About wearing shoes while performing Salat

[Sardar Miyan]

Allah's Command about Shoes
------------------------------
Innee ana rabbuka faikhlaAA naAAlayka innaka bialwadi almuqaddasi tuwan
20:12 "Verily I am thy Lord! therefore (in My presence) put off thy SHOES: thou art in the sacred valley Tuwa.
-----------------------------------

Allah's Command to Prophet Moses to remove his shoes in Wadi -e-Tuwa
make all of us know the shoes  are not worn in Sacred places where Allah's Zikr/ Salath is performed
 But I wonder in Saudi Arabia most of the people like Millitary people
pray Salath wearing shoes but all
over the world Muslims don't allow
Shoes in Masajid. I heard that our prophet used to pray wearing shoes
In the battle field. I just wanted to know if shoe is to be kept away from
sacred places why it was used in
Salat?

[optimist]

فَاخْلَعْ نَعْلَيْكَ literally it means ‘take off your shoes’; but Tajul Uroos says that it means ‘wait here’ or stay where you are: like when you tell someone you know to take off his shoes and rest for sometime: Thus the ayat would mean that God told Moses not to be in a hurry, and  to sit calmly and listen. Now your travel (that you were roaming in search of the truth) has come to an end, now you will find your destination easily.  Qurtubi says that here ikhlaa na’laika means complete your family chores i.e. put them out of your mind: he has said that the Arabs also mean family by the word na’al (shoe).

Regards
Optimist

[Joseph Islam]

Dear All,

As-salam alaykum

The reason for the verb action is elucidated by the context that 'Indeed you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa'. Therefore, there is a direct linkage with the removal of the shoe and the presence of the Lord in a hallowed valley. So a metaphorical rendition in my academic opinion is unduly forced.

Furthermore, an almost identical expression exists in the Hebrew Old Testament which the Quran confirms which renders any unduly forced metaphorical interpretation in the Arabic language futile.

Exodus 3:5
"Do not come any closer," God said. "Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground."

Therefore in my humble opinion, the imperative verb 'ikh'la' has a literal import (as it appears in the Hebrew text) and I would respectfully disagree with the application of Ghulam Ahmed Parwez's interpretation as Optimist has shared as it seems, verbatim [1]

I feel it is good practice and within the spirit of the Quran’s narratives that one removes their shoes when within the confines of places of worship and during ritual commemoration.

Regards,
Joseph.


REFERENCE

[1] PARWEZ. G, Lughat ul-Quran, The Language of Quran, Volume - II, Edited / Translated by: Quranic Education Society, Last Edited 2-6-13, Marked Volume III, page 101 of 360

[Sardar Miyan]

Thanks Bro JAi for sharing. Bro Optimist Please don't quote strange translations on this Forum. Please watch Allama Ghamidi's review on GAPerwaiz's translation particularly of Surah Mamal. Thanks

[Saba]

Here is a link of the critique mentioned by bro Sardar of Ghulam Parvez

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=444.msg1382#msg1382 


Salaam   

[optimist]

Salaam all,

Firstly, let me state that I have no problem to accept brother Joseph Islam's simple and clear explanation that the instruction was something to do with removal of the shoe in the literal sense.

I was pointing out the possibility of a different explanation since brother Sardar Miyan was obsessed with many questions like if it is necessary to remove our shoes from all sacred places,  and he has seen saudi arabia military men pray with shoes, whether they could be doing something wrong, etc.

However, please note, Parwez was making an analysis based on explanations provided in the following works.  My post was very clear on this point.
 
1. Taj-ul-Uroos :  which is compiled by Mohibuddin Ibnul Faiz Alsyed Muhammad Murtaza Alhuseni Alwasti Alzubedi Alhanafi who died in 1205 Hijri or 1701A.D. He edited his renowned dictionary in Egypt. It was published in 10 big volumes. The book Parwez was  referring to was published by Matba'ul Khairia and the date of publishing written on it was 1306 A.D.

2.Tafsir al-Qurtubi (Arabic: تفسير القرطبي‎) (Arabic: Al-Jami li-Ahkam al-Qur'an) is a famous Qur'an exegesis (Arabic: tafsir) by the famous classical scholar Al-Qurtubi d.671H.

Here is a link of the critique mentioned by bro Sardar of Ghulam Parvez

http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=444.msg1382#msg1382 


Salaam   

Just for your information, Dr. Shabbir from ourbeacon forum posted on Monday, 22 April 2013, 8:34 am the following. 

Ghamidi Saheb occasionally calls me to encourage our efforts. Answering a question, he said, "My criticism on Parwez Saheb Marhoom was ill-conceived until I understood him better."

I do not know if Dr. Shabbir is telling a lie. And also, I want to state clearly my view that  Parwez  could be wrong sometimes.  He himself never claimed he is infallible. 

However, brother Sardar or you can post the criticism of Ghamidi for the sake of English knowing readers here, it would be good that everyone can read and understand what are his points actually.  At the same time, I hope you will agree with me that Ghamidi is not  GOD to assume that his criticism has to be accepted as something infallible.

Salaam   

[Joseph Islam]

Dear brother Optimist.

As-salam alaykum

This is a very refreshing statement of yours.

I want to state clearly my view that  Parwez  could be wrong sometimes

With regards the specific comment you have shared below in blue, please see my email exchange with Dr. Khalid Zaheer who is the Vice-President of Al-Mawrid [1] which is an institution of which Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is founder-president [2]. I believe you will find this of interest as I have already sought clarification on behalf of some other readers.

Ghamidi Saheb occasionally calls me to encourage our efforts. Answering a question, he said, "My criticism on Parwez Saheb Marhoom was ill-conceived until I understood him better."

QUESTION:

From: Joseph A. Islam
Sent: 25 April 2013 15:56
To: Khalid Zaheer
Subject: A Clarification Request

Dear brother Khalid,
 
May peace be with you.
 
Is it possible whether you can shed any light on the content of the following post please which has been shared with me by a few discerning readers.
 
http://www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119188406
 
In particular, I am interested in brother Javed’s alleged sentiment captured by the statement “My criticism on Parwez Saheb Marhoom was ill-conceived until I understood him better”.
 
If you could obtain clarification / context from brother Javed, this would be even better.
 
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated for myself and some of my interested readers.
 
As always, with utmost respect.
Joseph.

RESPONSE:

From: Khalid Zaheer
Sent: 26 April 2013 06:22
To: Joseph A. Islam
Subject: Re: A Clarification Request

Salam

Just talked to him. He says he hasn't changed his understanding about Pervez Sahib. What he might have said to Dr Shabbir is that had I done done it today my style of presentation would have been different. He believes that we should focus more on positive presentation of what we understand is correct rather than to indulge in unnecessary negative polemic. However, his understanding that Pervez Sahib's approach towards understanding the Qur'an is flawed is the very same as before.

He also mentioned that there are two types of differences: basic and secondary. The basic differences can be on two counts: How one understands the Qur'an & Sunnah and places Hadith in their context while understanding Islam and what kind of overall approach to Islam emerges from it. If someone agrees with him on these two counts, the secondary differences don't matter nor can they be eliminated.

Pervez sahib differs with him in the first count and as a natural consequence on the second one as well.

I hope I have described what he said correctly.

Khalid Zaheer

REFERENCES

[1] Al-Mawrid
http://www.al-mawrid.org/pages/research_detail.php?research_id=11
[2] Al-Marwid
http://www.al-mawrid.org/pages/research_detail.php?research_id=5

[Sardar Miyan]

Salam All Incidently I happen to Email Almawrid about Ghamidis expression that he is sad about GAPerwaiz's  critical. Bro Hashmi gave me Email reply as below. --Reply:

Assalaam o alaykum

Thank you for the email. We believe that Mr Ghamidi has not been unrealistic in his critical analysis of the viewpoint of the said school. His view is not directed at the personality but the approach. It is a pure academic issue. I believe that the source you have in this regard needs to be checked. What is the source of your source? Please share and help and oblige. 

--
Tariq Mahmood Hashmi
Associate Editor (English)
Al-Mawrid
A Foundation for Islamic Research and Education
 
Moblie: 0333-4430507

Question:

 

Assalm,Recently while quoting wisdom of Allama Javed Ghamidi DR Shabbir Ahmed Saheb writes on Ourbeacon Forum that Allma Javed Ghamidi has expressed regrets on his unrealistic criticism of Allama GAPerwaiz done several years ago.I just wanted to know if this statement is correct.Thanks

[Saba]

It seems like Mr. Shabbir Ahmad is not a reliable source of information !!! Saba

[Sardar Miyan]

Salam Sister Saba,I posted my blog on this Forum about Unusual Translation of Dr Shabbir about Juma prayers but nobody commented.Kindly go through Thanks. I also sent an Email to Allama Ghamidi to please take time to go through Dr Shabbirs translation & write as he Translated Surah Namal just as GAPerwaiz did.

[Saba]

Salaam bro Sardar,

I think you might not have got a response as some readers simply can't be asked to spend time on Mr Shabbir's translations as they have little respect for his work or some of interpretations. They might feel they have more pressing issues to deal with. I do think that people like Allama Ghamidi have better things to do then to spend time on unusual translations of Mr. Shabbir...... Just my two cents. Saba

[Sardar Miyan]

Thank you sister for  your realistic comments comments

[optimist]

As-salam alaykum

Wa'alaikumussalam

This is a very refreshing statement of yours.

I want to state clearly my view that  Parwez  could be wrong sometimes

I have never ever supported Parwez unless the points he makes appeal to my reason.  I am answerable to Allah, not to Parwez or anyone in the world. 

With regards the specific comment you have shared below in blue, please see my email exchange with Dr. Khalid Zaheer who is the Vice-President of Al-Mawrid which is an institution of which Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is founder-president.  I believe you will find this of interest as I have already sought clarification on behalf of some other readers.

Intersting!  You had sought clarification for the same statement I quoted!!   This is different than what Dr. Shabbir had posted and hence confusing!.   Anyhow, it is not a concern for me whether he said "had I done done it today my style of presentation would have been different" or  "My criticism on Parwez Saheb Marhoom was ill-conceived until I understood him better."   Nobody knows what will be Ghamidi's style of presentation after another 10 years!!  By making such a strong attack against Parwez earlier,  Ghamidi closed the possibility of even retracting from his comments ever!   He went beyond intellectual criticism, and reached somewhat a level of personal attack on Parwez which is not befitting for a true scholar to do so.   May be this is what he is apologizing at the moment.  Anyhow, as you will admit, Ghamidi's criticism of Parwez can not be the criteria to judge what is wrong and what is right. 

Regards,
Optimist

[optimist]

It seems like Mr. Shabbir Ahmad is not a reliable source of information !!! Saba

In this case, it seems not very reliable.

[Saba]

He went beyond intellectual criticism, and reached somewhat a level of personal attack on Parwez which is not befitting for a true scholar to do so.   May be this is what he is apologizing at the moment.  Anyhow, as you will admit, Ghamidi's criticism of Parwez can not be the criteria to judge what is wrong and what is right. 
Regards,
Optimist

I disagree. See the video with an honest mind and heart and note that Ghamidi Saab's critique is very strong and convincing and it is mainly academic. He is not a criteria as you say, but if someone's criticism is convincing, it is convincing! period. I don't mean any disrespect to anyone, but I wouldn't expect a supporter of a particular ideology or scholar to entertain constructive criticism very well anyway.

This is as true for the traditionalist followers as it is for the qur'anist followers or anyone else from any other religion or thinking.

Readers who can understand Urdu will be able to see for themselves the nature of the criticism. I mainly found it a criticism of an academic nature not personal and pretty on the mark.


Here is the link once again anyway for those that understand Urdu. Saba


http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=444.msg1382#msg1382