7 heavens
-
Salaam bro Mazhar,
"Yakhirroon lilazqaani sujjadan" clearly implies sujood to the chin and not forehead and does not necessarily imply touching the chin with the ground. If The God wanted sujood upon the forehead, He would have said "3alal jabeeni", but we clearly hear "lilazqaani"/to the chins in context of sujood.
I don't find it difficult to perform the sujood with the chin touching the ground and I don't care if someone mocks me, as the salaat is for God alone and not to show off to others. Maybe this way is to differentiate the pagan's sujood to idols from the believer's sujood to The God alone.
Those who find the "exercise" (as you put it) difficult, can just bend down a little by bending their backs while sitting in the kneeling position and that will fulfill the command of "falling to the chin sujjadan" also as I explained in my previous post above. IMO, even just bending one's neck until the chin touches the upper chest while mentally focussing on obedience of The God would also be falling to the chin in sujood. That might be the sujood of choice while performing salaat walking or riding in state of fear/worry (2239).
The important thing is that the mental aspect of sujood i.e. obedience to The God is more important than how exactly one performs one's physical sujood, as long as one is lowering the chin nearer to the ground as stated in the Qur'aan.
-
Brother, Assalamo Alaikum,
Please don't take the word "excercise" in lowely perception, everything involving physical movement and activity falls within the purview of this word; moving of chin to the chest or on ground is after all a physical movement. And deliberate movements are controlled mostly by that part of the memory which we call "procedural memory". If by practice, it is easy for one to touch the chin on the ground, for other who has not practiced it for quite some time it will remain a difficult proposition. Today I have seen many topics on the forum regarding salat and its ettiquettes/manners etc and downloaded dozens of pages to go through them. At the moment, I just want to know would this manner of salat or by whatever name we call it, be an individual activity or with another or more people since what you say is recited during this contains plural words "We"?
-
Salaam bro Mazhar,
This is going off-topic and I think you should start a new thread in the salaat section if you wish to discuss this with others. I think the timed salaat/connection of muslimeen can be both individual and collective. Following signs mention salaat/connection in the singular
6162 Say "My salaat/connection, and my offerings, and my life, and my death, are all to God the Lord of the worlds."
918 Rather, the masaajid/institutions of God are maintained by he who believes in God and the Last Day, and he establishes the salaat/connection, and he contributes towards betterment, and he does not fear except God. It is these that will be of the guided ones.
1187 They said "O Shu'ayb, does your salaat/connection order you that we leave what our fathers served, or that we do not do with our money as we please? You are the compassionate, the sane!"
1440 "My Lord, let me establish the salaat/connection, and also from my progeny. Our Lord, accept my prayer."
3117 "O my son, establish the salaat/connection and advocate righteousness and forbid evil, and bear with patience whatever befalls you. These are the most honorable traits."
7531 For he did not believe nor sallaa/connect.
969 Have you seen the one who deters,
9610 A servant from sallaa/connecting? -
Salaam bro Mazhar,
If you are referring to 4829, in my understanding it is mentioning metaphorical signs/identifying features/distinctions in the faces of the muslimeen as a result of obedience and humility to The God. The word "mathal" itself points to it being metaphorical. The example in Injeel according to 4829 is clearly a metaphorical one, so the example in Torah is also most likely a metaphorical one
4829 Mohammed is the messenger of God, and those who are with him are severe against the rejecters, but merciful between themselves. You see them being obediently humble (rukka3an sujjadan), they seek God's blessings and approval. Their distinction is in their faces, as a result of obedience (as-sujoodi). Such is their example (mathaluhum) in the Torah. And their example (mathaluhum) in the Injeel is like a plant which shoots out and becomes strong and thick and it stands straight on its trunk, pleasing to the farmers; that He may enrage the rejecters with them. God promises those among them who believe and do good works a forgiveness and a great reward.
In this sign "rukka3an sujjadan" refers to obedience/humility of the muslimeen to the God (there is no "wa" in between them). "Seemahum fi wujoohihim" refers to the distinctions/signs/identifications in their faces referred to in 3106-7
3106 The Day on which faces will be whitened and faces will be blackened; as for those whose faces will be blackened "Did you reject after believing? Taste the retribution for what you rejected."
3107 As for those whose faces are whitened, they are in God's mercy, in it they abide eternally.These whitened faces are the shining/joyful faces and the blackened faces are the gloomy/shamed faces mentioned in 7522 and 888
7522 Faces on that Day will be shining.
7524 And faces on that Day will be gloomy.882 Faces on that Day which will be shamed.
888 And faces on that Day which are joyful/happy.The whiteness/shine/joy on the faces is the "seemahum" mentioned in 4829, which will identify the muslimeen and make their faces distinct on the Last Day.
-
Brother Tanveer,
You are right, I knew it you will immediately recall this ayah, and will express your perception about it.
First thing I wish to clarify is that ?mathal? does not mean metaphorical. It means example.
And the ayah you have quoted have no relationship with this ayah giving example. They talk about the expression visible on the faces of people.
And please see the translation you have pasted, there you have used the word example but in explanation you call it metaphorical.
Example is always about the visible action, person or a thing which is representative of one being compared.
Metaphor is implicit comparison; it gives and talks about the hidden or folded things, not visible or concrete.
Moreover you have omitted one important word of the ayah while translating?4829 Mohammed is the messenger of God, and those who are with him are severe against the rejecters, but merciful between themselves. You see them being obediently humble (rukka3an sujjadan), they seek God's blessings and approval. Their distinction is in their faces, as a result of obedience (as-sujoodi). Such is their example (mathaluhum) in the Torah. And their example (mathaluhum) in the Injeel is like a plant which shoots out and becomes strong and thick and it stands straight on its trunk, pleasing to the farmers; that He may enrage the rejecters with them. God promises those among them who believe and do good works a forgiveness and a great reward?
You have not taken care of the word
is physical mark which is always visible. It is neither expression of the face nor metaphor. Can one have this visible mark on the face if it does not touch the ground frequently for quite long periods? -
Peace Mazhar,
Unless it?s a weird form of kung fu using the head you won?t see prayer marks.
Mathaluhum kamathali allathee istawqada naran falamma adaat ma hawlahu thahaba Allahu binoorihim watarakahum fee thulumatin la yubsiroona
217 Their similitude is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in utter darkness. So they could not see.4829 Muhammadun rasoolu Allahi waallatheena maAAahu ashiddao AAala alkuffari ruhamao baynahum tarahum rukkaAAan sujjadan yabtaghoona fadlan mina Allahi waridwanan seemahum fee wujoohihim min athari alssujoodi thalika mathaluhum fee alttawrati wamathaluhum fee alinjeeli kazarAAin akhraja shatahu faazarahu faistaghlatha faistawa AAala sooqihi yuAAjibu alzzurraAAa liyagheetha bihimu alkuffara waAAada Allahu allatheena amanoo waAAamiloo alssalihati minhum maghfiratan waajran AAatheeman
Exact same word used ?mathaluhum? meaning MARKs = Similitude.
Also see ?similar example? usage of the word in verses 6122 and 7176.
-
Salaam Mazhar,
And the ayah you have quoted have no relationship with this ayah giving example. They talk about the expression visible on the faces of people.
"Seemaahum" is any visible identifying feature/sign. The whiteness/joy/shine on the faces of the muslimeen as per 3106-107, 7522, 8588 will be visible and will identify the muslimeen and thus "seemaahum". The Qur'aan explains itself.
What about the "seemaahum" of the guilty ? If it is a physical mark on the guilty, how did they get it ? It can only be the identifying feature of the guilty i.e. the blackness/gloom/shame on their faces per 3106, 7524, 882.
5541 The guilty will be recognized by their features (seemaahum); they will be taken by the forelocks and the feet.
In 2273, the poor who face hardship in the cause of God, and cannot go forth in the land, will be known by their features/"seemaahum", which is that "they do not ask the people repeatedly"
2273 For the poor who face hardship in the cause of God, they cannot go forth in the land; the ignorant ones think they are rich from their modesty; you know them by their features (seemaahum), they do not ask the people repeatedly. And what you spend out of goodness, God is fully aware of it.
Here SEEMAAHUM = they do not ask the people repeatedly
They will be known because they do not ask people repeatedly, which clearly shows "seemaahum" can be a non physical identifying feature.
How can poor who face hardship in the cause of God and cannot go forth in the land, get physical marks ?
And please see the translation you have pasted, there you have used the word example but in explanation you call it metaphorical.
Example is always about the visible action, person or a thing which is representative of one being compared.
Metaphor is implicit comparison; it gives and talks about the hidden or folded things, not visible or concrete."Mithl" or "mathal" means "similitude" or "description by way of comparison" according to Lane's Lexicon. In LL, it is even said that "it is metaphorically applied to a condition, state, or case, that is important, strange, or wonderful".
My point was that the "mathal"/similitude in Injeel per 4829 is clearly a metaphorical one (muslimeen being compared to a strong and thick plant), which implies that the "mathal"/similitude in Torah is also a metaphorical one.
Furthermore, there is no "WA" between "rukka3an" and "sujjadan" in 4829, which clearly implies that the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" in 4829 refers to humility and obedience to The God, and cannot be physical ruku/sujood.
You have not taken care of the word
is physical mark which is always visible. It is neither expression of the face nor metaphor.According to Lane Lexicon, "athar" is not only a physical mark but can also mean "effect/influence/consequence", and thus can be non-physical effect also.
The faces of the muslimeen will have "identifying features" (seemaahum) due to "the effect/influence/result or consequence" (athar) of obedience to The God (sujood), and these identifying features can only be the whiteness/joy/shine on their faces on the Last Day, as clearly explained in the Qur'aan.
There is no "WA" between "rukka3an" and "sujjadan" in 4829, which clearly implies that this phrase refers to humility and obedience to The God in 4829, and cannot be a physical ruku/sujood in that sign.
-
Brother Tanveer, Salam,
Elongation and stretching a word won?t prove a point. Feelings/emotions get reflected on the faces and in body language. But they are never called . It basically and primarily means a ?scar, spot? left on the skin after healing of a wound; marks of footsteps, distinction and in relation to consequence of these things the word can be used.
What feelings are reflected by expressions on the faces can never be expressed by the word . In response to one of my post Sister Samia said ?I am blushing?. If her lovely son/daughter had seen her at that point of time, they might have thought that mother is having high blood pressure, being not aware of the reason of blushing. Blushing can?t be represented by though one can still use the word ?mark? since it is also used to indicate outward sign of somebody?s feeling or attitude though in ordinary perception it means scar, dent, and spot on the surface of a thing.
The problem with the lexicon writers has been that they also embarked upon interpreting words which was not their job. The word is in itself a consequence/effect of something.Quote There is no "WA" between "rukka3an" and "sujjadan" in 4829, which clearly implies that this phrase refers to humility and obedience to The God in 4829, and cannot be a physical ruku/sujood in that sign? {Tanveer
}This was said earlier in the verse. In ruku, bending, there can?t be any and because of sujood, become very visible on knees and quickly even if someone says salat once or twice a day, but that part of the body is not visible to others therefore there is no mention of it. has been used only with reference to sujood and on faces. Moreover this has not been said with regard to the Last Day; it is about the present days.
If we read Quran with preconceived notions/perceptions/thoughts we indulge in stretching the meanings of a word to find one supporting our contention; but then the intention can?t be called as seeking guidance from the Book. Lexicons, exegeses, Hadith material they all help people to restrict to their own perceptions rather than listening to the Book. The statement of the Book is the one which is reflected by its own words, not that Lane or Ibne Kathir or Bukhari said.
?Mathal? and Metaphor are never synonym, interchangeable. For Metaphor the Arabic Root is . One is for visible, which can be perceived by senses, the other is with concealed/infolded thing, like Alaq when used with relation to human creation. Knowledge/conveyance of thought is made easy to people by giving example about the ? and for invisible/concealed/hidden one has to use metaphor to make others understand what is being said. Scintists use the metaphor to make people understand about the invisible things and the Quran has Ayat Mutashabahat to convey knowledge of the universe and human body. And Ayat Mohkmaat are for actions/behavior/attitude/deeds/acts, simple and straight commands without the use of metaphor; but explained only with Mathal, since these are the main purpose of sending the Book. These are for simple and straight forward people who wish to know the purpose of their creation and want to live in accordance with that purpose. Ayat Motashabehat help the "brainy" people who argue before accepting any thing to accept it as the word of Allah when things open in the same manner earlier described in the Book and then accept it as a statement of fact narrated 1400 years back. And Allah has promised that He will keep unfolding the knowledde/metaphors to the humanity.
-
Salaam brother Mazhar,
Elongation and stretching a word won?t prove a point. Feelings/emotions get reflected on the faces and in body language. But they are never called . It basically and primarily means a ?scar, spot? left on the skin after healing of a wound; marks of footsteps, distinction and in relation to consequence of these things the word can be used.
What feelings are reflected by expressions on the faces can never be expressed by the word . In response to one of my post Sister Samia said ?I am blushing?. If her lovely son/daughter had seen her at that point of time, they might have thought that mother is having high blood pressure, being not aware of the reason of blushing. Blushing can?t be represented by though one can still use the word ?mark? since it is also used to indicate outward sign of somebody?s feeling or attitude though in ordinary perception it means scar, dent, and spot on the surface of a thing.
The problem with the lexicon writers has been that they also embarked upon interpreting words which was not their job.The word is in itself a consequence/effect of something.One cannot stretch or elongate a word, but its meaning. I am not stretching or elongating any meanings. I gave a standard Classical Arabic dictionary meaning of "athar" as "effect/influence/consequence" which you admit also. Where is the stretching ?
The "athar"/effect can be non-physical thing also. If you look up "athar" in Lane's Lexicon, you will find the meaning "LUSTER OR BRIGHTNESS, OF THE FACE" also.
Furthermore, in Classical Arabic it can be said "aththara fi 3irdhihi", meaning "he scarred his honor" (ref Lane Lexicon).
"Athar" used in the context of 4829 clearly means "effect/consequence". "Min athari al-sujoodi" means "from effect/consequence of sujood", and in the context of 4829, the sujood can only mean obedience to the God because earlier in the same sign the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" is used which cannot be referring to a physical sujood but only to mental obedience to The God, and "al-sujoodi" refers to this "sujjadan".
This was said earlier in the verse. In ruku, bending, there can?t be any and because of sujood, become very visible on knees and quickly even if someone says salat once or twice a day, but that part of the body is not visible to others therefore there is no mention of it. has been used only with reference to sujood and on faces. Moreover this has not been said with regard to the Last Day; it is about the present days.
Now look who is elongating and stretching meanings !!
Ruku3 primarily means "humility" to The God as used in the Qur'aan, and even where it means a physical ruku3 in addition to the mental humility, it cannot mean bending the way it is used in the Qur'aan.
For example, in 3824, how can one "KHARRA RAAKI3AN"/FALL bending ? One can only fall kneeling.
The face touching any surface for a long time does not necessarily leave physical marks, unless it keeps touching a hard surface. If it touches a soft rug or soft carpet, it may not necessarily have any physical marks even after years, but the brightness/joy of the face due to obedience to The God will always be there.
"Seemaahum" is also used in relation to the Last Day as an identifying feature, and the same "brightness/shine/joy" or "darkness/gloom/shame" of the faces can also be visible in this life.
You still haven't responded to how the guilty will get physical marks and be recognized by them on the Last Day, and how the poor who face hardship in the cause of The God will get physical marks IN THIS LIFE, as brought up in my last post
What about the "seemaahum" of the guilty ? If it is a physical mark on the guilty, how did they get it ? It can only be the identifying feature of the guilty i.e. the blackness/gloom/shame on their faces per 3106, 7524, 882.
5541 The guilty will be recognized by their features (seemaahum); they will be taken by the forelocks and the feet.
In 2273, the poor who face hardship in the cause of God, and cannot go forth in the land, will be known by their features/"seemaahum", which is that "they do not ask the people repeatedly"
2273 For the poor who face hardship in the cause of God, they cannot go forth in the land; the ignorant ones think they are rich from their modesty; you know them by their features (seemaahum), they do not ask the people repeatedly. And what you spend out of goodness, God is fully aware of it.
Here SEEMAAHUM = they do not ask the people repeatedly
They will be known because they do not ask people repeatedly, which clearly shows "seemaahum" can be a non physical identifying feature.
How can poor who face hardship in the cause of God and cannot go forth in the land, get physical marks ?
If we read Quran with preconceived notions/perceptions/thoughts we indulge in stretching the meanings of a word to find one supporting our contention; but then the intention can?t be called as seeking guidance from the Book. Lexicons, exegeses, Hadith material they all help people to restrict to their own perceptions rather than listening to the Book. The statement of the Book is the one which is reflected by its own words, not that Lane or Ibne Kathir or Bukhari said.
I will give you the same advice.
?Mathal? and Metaphor are never synonym, interchangeable. For Metaphor the Arabic Root is . One is for visible, which can be perceived by senses, the other is with concealed/infolded thing, like Alaq when used with relation to human creation. Knowledge/conveyance of thought is made easy to people by giving example about the ? and for invisible/concealed/hidden one has to use metaphor to make others understand what is being said. Scintists use the metaphor to make people understand about the invisible things and the Quran has Ayat Mutashabahat to convey knowledge of the universe and human body. And Ayat Mohkmaat are for actions/behavior/attitude/deeds/acts, simple and straight commands without the use of metaphor; but explained only with Mathal, since these are the main purpose of sending the Book. These are for simple and straight forward people who wish to know the purpose of their creation and want to live in accordance with that purpose. Ayat Motashabehat help the "brainy" people who argue before accepting any thing to accept it as the word of Allah when things open in the same manner earlier described in the Book and then accept it as a statement of fact narrated 1400 years back. And Allah has promised that He will keep unfolding the knowledde/metaphors to the humanity.
This fallacy of logic is called STRAWMAN.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Where did I say "mathal" and "metaphor" are synonymous ? This is the second time you have misrepresented what I said. Please read my previous posts carefully. This is what I said
"Mithl" or "mathal" means "similitude" or "description by way of comparison" according to Lane's Lexicon. In LL, it is even said that "it is metaphorically applied to a condition, state, or case, that is important, strange, or wonderful".
My point was that the "mathal"/similitude in Injeel per 4829 is clearly a metaphorical one (muslimeen being compared to a strong and thick plant), which implies that the "mathal"/similitude in Torah is also a metaphorical one.
When I say that "mathal"/similitude is a metaphorical one, it does not mean that I am saying "mathal" and "metaphor" are synonymous, but I am using "metaphorical" as an adjective of "mathal"/similitude.
"Mathal"/similitude is always applied metaphorically. The second "mathal"/similitude in 4829 is metaphorical because muslims are being compared to strong and thick plant, which is clearly a metaphorical "mathal"/similitude. Similarly, the first "mathal"/similitude of their identifying features being in their faces from "athar"/effect of "sujood" is also a metaphorical "mathal"/similitude.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
met?a?phor /mtfr, -fr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?noun- a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in ?A mighty fortress is our God.? Compare mixed metaphor, simile (def. 1).
- something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.
This discussion is completely off-topic, and i am not going to continue it any further in this thread. I have already expressed my understanding about this issue based on the Qur'aan, and the readers can make up their own minds.
-
Brother Tanveer,
Permit me just one question, please. In Quran, the word has only once occurred in conjunction with word and both are by you being considered and assigned the same meaning and perception. What was the need of using these two words, if things were not to be made specific with regard to visible scar, mark on the face? I have seen many people who have a scar on the forehead, appeared not because of hitting of king fu or rubbing it with hard ground. Rich people who say their salat on very costly rugs/carpets.
I said ?The word is in itself a consequence/effect of something?
You said
?I gave a standard Classical Arabic dictionary meaning of "athar" as "effect/influence/consequence" which you admit also. Where is the stretching??Please read both carefully, and you will find both convey different perception. I said that ?Athar? itself is the result of healing of the wound leaving behind a scar on the skin.
And let me clarify that Salat is that sort of thing the major part of which is done under the control of ?procedural memory? which is learnt by seeing others and personal practice. It is a practical not theory.
And also the majority of public perhaps does not consider that it was not the idolaters who were first in existence but it were the monotheists who existed first. Idolaters copied the sujood style for their idols.
-
What was the need of using these two words, if things were not to be made specific with regard to visible scar, mark on the face? I have seen many people who have a scar on the forehead, appeared not because of hitting of king fu or rubbing it with hard ground. Rich people who say their salat on very costly rugs/carpets.
Perhaps they interpret the verse that way and consider it a duty to hit harder; thus people with BIG scare marks distinguish themselves and get extra points ? in their opinion.
I said that ?Athar? itself is the result of healing of the wound leaving behind a scar on the skin.
Also consider?
Faonthur ila athari rahmati Allahi kayfa yuhyee alarda baAAda mawtiha inna thalika lamuhyee almawta wahuwa AAala kulli shayin qadeerun
3050 Then contemplate (O man!) the memorials of Allah's Mercy!- how He gives life to the earth after its death verily the same will give life to the men who are dead for He has power over all things.Peace
-
The life of earth after death is even visible to blind people. This is what "athar" mean. This is peculiar way of stretching things for one's own desires by referring to absolutely irrelveant perspective/context.
No, I?m not the one stretching/bending to justify a desire to pound my head.
As Tanveer earlier ? it's pointless discuss further.
Take care.
-
-
Salaam brother Mazhar,
Permit me just one question, please. In Quran, the word has only once occurred in conjunction with word and both are by you being considered and assigned the same meaning and perception. What was the need of using these two words, if things were not to be made specific with regard to visible scar, mark on the face?
The red part of your quote above is again STRAWMAN. I am not considering and assigning them the same meaning and perception. I would request you to stop using STRAWMAN as it reflects carelessness on your part. Just a humble suggestion.
As used in 4829
SEEMAAHUM = identifying feature/sign/distinction
ATHAR = effect/consequence/influence
"Their identifying features/distinctions/signs (seemaahum) are in their faces from (min) effect/influence/consequence (athar) of obedience (al-sujoodi)".
How am I considering and assigning both "seemaahum" and "athar" same meaning and perception ?
You are the one who has a preconceived notion that 4829 only refers to physical marks on the faces. As I have already shown, linguistically, grammatically, and based on context of 4829, it is most likely referring to a non-physical identifying feature as a result of obedience to The God. I will summarise the Qur'aanic evidences again at the end of this post.
I have seen many people who have a scar on the forehead, appeared not because of hitting of king fu or rubbing it with hard ground. Rich people who say their salat on very costly rugs/carpets.
This is example of some more logical fallacies
- half truth
- hasty generalization
- proof by example
- appeal to probability
Please look up the examples at the following link
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
One example of proof by example is as follows
I've seen a person shoot someone.
Therefore, all people are murderers.Just because some people develop marks on their face due to prostration, does not mean ALL people who prostrate will also develop marks. People who prostrate on soft rugs or soft carpets may not develop marks. Also being rich and possessing costly rugs has nothing to do with marks, because even costly rugs can be hard, especially antiques.
In addition to that, I have already proven from the Qur'aan that the physical component of prostration is to the chin, not upon the forehead. This example given by you also shows that you are trying to justify prostration on the forehead rather than to the chin based on your own desires and pre-conceived notions rather than following The God's words which CLEARLY mention sujood TO THE CHINS.
I said ?The word is in itself a consequence/effect of something?
You said
?I gave a standard Classical Arabic dictionary meaning of "athar" as "effect/influence/consequence" which you admit also. Where is the stretching??Please read both carefully, and you will find both convey different perception. I said that ?Athar? itself is the result of healing of the wound leaving behind a scar on the skin.
In 4829, it says "min athari al-sujoodi"/from effect of sujood, and NOT "athari min al-sujoodi"/effect from sujood. You would have been right if it had said the latter. You are taking one dictionary meaning of "athar" and rejecting the other standard meaning without any evidence, and also ignoring the construction of the phrase and its grammatical implication.
The evidence points to "al-sujoodi" meaning "obedience to The God", rather than a physical prostration, because in the same sign the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" is used which CANNOT mean a physical ruku3/sujood but can only refer to humility/obedience to The God as I have already shown before, and "al-sujoodi" coming after that phrase in the same sign, can logically only be referring to the "sujjadan" mentioned earlier.
And let me clarify that Salat is that sort of thing the major part of which is done under the control of ?procedural memory? which is learnt by seeing others and personal practice. It is a practical not theory.
Firstly, what is the relevance of this to the current discussion ? How is 4829 talking about salaat ?
Just because the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" and the word "al-sujoodi" is used in 4829, does not mean that the sign is referring to salaat. I have already shown many times that the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" CANNOT refer to physical ruku3/sujood because of the grammatical construction. There is no "wa" between "rukka3an" and "sujjadan"; "sujjadan" in this phrase is an adjective of "rukka3an", and thus refers to being obediently humble to The God, and not to any physical act of ruku3/sujood. "Al-sujoodi" occurring soon after this phrase can only logically refer to "sujjadan" in that phrase, and is thus also referring to obedience to The God.
Even if you look at other occurrences of "ruku3" and "sujood" in the Qur'aan, most of the time they refer to humility and obedience to The God, and not to physical acts. Where and how do you get the idea that 4829 can only be talking about salaat ?
Secondly, no wonder you are having problem understanding the Qur'aan, because apparently you believe in learning things by seeing others (red part of your quote above), rather than learning by studying The God's words using our God given minds, reason, and senses and understanding how The God tells us to do things, irrespective of what others are doing. No wonder you are letting your pre-conceived notions formed by "seeing others" come into your way of understanding how matters pertaining to our guidance should be performed.
2170 And if they are told "Follow what God has sent down," they say "No, we will follow what we found our fathers doing!" What if their fathers did not understand anything and were not guided?
And also the majority of public perhaps does not consider that it was not the idolaters who were first in existence but it were the monotheists who existed first. Idolaters copied the sujood style for their idols.
Idolaters copied by making the sujood to their idols only a physical act and performing it upon their foreheads instead of it being also a mental act of obedience to The God and performing the physical component TO THEIR CHINS.
You can continue to perform sujood like the idolaters on your forehead and get scars on your forehead, but then how are you going to justify the forehead thing on the Last Day, whereas The God clearly tells you that the physical sujood to Him is TO THE CHINS ?
The God says that the identifying feature of the muslimeen is in their faces from effect of sujood. The idolaters perform sujood on their foreheads to their idols and can easily get physical marks on their foreheads, so how are you going to IDENTIFY muslimeen from the idolaters if both have physical marks on their foreheads ?
Let me summarise all the Qur'aanic evidences that the identifying features on the faces of muslimeen mentioned in 4829 are most likely NON-PHYSICAL, as a result of obedience to The God.
-
The phrase "rukka3an sujjadan" as used in 4829 CANNOT refer to a physical ruku3/sujood grammatically and linguistically, as I have shown above, and can only be referring to obedience/humility to The God.
-
"Seemaahum" refers to NON-PHYSICAL identifying features in ALL other occurrences in the Qur'aan (2273, 746, 748, 4730, 4829, 5541), and thus is most likely referring to non-physical identifying features in 4829.
-
"Al-sujoodi" in 4829 most likely refers to obedience to The God, as it comes soon after the phrase "rukka3an sujjadan", and is logically referring to the "sujjadan" in that phrase.
-
"Athar" is not always a physical mark, but also means "effect/influence/consequence", and can also be a non-physical effect in Classical Arabic. It says "min athari al-sujoodi"/from effect of sujood, instead of "athari min al-sujoodi"/effect from sujood in 4829, and thus most likely refers to a non-physical result/consequence/effect of obedience to The God as used in 4829.
-
"Mathal"/similitude is usually metaphorical in Classical Arabic. The similitude in Injeel according to 4829 is clearly a metaphorical one (muslimeen compared to a strong and thick plant which shoots out and stands straight, thus referring to strength, and conviction of their beliefs and following the straight path). Hence, the similitude in Torah according to 4829 can only be a metaphorical one too (the identifying features of muslimeen being in their faces from effect of sujood, referring metaphorically to the brightness/joy/shine on their faces as a result of obedience to The God).
This brightness/whiteness/joy/shine on the faces of muslimeen will be clearly visible on the Last Day (3106-107, 7522, 888 ), and will be their identifying features/"seemaahum" on the Last Day (746). On the other hand, the guilty will be recognized by their identifying features/"seemaahum" too on the Last Day (5541, 74, which will be the "darkness/blackness/gloom/shame" on their faces.
No more comments from me. The readers can use their own minds and do their own research to confirm/verify per 1736 and then follow whichever understanding they think is the best one
3918 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.
May The God guide us to the truth and the straight path.
-
Peace all
Wow it's been so long since I have posted on FM (
Anyway, just to spark some thought, I'd like to bring up astral projection. According to many people, there are 7 dimensions/planes of existence within the universe.
Read about it here http//english.divinaciencia.com/evoluc_i.php
And here is a more in depth site on astral projection if anyone is interested. It's very long but very informative as well. It even describes these so called dimensions
http//www.spiritual.com.au/articles/astral/astralp1_rbruce.htm
Peace all