The Ahillat
-
Peace Anwar
Ah! You mean "uhilla bihi"! I am really sorry.
But this verb has another part of it, which is the preposition "bi", and is an indispensible part of it to keep this meaning, just like "up" with "make" two completely different meanings make and make up. Even when you derive a noun, a verbal noun..etc from this verb, the preposition should show up with the new derivativee.g. al-ahillatu biha...Since this is not the case, I do not think ahilla is derived from the verb ahalla bi, although they might share the same root.
-
God bless,
I was reading the Quran last night and I noticed
Maa laa yaghfirullaahu huwa an yushrak bihi.
Notice that all that was need was 'an yushrak'
The 'bihi' is emphasis and is really just redundant. It means 'as it concerns him' This is the same with uhilla bihi. I'll give you the verse number later.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace bro Anwar, all,
I think "uhilla" in 2173 and 53 means "dedicated" or "offered". In such case "ahilla(t)", if derived from the same meaning would mean something like "dedications" or "offerings".
Ahilla(t) is also the plural of "hilaal" meaning "crescent moon", so it can also mean "crescent moons".
I don't think that "offerings"/"dedications" would make much sense in the context of 2189 and "crescents" seems to fit better. One cannot make "offerings"/"dedications" a timing mechanism, but one can make "crescent moons" a timing mechanism.
"Mawaqeet" is plural of "meeqaat" which signifies a time appointed for performance of some action.
Referring your article
http//www.quranists.com/HajjandRamadan.html
Your implication of "ahillat" referring to "slaughtered animals that are offered" in 2189 could have been right only if it had said "they are AT appointed times" or "they are to be timed", instead of "they are appointed times". There is no "AT" in the relevant part of 2189. I don't think "mawaqeet" in 2189 is used as a verb meaning "to be timed", as you erroneously imply, but is used as a noun meaning "appointed times".
"Mawaqeet" refers directly to "ahillat", i.e. "ahillat" are "mawaqeet". "Crescent moons" can be "appointed times" but "slaughtered animals that are offered" cannot be "appointed times". Thus the context clearly indicates that "ahillat" in 2189 refers to "crescent moons" and not to "slaughtered animals that are offered".
-
Peace,
As I said in my article mawaaqeeet is also the plural of mawqoot or timed. Consecrated is more correct as we are forbidden food that dedicated in slaughter or preparation to other than God. When the passage says wal-hajji this makes perfect sense, it is talking about teh consecrations of the animals we are to sacrifice during pilgrimage.
Yes ahillat is the plural of hilaal and haleel. But this passage makes more sense when speaking of consecrations, the pilgrimage and entering the doors of God's houses not just for show.
The verse is consistently about pilgrimage if we see mawaaqeet as the plural of mawqoot and ahillat as consecrations, if we look at it as new moons or moon stages, then it is less consistent. Especially when we consider the the lunar calendar is only valid with an added month. Checking out Shabbirs article where 11 days were added is also a very valid opinion about Ramadan, but I don't see any clues for how we can figure out the original placing of these soli-lunar months when only the 11 days were added. That should have been what they did when they got the message to stop adding an extra month. However I think if the orignal ramadan is discovered the option of the season of heat or summertime is also very valid.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Food consecrations for The God are allowed but food consecrations for other than The God are forbidden per 53. In 2189, "ahillat" are being mentioned in general when it says "they ask you regarding ahillat", and also when it says "for the people and for the hajj" which indicates that "ahillat" are also for the people in general and not only for hajj. Now, if "ahillat" are taken to be "(food) consecrations", and "mawaqeet" are taken to be "timed", then food consecrations (for The God) are supposed to be offered only at appointed times for the people in general (other than hajj).
Pursuing this logic further, it will mean that "consecrations" (not for hajj but for people) to The God be offered by people only at appointed times. What are the appointed times for offering "consecrations" to The God for people in general (not for hajj) according to al-qur'aan ?
The two translations will be as follows
"They ask you regarding the consecrations, say "they are timed for the people as well as for the hajj"
(Anwar version)If this version is correct, then for the hajj, consecrations will be timed during the 4 restricted months, but what about for the people ?
"They ask you regarding the crescent moons, say "they are timing mechanisms for the people as well as for the hajj" (FM version)
This makes sense as crescent moons can be used by the people in general as a timing mechanism and also for hajj.
One can hereby see that "ahillat" in the context of 2189 cannot refer to "consecrations", and "mawaqeet" cannot refer to "timed", because then it will make no sense as shown above. Thus "ahillat" can only mean "crescent moons" and "mawaqeet" can only mean "appointed times"/"timing mechanisms" in context of 2189.
-
Peace,
Tanveer, you said
consecrations (for The God) are supposed to be offered only at appointed times for the people in general (other than hajj).
You say other than Hajj, and that if it is for the hajj it can't be for the people. Why one or the other? It's for both. For the people and the Hajj, more specifically for the people on hajj.
This makes perfect sense. It only doesn't make sense when you try to pidgeon-hole it and make it one or the other when the verse says that it is for both. Remember 'wa' can also mean, 'meaning' or 'that is'
"For the people, meaning/that is, (for) the Hajj.''
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
I never said one or the other. I said for both. I can understand how the appointed times for the food consecrations for the hajj are in the 4 restricted shahr, but what are the appointed times for the food consecrations for the people in general according to al-qur'aan ?
The "wa" cannot mean "meaning/that is" in 2189 because "for the hajj" already includes the people performing the hajj so it would be redundant to say "for the people, that is for the hajj". That would make no sense at all. It is clearly for two subjects for the people in general and for the people performing the hajj.
-
Peace,
Tanveer you said
The "wa" cannot mean "meaning/that is" in 2189 because "for the hajj" already includes the people performing the hajj so it would be redundant to say "for the people, that is for the hajj". That would make no sense at all. It is clearly for two subjects for the people in general and for the people performing the hajj.
This is defintely a meaning of waw. You can check out the verse in Chpt two that said ''We believe in what was revealed to us and before us . . . and what was given to Moses and Jesus AND (WAW) the prophets from their lord."
This can be found in tons of places in the Quran and even seen in grammatical books on Old Arabic.
The waw here is 'meaning,' or 'that is'. Saying for the Hajj, specifies during what occasion this is supposed to be done. Otherwise it would just be a general 'for the people', that is why wal-hajji (meaning, for the Hajj) comes next. Please look at the Arabic again closely and try not to be so oppositional.
Peace & Godbless,
Anwar -
Salaam Tanweer
How is the new moon "hilaal" appointed time for Hajj? And why is it in the plural (ahilla)?
Also, the quraan never mentioned the word "hilaal", so why would anybody ask about it?I know I did not agree with progod when he first started this thread, but as I followed it up, I started to think...maybe he's got a point!
-
Peace Samia,
There are two things here that can be interpreted differently. First is ahillat which we both know can be the plural of hilaal and haleel (a word not in use anymore but which is the equivalent to ma uhilla, or maa uhilla bihi).
Then there is mawaaqeet which can be seen as the plural of meeqaat (timing device) or mawqoot (timed, a set time).
The thing is that it can go both ways. If we take it as hilaal then it is a timing device for men and/that is/ the hajj. This is kind of redundant as we already know that the hajj is during certain months, and if we count the months by the moon well then this is somewhat redundant. But God can be redudant, and sometimes it is for a reason. However I don't see the logic of this redudancy taking it as this.
Whether we are to count the months using the moon depends on how we view shahr, and the Quranic clues about this. I am of the opinion that we are to count the year's shuhoor by counting 30 days from the clues i've seen in the Quran on how to make up one day of fasting (feeding 1 person) and how to make up 2 shahr(aan) of fasting (feeding 60 people).
Now if we look at ahillat as the plural of haleel and mawaqeet as the plural of mawqoot then 'The consecrations are to be at set times for (the benefit of) the people, that is (wa) for the pilgrimage (al-hajjI)
Here there is no redudancy, just clarification. The consecrations are set times for the people to take advantage of them and this is done during the hajj. What follows next (enter the doors of the houses (God houses) not to make a show (dhuhoor (dhahara-dhuhoor like saqata-suqoot) . . .) follows along with the theme of hajj.
You see understanding it this way is less redudant and clears up al-buyoot as God's houses(the sanctuaries to which we are to make pilgrimage) and the rest which makes the passage seem much more consistent.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Do you mean that "hajj" is not performed by the people ? "For the hajj" automatically implies "for the people who are performing the hajj" and then it would be redundant to say "linnaas" in addition to "al-hajj" in 2189. This creates a redundancy and signifies poor language and The God is not redundant like that. "For the hajj" would have been sufficient if The God meant that "ahillat" were for the people who performed the hajj. Your interpretation of "wa" meaning "that is" does not make any sense in this context because it then creates this redundancy.
The thing is that it can go both ways. If we take it as hilaal then it is a timing device for men and/that is/ the hajj. This is kind of redundant as we already know that the hajj is during certain months, and if we count the months by the moon well then this is somewhat redundant. But God can be redudant, and sometimes it is for a reason. However I don't see the logic of this redudancy taking it as this.
If we take it as hilaal then it is a timing device for the people (in general) AND the hajj. Why are you translating "wa" as "that is" when you take "ahillat" as timing devices, and then claim it is redundant ?
The crescent moons are to be used as a timing device for 1. the people in general AND 2. the hajj in 2189.
For the hajj, the crescent moons are used to time when the hajj ends. Please see Ayman's article for explanation
http//free-minds.org/articles/science/timing.htm
An example of crescent moons as timing device for people in general
- And those who die from you and leave spouses, they (the spouses) should wait on themselves four full-moons and ten (days). So when they reach their term, there is no blame on you for what they do in themselves with recognized good; and The God is informed of what you do.
2234 is in line with 2189, which says that the crescents are timing devices for people in general (not just for "hajj". In this case, the ten extra days is the exact time it takes for the full-moon to reach the crescent stage again.
Whether we are to count the months using the moon depends on how we view shahr, and the Quranic clues about this. I am of the opinion that we are to count the year's shuhoor by counting 30 days from the clues i've seen in the Quran on how to make up one day of fasting (feeding 1 person) and how to make up 2 shahr(aan) of fasting (feeding 60 people).
I disagree with your interpretation of "shuhoor" as 30 day periods according to al-qur'aan. My understanding is that according to al-qur'aan, "shahr" means "full moon" and not "30 day period". Please see Ayman's article referenced above for further explanation.
Firstly, there is no qur'aanic evidence of "shahr" being a "30 day period". The "exchange formula" used by you to arrive at this meaning has already been refuted by discussions on this forum in the past by Oben and Ayman. For example, 589 refutes your "exchange formula" by telling us that feeding 10 people = fasting 3 days. According to this sign then, feeding 60 people would be equivalent to 18 days.
Secondly, NO CLASSICAL ARABIC DICTIONARY in the world gives the meaning of "shahr" as "30 day period".
Thirdly, NO PREVIOUS CALENDAR SYSTEM has ever used a 30 day period consistently as a timing device.
I do not wish to discuss this point further as it has already been convincingly refuted on this forum in the past. For past refutations, please see the following
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12280.0
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12364.msg97220#msg97220
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9329.msg44884#msg44884 (read onwards from this post)
I agree to disagree with your interpretation of 2189 and the readers can make up their own minds after studying the points from both sides. May The God guide us all to the straight path.
-
Salaam Samia,
How is the new moon "hilaal" appointed time for Hajj? And why is it in the plural (ahilla)?
Also, the quraan never mentioned the word "hilaal", so why would anybody ask about it?I know I did not agree with progod when he first started this thread, but as I followed it up, I started to think...maybe he's got a point!
I understand "hilaal" as not "new moon" but "crescent moon", and therefore "ahillat" meaning "crescent moons" in 2189. I understand "mawaqeet" as plural for "meeqaat" meaning "timing device/mechanism" or "appointed time".
Thus, according to 2189, "crescent moons" are "timing devices" for the hajj. They are used to time when the various hajj at plural times of the year END, thus being appointed times for their END. Please see Ayman's following article for full explanation
http//free-minds.org/articles/science/timing.htm
It is in the plural because there are plural shuhoor when the hajj can be performed and thus plural ahillat to time the end at plural times of the year. It is also in the plural because the ahillat can also be used as timing devices for the people in general at plural times of the year.
As you know, there can be 24-26 ahillat/crescent moons in a year, and even if you take the waning crescent moons as timing devices (there are exactly 10 days between the full moon and the waning crescent moon), there are still 12-13 waning crescent moons in a year. Please see the above post for example of when ahillat/crescent moons can be used as timing devices for people in general.
-
Peace,
I already know you disagree with this point, and did from the time you saw it. as for 'for the people at the pilgrimage.' Think about it. Why do people sacrifice animals. Many times they don't do it for the people. They do it as a ritual. So it could have said 'set times for the pilgrimage' but it is more consistent with the purpose of the sacrifices to say 'set times for (the benefit) the people, that is, for the pilgrimage making it clear that the sacrifices during the pilgrimage are for the people, not the just the pilgrimage.
You call it poor language and find it redudant, but I can tell that you haven't really gotten deep into the study of the Arabic of the Quran. There is much there that a modern reader would consider poor language, but we are not within the capacity of judging the quality of Old Arabic style, as we are not old Arabs. Our only capacity is to try to find the most logical meanings of these verses.
As for shahr. Here you are again wrong in your assumption. Firstly A shahr is a lunar cycle from one hilaal to the other in its basic meaning. That can range from 28-30 days. We don't need a dictionary to tell us that a shahr can be 28, 29 or 30 days. We just need to think. The more you learn Arabic the more you will learn that the dictionaries are fantastic tools but they don't always have everything. The logic is there, plain to see. Especially when we see in the Quran the compensatin of feeding 60 people for each day of 2 months of fasting.
You are right about crescent moon being hilaal and not new moon. Some people including myself mistakenly use the two terms interchangeably. Hilaal can also mean any other moon phase as well, so that you know.
You can agree with Ayman as that is your right but he did not refute me. It came down to the interpration of a verse and whether in that verse would should look at the 3 days of fasting and feding 10 people as compensations for each other or compensatiosn for the act commited. In which case we need not look for the two to be mathematical equivalents as they are not compensation for each other. You're tone here seems somewhat sharp & intolerant however, that is not what we came to discuss, again nor would i consider those forums refutations.
Ayman would view these as mathematical equivalents, therefore if A=b and C=b than A=C. But we are talking about actions here. A was said to compensate (not be equal to) b, and C was said to compensate (not equal) b. So this should be looked at as as case the equal sign that looks more like this ~ if we are going to think mathematically. if A is approximately equal to b and C is approximately equal to b that does not mean that A is approximately equal to B. I'm sure you math wizzes should understand this. We are talking about the compensation of an (non-unit) action besides daily fasting here. Okay that's enough I'm sure I explained this enough on those other forums. I'll review them again to get another look.
I will revisit those articles you point to and comment on them later.
Godbless,
Anwar -
If we look at all the occurrences of the word "mawaqeet"/"myqat", we can clearly see that it can indicate the end of something
- And We appointed for Moussa thirty nights, and We completed with ten thus was completed the timing ("myqat" of his Lord, forty nights...
Notice that in 7142, The God could have just said 40 nights instead of 30 and then completing with 10 to complete the "myqat". These are not unnecessary extra words but they are hinting at two things. The first is that 10 completes the count and the second is that the fulfillment of the "myqat" is at its end not its beginning. So the crescents time the end not the beginning of "al-hajj" (the annual fair).
In 2189, we are told that the crescents do not only time "al-hajj" (the annual fair) but they also serve generally as a timing device. It is not a coincidence that it takes ten nights for the full-moon to reach the crescent stage. So in addition to "al-hajj" (the annual fair), the crescent also times the end of the fast and it even times mundane things such as the waiting period for a woman whose husband has died (2234).Ahillah here as deduced by Ayman mean "endtimes" marker. Thus ahillat also signify a cosmic marker for "out of the prescribed timing" for the mankind.
When the earlier people see the crescents (ahillat) up on the sky, it signify that they had already completed their time frame for eg Siyam/Hajj/Divorce I'ddah (for departing husband/menopause women), which started from full moon marker and ends at the crescents marker.
For them (1400 year before), waxing or waning crescent concept does not relevant because it is just a recent astronomy terminology. They might not understood the concept of northern/southern hemisphere where waning and waxing is interchangeably. In short, those are not important concepts to be made known by God to the common people at that time.
So as long as it is crescent emerged over the head, it means "endtimes/out of the prescribed times".
God usually give something easier to work out definitely.
Peace,
Ashraf -
Peace Ashraf,
Ahillah here as deduced by Ayman mean "endtimes" marker. Thus ahillat also signify a cosmic marker for "out of the prescribed timing" for the mankind.
When the earlier people see the crescents (ahillat) up on the sky, it signify that they had already completed their time frame for eg Siyam/Hajj/Divorce I'ddah (for departing husband/menopause women), which started from full moon marker and ends at the crescents marker.
For them (1400 year before), waxing or waning crescent concept does not relevant because it is just a recent astronomy terminology. They might not understood the concept of northern/southern hemisphere where waning and waxing is interchangeably. In short, those are not important concepts to be made known by God to the common people at that time.
So as long as it is crescent emerged over the head, it means "endtimes/out of the prescribed times".
God usually give something easier to work out definitely.The waning crescent is left visible and the waxing is right visible in the Northern Hemisphere. It is the opposite in the Southern Hemisphere. So they are very easy to distinguish since even ancient common people were intelligent enough to know their left from their right.
The only place where they are not distinguishable easily is on the equator where the crescent is pointing straight up. However, even on the equator, they can be distinguished because from the full moon you have to go through the waning crescent first and this takes 10 days.
Peace,
Ayman