We refrain from sending the signs, only because the men of former generations treated them as false.

This  translation implies that God initially sent Signs / miracles to convert people and had an intention to send more signs but He disappointed to learn that His signs did not work as expected. So, He stopped sending them.

Now see translation below:

Reformist Group: The rejection of previous people did not stop Us from sending the signs. 

Endnote (Page: 206): Traditional translations render the meaning of "Ma" as a relative pronoun rather than a negative particle, "What stopped us from sending…."
Source: https://www.irshadmanji.com/PDFS/ReformistTranslation.pdf

Now look at word to word translation:
http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=17&verse=59

peace and thank you  for the help

[Joseph Islam]

Salamun Alaikum.

Yes, this is correct.

However, the negative particle 'ma' needs to be read with the restriction particle 'illa' (except), to derive the full meaning of overall 'restraint' given the context of the verse.

As I'm sure you will appreciate, natives derive the full meaning of a sentence and not by a conscious breakdown of individual syntax and part scrutiny of synctactics.  It is what is meant by the overall sentence which is important.

Please see response 2 of the following post

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=446.msg1386#new

Another way of reading this would be that 'we did not stop X Y Z' EXCEPT 'illa' (the reason we did) because ancients denied this.

This is similar to 'There is No God' [illa] except [Allah]. The reason for the exception (illa) is stated i.e. that 'Allah' exists. If we just read 'No God' without the exception (illa), then the sentence would be understood as 'There is no God' [full stop]. Understanding the 'exception' (illa) is important.

My theological contention would also be that If such 'signs' were to continue, then why were they not given to Prophet Muhammad when the disbelievers kept asking for it? (16:109, 13:7, 3:183, 20:133, 29:50-1)

I hope that helps, God willing.
Joseph.

[chadiga]

Salam brother
i'm very happy for your clear answer! i was read the tafsir from m.asad, and i understood this Aya always in this way, but i was confused when i see this arabic grammatic...
So nice to know you, you are the helper in the distress
May Allah bless you peace

[Joseph Islam]

JazakAllah khair. I am glad it was of some help. It is only God that provides us avenues so that we may seek other opinions / assistance. It is only He who helps us in distress. Today, I may have been an avenue for a thought. Tomorrow, it may be you that helps me and us all sister. I know you already do.

We all learn from each other with God's help and that is the beautiful thing 

Your brother in faith,
Joseph.

[optimist]

Salam
i see this question in an other forum and i like to know your thoughts about it:

Verse 17:59

وَمَا مَنَعَنَا أَن نُّرْسِلَ بِالْآيَاتِ إِلَّا أَن كَذَّبَ بِهَا الْأَوَّلُونَ

Transliteration : Wa ma manaAAana an nursila bialayati illa an kaththaba biha alawwaloona, …

Yusuf Ali: And We refrain from sending the signs, only because the men of former generations treated them as false.

This  translation implies that God initially sent Signs / miracles to convert people and had an intention to send more signs but He disappointed to learn that His signs did not work as expected. So, He stopped sending them.

Now see translation below:

Reformist Group: The rejection of previous people did not stop Us from sending the signs. 

Endnote (Page: 206): Traditional translations render the meaning of "Ma" as a relative pronoun rather than a negative particle, "What stopped us from sending…."
Source: https://www.irshadmanji.com/PDFS/ReformistTranslation.pdf

Now look at word to word translation:
http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=17&verse=59

peace and thank you  for the help

Salamun alaikum

Permit me to post one comment without participating in any futher discussions on this question.   This issue has been taken up in another thread, however, I think I should make a comment here due to the above comments marked in red, which has serious flaws.

No Muslim would deny Allah’s knowledge covers past, present and future.  The above comment implys that, in spite of the fact that Allah knew the previous generations would deny his miracles he had still sent to them miracles!!  This is a wrong understanding.  What prevented Allah from not sending miracles  is not their expressed denial of such miracles in the past, but Allah’s confirmed knowledge that  those who are bend to reject Allah and those who seek miracles as a precondition to believe never apply their reason seldom learn from such proofs manifested through their acts.    That is the reason why Quran tells the prophet about such people;  “Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they were to continue (all day) ascending therein, They would only say: "Our eyes have been intoxicated: Nay, we have been bewitched by sorcery." (15:14-15).    This was the nature of such people at all times.  A miracle can do nothing for them to promote their belief.

Notice one important point also here.    According to Quran there would be no respite once a miracle is sent.  Verse 15:8 states if angels are sent there would be no further respite.  Also, when  Jesus prayed for a table of food as a sign as a result of repeated demand from his people (initially Jesus warned them),  Allah made a severe warning that anyone disobeys thereafer would be punished with very severe punishment never inflicted on any humanity (5:112).  When this stern warning was received the people did not pursue for the miracle. 

[Joseph Islam]

Dear brother Optimist,

Salamun Alaikum.

Just a small comment. You suggest that this is a wrong understanding:

"The above comment implys that, in spite of the fact that Allah knew the previous generations would deny his miracles he had still sent to them miracles!!" 

How is your contention any different from the argument which says that God knew Pharaoh would be a tyrant and would never believe, yet he still sent Prophet Moses to him?

What God completed (in whatever manner) is an appropriate level of manifestation of proof for a particular community so that they had no reason left to deny the truth. Some academics like to call this 'Itmam ul-Hujjah'.

ITMAM AL-HUJJAH - COMPLETION OF PROOF
http://quransmessage.com/articles/itmam%20FM3.htm

Just some thoughts.

Your brother in faith,
Joseph.

[optimist]

How is your contention any different from the argument which says that God knew Pharaoh would be a tyrant and would never believe, yet he still sent Prophet Moses to him?

Wa'alaikumu'ssalam,

I think it is not difficult to understand.   It was necessary he is sufficiently warned about his wrong ways and introduce Islam to him.  As you are aware, Allah would not punish any community without sending messengers and sufficiently send warnings.

Allahs says “Go, both of you, to Pharaoh, for he has transgressed all bounds; But speak to him a gentle word, haply he might take heed or fear”. 20:43

“Allah directed Moses: 'Go thou to Pharaoh; he has rebelled,' And say to him. 'Wouldst thou be purified? And I will guide thee to thy Lord so that thou mayest fear Him. So he showed him the great Sign, But he rejected him and disobeyed; Then he turned away from the Truth, devising schemes; And he gathered his people and proclaimed, Saying, 'I am your Lord, the Most High. So God seized him for the punishment of the Hereafter and the present world.”(79:17-25)

Various ways how Pharoah was warned are explained at many places in Quran;

“O pharaoh! I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds” (7:104)

Moses said to Pharoah “It has, indeed, been revealed to us that punishment shall come upon him who rejects the Message of God and turns away“(20:48).

“Pharaoh said, 'Who then is the Lord of you two, O Moses? Moses said, 'Our Lord is He Who gave unto everything its proper form and then guided it to its proper function” (20:50)...."My Lord neither errs nor forgets. It is He Who has made the earth for you a bed and has caused pathways for you to run through it; and Who sends down rain from the sky and thereby We bring forth various kinds of vegetation in pairs. (20:51-53).

“Then after them We sent Moses with Our signs to pharaoh and his chiefs, but they wrongfully rejected them: So see what was the end of those who made mischief.(7:103)

And We showed pharaoh all Our Signs, but he did reject and refuse.(20:56)

“We have sent to you, (O men!) a messenger, to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent a messenger to pharaoh. But pharaoh disobeyed the messenger; so We seized him with a heavy Punishment.” (73:15-16)

Then after them sent We Moses and Aaron to pharaoh and his chiefs with Our Signs. But they were arrogant: they were a people in sin.(10:75)

Please note Quran is not even addressing Pharaoh as a Kafir at the initial stage before he was introduced to Islam and deliberately rejecting the truth.  Initially he was addressed only as "people defiantly disobedient" (kanoo kauman faasiqoon) 28:32 and people "exceeded all bounds"(20:24)

[Joseph Islam]

Dear brother Optimist,

Salamun Alaikum.

Thank you very much for your comments 

I have already agreed with your sentiment that an appropriate level of manifestation of proof is required for the completion of proof (within the scope of Itmam ul-hujjah). However, this was not my contention.

From what I understood, you seemed to question in your first post on this thread as to why God would send a miracle to previous communities if He knew they would deny them. Therefore, this understanding in your view could not be correct. I quote the relevant part from where I derived this understanding.

"in spite of the fact that Allah knew the previous generations would deny his miracles he had still sent to them miracles!!  This is a wrong understanding".

Therefore, I understood this as another premise for you to contend the existence of Biblical portents. Thus, I humbly challenged that contention by citing the example, that on your basis, God also knew that Pharaoh would not believe, so why did he still send him signs?

My apologies if I misunderstood your point :-)

I am personally of the strong opinion that Biblical portents were a mechanism to complete the 'manifestation of proof' to a certain people. I believe these happened for all the reasons I have hitherto cited.

Not wanting to duplicate effort with the general topic of Biblical portents et al (which is now well exhausted between us!), it is probably best now to leave our respectful exchanges for the readers to decide its merit and any benefit they can derive from it

For other readers, please see my 8 contentions below with the position that Biblical portents narrated in the Quran are only allegories. In all humility, I look forward to any convincing academic rebuttals with evidence based arguments. I will do my best to keep an open mind iA.

• Given God's infinite capacity, please provide clear Quranic proof that He cannot / would not temporarily suspend / alter / interfere with the laws He himself has created as and when 'He so wills' to manifest a particular truth
• What did God stop / withhold / arrest / prevent / refrain / suspend (mana) in 17:59 going forward that He had sent to previous communities?
• How could God stop something (17:59) He did before, if He did not alter His ways?
• Why does the Quran 'confirm' (musaddiqan) the traditional understanding of the Jewish and Christian audience at the time of the Prophet's ministry with regards portents and not challenge it?
• Why does the Quran use similar terms in the Arabic language to support the existing understanding of the Jews and Christians regarding portents?
  For example, if Prophet Moses's rod became a snake (Hebrew - naw-khawsh: snake, serpent - Exodus 4:3) and this is how it was always understood by the People of the Book for generations, why did the Quran use a similar expression to describe the same narrative (Arabic: jannun - serpent, snake (27:10) thu'banun: serpent)?
  This is clearly a 'confirmation'. Why did the Quran not challenge this Biblical understanding? Why did it confirm it in Arabic? This would be the perfect place for the Quran to challenge the Biblical understanding of portents.
• Why would one not accept the Quran's clear testimony, even though the Quran says it is not a book of riddles and has no crookedness?
  "...qur'anan arabiyyan ghayra dhi iwajin ..." (A Quran in Arabic without any crookedness...)
• The Quran many times narrates Biblical narratives as fact and often prefixes it as a reminder with 'wa-idh' (and when) and the time adverb 'idh' (when). For example when a table spread was sent down from heaven (5:112), the Quran uses the the time adverb 'idh' (when) implying that the narrative occured as stated in clear Arabic speech. Why does the Quran use the time adverb in this way and not present it as a parable (mathaal) instead?
• Why does the Quran present long Biblical narratives dealing with portents (a good portion of the Quran) if they are simply allegories especially if believers are not to pursue their interpretation to seek guidance (3:7)?

Your brother in faith,
Joseph. 

[optimist]

Thus, I humbly challenged that contention by citing the example, that on your basis, God also knew that Pharaoh would not believe, so why did he still send him signs?

Salam alaikum,

With respect I would like to state that your point would be valid if Allah had indeed sent "miracles" (as you literally perceive) to Pharoah.    Allah did not send any miracles.  What happened before Pharoah was only an intellectual debate and discussion which are allegorically explained using rod of moses becoming snake and swallowing all false snakes.   

Even assuming your arguement is true, let me ask you why rejection of  such signs by pharoah prevent Allah from sending miracles to the people during prophet's time?  If the knowledge of rejection of miracle is the issue that prevented Allah, the fact that such people will reject miracles is available with Allah all the time.  Just like, even after knowledge of rejection, Allah sent miracles (as you perceive) to Pharoah, Allah should sent miracles to people during prophet's time.

My contention is that, it is not the express rejection of "Miracles" (the meaning as you perceive) that prevented Allah,  but His confirmed knowledge from the habit of those people in the past who are bend to reject Allah and seek for miracles as a precondition to believe never apply their reason seldom learn from such proofs manifested from theirown acts of disobedience (For sure you can not prove a miracle in the example of Thamud discussed in the context).    Please again note the verse;  “Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they were to continue (all day) ascending therein, They would only say: "Our eyes have been intoxicated: Nay, we have been bewitched by sorcery." (15:14-15).    This was the nature of such people all the time.  And this is what prevented Allah from sending miracles to the people during prophet's time.

Well, going through the verses I quoted in my previous post, it should be clear that it was more than a magical feast that happened before Pharoah.  Allah allegorically explained the things because it is impossible to explain all the facts and circumstances literally for those who are not present during that time and period.   If it was just a magical victory prophet Moses had to accomplish there was no need for Moses to seek Allah the help of his brother Aaron due to Moses own reasoning “Aaron my brother is more fluent of tongue than I; send him with me that he may help me and confirm my words, for I fear they will reject me.”(28:34).   In the Biblical  narration it was actally Aaron who is throwing the stick....THINK and read between the lines.  There are deep meanings hidden in the verses of Quran more that what we literally understand.

 

[optimist]

For other readers, please see my 8 contentions below with the position that Biblical portents narrated in the Quran are only allegories. In all humility, I look forward to any convincing academic rebuttals with evidence based arguments. I will do my best to keep an open mind iA.

• Given God's infinite capacity, please provide clear Quranic proof that He cannot / would not temporarily suspend / alter / interfere with the laws He himself has created as and when 'He so wills' to manifest a particular truth
• What did God stop / withhold / arrest / prevent / refrain / suspend (mana) in 17:59 going forward that He had sent to previous communities?
• How could God stop something (17:59) He did before, if He did not alter His ways?
• Why does the Quran 'confirm' (musaddiqan) the traditional understanding of the Jewish and Christian audience at the time of the Prophet's ministry with regards portents and not challenge it?
• Why does the Quran use similar terms in the Arabic language to support the existing understanding of the Jews and Christians regarding portents?
  For example, if Prophet Moses's rod became a snake (Hebrew - naw-khawsh: snake, serpent - Exodus 4:3) and this is how it was always understood by the People of the Book for generations, why did the Quran use a similar expression to describe the same narrative (Arabic: jannun - serpent, snake (27:10) thu'banun: serpent)?
  This is clearly a 'confirmation'. Why did the Quran not challenge this Biblical understanding? Why did it confirm it in Arabic? This would be the perfect place for the Quran to challenge the Biblical understanding of portents.
• Why would one not accept the Quran's clear testimony, even though the Quran says it is not a book of riddles and has no crookedness?
  "...qur'anan arabiyyan ghayra dhi iwajin ..." (A Quran in Arabic without any crookedness...)
• The Quran many times narrates Biblical narratives as fact and often prefixes it as a reminder with 'wa-idh' (and when) and the time adverb 'idh' (when). For example when a table spread was sent down from heaven (5:112), the Quran uses the the time adverb 'idh' (when) implying that the narrative occured as stated in clear Arabic speech. Why does the Quran use the time adverb in this way and not present it as a parable (mathaal) instead?
• Why does the Quran present long Biblical narratives dealing with portents (a good portion of the Quran) if they are simply allegories especially if believers are not to pursue their interpretation to seek guidance (3:7)?

Your brother in faith,
Joseph. 

It is my belief that you yourself will make a scholarly convincing academic rebuttal with evidence based arguements one day. Insha Allah

[QM Moderators Team]

Dear Optimist.

I think brother Joseph has spent more than enough time responding to your comments on this topic and has repeatedly politely asked you to conclude this discussion with him. Please let us kindly and politely remind you of 2 (c) and especially 2 (d) of the Forum policy.

You can find the policy here.

http://quransmessage.com/forum/policy

You are most welcome on this forum, but discussions which lead to unnecessary argumentation will be curtailed on this forum especially if a member has wanted to conclude the discussion after having given their full side of the argument.

Thank you sir

QM Forum Moderators
 

[optimist]

Salamun Alaikum,
I realize the situation.....I won't be making any further comments on this topic in any threads....
Thank you

[Truth Seeker]

Salaam,

I think that the conversations that you and Joseph have had on this topic have been in depth.  I as a forum member can also see that the conversation between you both has been exhausted clearly by the fact that it has spilled over from another thread.

Sometimes members get engrossed with each other in the posts not realising that the conversation has come to a natural conclusion!

[Saba]

Thanks Truthseeker - completely agree with you and got to say though thoroughly enjoyed the debate. However, I do find the 8 points by brother Joseph strong challenges which can't simply be dismissed. I don't find yet any convincing response. Salam - Saba