What Mustansir Mir really says about kharruu liladhqaan
-
Salaam Sarah,
So Lanes uses other examples, are they the only ones sighted? Gotta link I could check out?
He mentions the Quranic verse and a few of the examples here under the entry kh-r-r.
He mentions the rest here, in the first column, about half way down.
These are pdf scans from Project Quran List. First one is linked to in the entry for kh-r-r, and the other at dhal-qaf-nun
In regards to your reference 17107 hypothetically it is a possible clear refers to physical prostration... when you read the verse is that what you visualise? That the knowledge came to them and based on that they believed and they fell down in prostration? Maybe that?s what you visualise.
The way I visualize it is that they fall to the ground in humility and overwhelming emotion, and then perform a prostration.
Something that might not seem significant but probably is 17109 doesn?t mention sujjud. So wouldn?t it be wrong to associate sujjud to ?youkharuna llathakini? in all references? Considering one interpretation of sujud is known as physical prostration on the ground etc, doesn?t this challenge the idea ?
I read this verse just as I read the above one, that yukhirruuna liladhqaani simply means to fall down to the ground in submission/defeat.
This verse differs from the other in that once they are on the ground they don't prostrate, they begin to cry.
When I asked a sheikh about this verse last summer, I was told that these verses should be read with 2573, where it is said "when they are reminded of the verses/signs of their lord, they do not fall deaf and blind thereat."
He was saying that the true believers are overwhelmed with emotion and khushoo3, whilst the disbelievers perform their tasks without emotion, simply because they have to.
These verses relate to 1074-5 ?Woe to those who pray but hearts are not in the prayers."
It is simply about khushoo3. Check Kh-Shiin-Ayn here at Project Quran List.
BTW is Mir contactable?
I would imagine that as a professor he would be very contactable. Perhaps this is what we need to do.
The reason I started this thread was to expose the ungenuine statement by wakas in his article
Professor Mustansir Mir is very clear in "Verbal Idioms of The Quran", in which he cites "fall to the chin" as a verbal idiom meaning extreme humility, for the chin represents pride...
Grammatically, the accusative word "sujjudan" in "yakhorruun lil'adhqaan sujjudan" names the action or manner of the verb preceding. In other words, it describes how "they fell to their chins". So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical.This is ungenuine because that is not what Mustansir Mir is saying. He is saying, as do all traditional Sunni or Shia scholars, that it means extreme humility - but Wakas is neglecting to add that Mustansir Mir is "very clear" about the fact that it is "body-physical"
"to fall down on one's face in humility.
Kharra 1i dh-dhaqani implies extreme humility"
So Mir is saying EXACTLY what all traditional Muslim clerics say
Which is why I cannot understand why Wakas uses this as evidence for his argument that sujood is not physical in this verse, since Mustansir Mir most certainly does not say that, and even your neighborhood mullah would say that it is an idiom. There is no one in Islamic theology that I am aware of who states that that verse is NOT an idiom, just as there is no one who states that it is NOT body-physical.
-
peace Sarah,
Please bear in mind ths does not read properly. He quotes my article and joins two separate paragraphs together (which are themselves separated by a line of space) then makes parts bold and implies I am saying this is what Mustansir Mir (MM) says. Deceptive.
IF I was trying to mislead anyone about what MM says, I would not have provided a link to the book for people to read themselves. Anyone can read what I said about this over a year ago here http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598162.msg206637#msg206637 and compare with what MM actually says http//img98.imageshack.us/img98/2650/97400887.jpg
It is not my fault ths does not understand what an idiom is "an expression whose meanings cannot be inferred from the meanings of the words that make it up"
According to ths they fall to their chins prostrating, means they fall upon their faces, prostrating
Woah, what word play, what an idiom! ;D
According to wakas they fall to their chins SJD, means they humble themselves utterly, acknowledging (or any other meanings of SJD, i.e. honouring/paying respect/submitting)
Lets look at the facts
-
His book is called verbal idioms of The Quran, in which he lists idioms. He lists this idiom under Kha, implying the kh-r-r part is the idiom or at least part of the idiomatic expression. This is how his book works.
-
Both Lane and MM cite examples of objects with no chin or face, that use the idiom, but in these, ths seemingly implies its not about a chin or face, its about humility BUT when it comes to humans it is about a physical fall to the chin/face. How convenient, but unfortunately for him, that is not how idioms work.
-
MM when first listing the idiomatic phrase often gives the literal translation, and then discusses/explains it either in brackets and/or underneath. Unfortunately, in this case, MM is not 100% clear, however, by using logic when reading his explanation, we can clearly see he states in these verses it means to humble oneself before God.
-
MM lists another idiom with kh-r-r in his book, in fact, the one before the one we are discussing, and explains it as not a physical fall.
-
The Quran and Classical Arabic dictionaries state the meaning of th-q-n as "chin", not "face".
-
If we take it as a physical fall, then whenever The Quran is relayed to us, we should physically fall (or at least some of the time), according to ths. No mullah/sheikh, who ths seems to like referring to, says we should do this. Nor from the people of the book.
-
Traditional exegetes show variance in 'fall SJD' verses, as I point out in my article http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html
And lastly, note how in this thread http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601641 ths cited this verse as the strongest proof of SJD=prostrate, yet this verse clearly contains problems! Readers of the forum can easily see how weak the evidence of SJD=prostration is.
-
-
Please bear in mind ths does not read properly. He quotes my article...
According to ths they fall to their chins prostrating, means they fall upon their faces, prostrating
Woah, what word play, what an idiom!
It seems I'm not the only one who can't read properly, because I've never said anything about the face - this is your own hallucination.
This is what I said
The way I visualize it is that they fall to the ground in humility and overwhelming emotion, and then perform a prostration.
You are the one translating "chin" for "face"
- Both Lane and MM cite examples of objects with no chin or face, that use the idiom, but in these, ths seemingly implies its not about a chin or face, its about humility BUT when it comes to humans it is about a physical fall to the chin/face. How convenient, but unfortunately for him, that is not how idioms work
Again, I never said anything about the face. You are reading this sentence and trying to translate every word in the sentence into something else. So it's no wonder you keep coming up with chin=face.
According to wakas they fall to their chins SJD, means they humble themselves utterly
Now,
- Tell us then Wakas, how does a tree "humble itself" during a storm, as per Lane's example.
- How has the stone humbled itself, as per Lane's example.
This is a direct quote from Lane
-- A wind blew violently, so that the trees fell, or bent themselves down to the ground
-- The wind blew,and overturned, or threw down, or bent down, the trees
(of a stone) -- The torrent overturned itSo it seems you cannot read properly, because Lane says the tree FALLS DOWN, the stone IS OVERTURNED, and Mir says the verse means the people FALL DOWN.
I do not have a problem with you peddling your half-baked views around the forum - I have a problem with you claiming that an Islamic scholar supports your view - which I've proven he ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT.
Now please tell me how my opinion differs from Mustansir Mir and Lane.
Unfortunately, in this case, MM is not 100% clear, however, by using logic when reading...
Oh?! He's not clear??
Because in your article you say he was "very clear" - hahahahah classy.
Secondly, this is direct quote from his book
"to fall down on one's face in humility."
That is "very clear", as you stated - only with the opposite meaning to what you've been peddling around on this forum.
EDIT
yet this verse clearly contains problems!No, Wakas, there is not a single academic nor Arabic scholar in this world who believes that sujood does not mean physical prostration, nor a single scholar who supports your view that this verse has no physical falling in it.
Therefore the entire academic community disagrees with your view - there is no problem with this verse - you are the only one with a problem.
-
It seems I'm not the only one who can't read properly, because I've never said anything about the face - this is your own hallucination.
From http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599857.msg243797#msg243797
The argument goes that it is a poetic device where the part (chin) describes the whole (face)
Who is hallucinating now ths?
For those interested, see Brother Ayman's analysis of his post above, where he critiques it.
Further, you seem to promote what MM says is literal, and he mentions "upon the face", so do you agree with this or not? Yes or No.
Now,
- Tell us then Wakas, how does a tree "humble itself" during a storm, as per Lane's example.
- How has the stone humbled itself, as per Lane's example.
This is a direct quote from Lane
-- A wind blew violently, so that the trees fell, or bent themselves down to the ground
-- The wind blew,and overturned, or threw down, or bent down, the trees
(of a stone) -- The torrent overturned itSo it seems you cannot read properly, because Lane says the tree FALLS DOWN, the stone IS OVERTURNED
It is unfortunate I have to teach you the basics of language, but..... in none of these examples it is about being humbled themselves, in these examples it mentions what was the cause, i.e. the wind, and torrent, thus would be translated as
a wind blew violently, so that the trees fell to the chin -----------> meaning a wind blew violently, so that the trees became/were utterly humbled
the torrent overturned it (the stone) to the chin --------------> meaning the torrent utterly humbled it (the stone)
etc.It's all very simple ths.
Oh?! He's not clear??
Because in your article you say he was "very clear" - hahahahah classy.
Do you understand the difference between "very clear" and "100% clear"? Perhaps I can phrase it in a way you might understand
- ths misreads very much of the time
- ths misreads 100% of the time
See the difference?
Therefore the entire academic community disagrees with your view
Apart from MM of course.
###############
Interestingly you never commented on my points 1, 4, 5, 6, 7.
Do you have no answer?##########
But let's put this all aside, why dont you tell us what your view actually is
- what does the phrase in 17107/109 literally mean
- what is its idiomatic meaning
- what part of it is idiomatic
Quite simple questions..... ;D
-
Again misquoting me and not reading properly Wakas
That wasn't my argument - that was an argument from a sunni website that I'd found
That's why I wrote "The argument goes"
Why would I write that if I was making the argument??
Again you misquote someone, just like you did with Mir. You really need to learn to read Wakas
Who is hallucinating now ths?
You still are.
It is unfortunate I have to teach you the basics of language, but..... in none of these examples it is about being humbled themselves, in these examples it mentions what was the cause, i.e. the wind, and torrent, thus would be translated as
a wind blew violently, so that the trees fell to the chin -----------> meaning a wind blew violently, so that the trees became/were utterly humbled
the torrent overturned it (the stone) to the chin --------------> meaning the torrent utterly humbled it (the stone)
etc.It's all very simple ths.
Not only do you speak with the attitude of a 7 year old - but again you misunderstand. I know very well what you think the translation is here, but you fail to understand my point
How is the tree humbled?
How is the stone humbled?
If it is so simple - then describe how a stone gets humbled by a torrent
-
Ahh, so you quoted an argument you did not agree with. Unusual, but it seems bro Ayman and I misunderstood then. Perhaps if you had been 100% clear, it would have been better.
It seems you like me answering your questions, but run away from mine.
If it is so simple - then describe how a stone gets humbled by a torrent
Definitions of torrent on the Web
downpour a heavy rain
a violently fast stream of water (or other liquid); "the houses were swept away in the torrent"
flood an overwhelming number or amount; "a flood of requests"; "a torrent of abuse"Easy. The stone could be swept away, dislodged from a place, completely submerged, swept away and broken etc.
Now please answer my questions, if you can.
-
a violently fast stream of water (or other liquid); "the houses were swept away in the torrent"
flood an overwhelming number or amount; "a flood of requests"; "a torrent of abuse"Easy. The stone could be swept away, dislodged from a place, completely submerged, swept away and broken etc.
Yes thank you - physical movements are implied in each case. Now we can finally agree what Lane meant in his examples, and what Mir meant in his example of Imru 'l-Qays' poetry. There should be no more confusion on the matter.
-
In reply 3 I had drawn ths attention towards which is the most relevant preposition to understand the phrase.
What is indicated by the preposition "li"?
"li" is either for;
(1) for specification, to indicate exclusivity;
(2) for explanation; or it is
(3) Extraneous, meaning that even if it is removed, there will be no effect on the meanings.
(4) In the meaning of and
(5) And in the meaning of in an oath due to surprise.
Does in the prepositional phrase under discussion, it convey any signification other than for explanation?
-
Update
I spoke to Mustansir Mir recently about this entry in his book. We had a long conversation (nice man) and here is the summary
The expression "khrr to the chin" seems to be taken from natural phenomenon, .e.g. trees are bent or fall over due to heavy wind/rain, or when stones get tossed over, so AQ borrows from these expressions found in poetry and/or were probably known to the Arabs of the time, to give a dramatic effect or imagery, and this is what AQ is aiming at, and it implies utter/extreme humility. He said AQ is aiming to express the internal feeling by using an idiom for a physical/external manifestation. He said it alludes to the practice of physically prostrating at certain points during AQ's recitation (for those unfamiliar with this Tradition, symbols in the Quran Arabic script are used to denote these points, even though there is no explicit Quranic justification and seems to be a later insertion, and bearing in mind this is addressed to the people of the book in 17107). So he said it does refer to a literal/physical prostration but not a violent/intense fall, just a normal prostration. That is the idiom, apparently. Hence listed under khrr.
When asked why use dhaqn/chin and not face if that's what was meant, he says this type of literary device is sometimes used where one small part is used to represent the whole, or the whole is represented by one part. He mentioned an example using 'everything perishes except God's wajh (literally face)' implying His being/presence, i.e. face represents His whole presence. (It would be interesting to document how often AQ does this. I have not studied it). To me it is a little odd for a chin to represent a face but I guess it is plausible.
When asked about why do examples use "chin" for things such as trees/stones when they dont have chins or faces, he implied this was the expression, as he mentions in his book the chin represents pride something to be held high etc so when this is lowered it reflects humility, and when lowered to the utmost it reflects extreme humility. I'm not sure how chins were applied to trees/stones etc or what came first, the chin reference to humans or other objects, but it is possible this is just how the phrase came about.This view does seem plausible IF given some leeway. Bearing the above in mind, if I were to make sense of the idiom in the commonly understood manner, I'd say "fall to the chin" is a reference to the extent and manner of the change in state, i.e. utterly/significantly humbled, and since trees, stones and humans can "fall" but in different manners, thus for humans it would be in Traditional Muslim prostration manner. So there is no chin involvement in either trees/stone/human, this is just the reference point because chin is something to be held high, pride etc, and when lowered it reflects humility, and this is where the saying comes from.
To me, it still does not explain the following
There is no SJD in 17109 where they fall to their chins weeping. So if taken in the traditional manner, without the SJD this allows any manner of falling in this case, e.g. to one's knees, I would presume.
It may be interesting to note SJD was in the accusative case in 17107, weeping was not in 17109 (AFAIK). It should also be noted that there is no "weeping points" in The Quran, i.e. no points in the Arabic script where it is marked we should fall to the knees weeping etc, so I think this part of his explanation is suspect.
There is variance amongst translators about the meaning of "fall SJD". It seems odd to suggest fall to their chins SJD means a normal prostration but fall SJD does not. See Ibn Kathir or Al Jalalayn for example. Personally, I have no idea why there is variance amongst them when it comes to this issue. I can only guess they were either basing their translation of these phrases on traditions or earlier exegesis, or they found them difficult to reconcile with logic hence opted for variation, or they couldn't make up their minds on what it meant.The problem is the inconsistency, and the logic of the mainstream view. To me it does not fit, hence my attempt to pin down what is the idiom exactly. Similar to bro Ayman's analysis.
Interestingly, from my findings on SuJuD, the way I took its meaning fits perfectly. Perhaps this is just a coincidence. I do not think it is, but each to their own.
-
Thank you.
I've been trying to say this from the start. Mustansir Mir's view does not differ at all from the standard sunni view.
They both agree that the chin is a metonym that refers to the face. (The metonym argument is poor in my opinion. I think the expression is by itself enough to explain this verse).
And they both agree that the mention of the chin is simply a poetic device to express the state of humility and extreme emotional state of the people in this particular case.
The traditional manner of prostrating at various points in the text is called sajdat al-telawa.This shouldn't change your point of view though. Whether I say it or Mir says it or your neighborhood sheikh says it, it's the argument that counts, not the person.
I would have just wished that we could have all discussed this without the drama and snide remarks. I could have done without the sarcasm, nor san's and savage_carrot's utterly pointless sarcastic remarks...
-
I could have done without the sarcasm, nor san's and savage_carrot's utterly pointless sarcastic remarks...
Thank you. We see the equality in your comment.
And they both agree that the mention of the chin is simply a poetic device to express the state of humility and extreme emotional state of the people in this particular case.
Now you can start to view my (utterly pointless) meteor reference as "pride". Didn't i say to help illustrate your point? Shouldn't that be extreme enough? But of course it can be taken as something else, depending on your mood. After that part, then sorry if you feel like being attacked personally by me (don't know what i've done so wrong, but as you picked my name first...).
That said, i'm still taking the sujud part differently than you do (or Mr Mir does, now that we know for sure), just to be clear.
-
I would have just wished that we could have all discussed this without the drama and snide remarks. I could have done without the sarcasm, nor san's and savage_carrot's utterly pointless sarcastic remarks...
What about your own utterly pointless sarcastic remarks?
When you play with fire, you get burned
-
When you play with fire, you get burned
What's that supposed to be? Some kind of pre-school comeback?
Also, I was replying to everyone seriously in the beginning. Feel free to double-check that.
What about your own utterly pointless sarcastic remarks?
I came on here to propose that the mainstream accepted view on here wasn't correct. I was then promptly mocked, as if what I was proposing was ludicrous and a joke.
But no you're right, I suppose all serious academic debates are rife with youtube videos, and all academics mock each other with extremely clever haikus, all academics surely tell each other to check the definitions of humility and humiliation in the dictionary, and other generally ON-TOPIC remarks.
So for a bunch of people claiming to have "free minds", everyone's minds turned out to be surprisingly stolid.
So please excuse me for having a bitter taste in my mouth.
-
Salaam Wakas,
I take 17107 and 17109 to follow the expression that Lane explains.
I can fully understand why you have a problem with it, translating from English it feels like it should work like "fall on your face", which is fully figurative - ie. can be used to describe something where no physical movement happens.The best way to explain this in English is when someone falls over, and you say "he fell on his ass!"
He doesn't literally fall on his ass, he just falls over. It's just a saying to highlight how embarrassing the situation was for him.So I interpret it as an expression used when something mighty, or proud, falls over. Like the stone in Lane's example. You add the "adhqaan" simply to add poetic weight.
So instead of saying "the tree fell over", you would say "the tree fell to its chin!"
The chin, as a symbol of pride, is used figuratively to describe the increased humiliation.The traditional view, is that the chin is a metonym that represents the face. But I'm increasingly dissatisfied with that explanation. I think that if you take 'sujood' to mean traditional prostration, then there is no need to make this mean face - it simply means to fall to the ground.
So in both 17107 and 17109, they fall over. This is either related to 2573 or not.
So 17107
yukhirruuna liladqhaani - they fall to the ground in utter humility/submission
sujjadan - in sujood
17109
yukhirruuna liladhqaani - they fall to the ground in utter humility/submission
yabkuuna - crying
As for sujood, I interpet it as one of the most complex concepts in the Quran, indicating a physical movement of prostration to represent the humility/submission/obeisance of that person.
I realize I haven't gone and written a thorough analysis of sujood from the Quran as you have, perhaps I'll do so the next time I get a vacation, but your definition of sujood as non-physical could fit this verse.
The only reason it's important is that it relates physical movement with sujood, and that sujood can be done from the ground.
I think that the reason a physical movement is required is to make it into a conscious act, so that the person can say to himself at that moment "I am making sujood". Otherwise, sujood becomes such an abstract concept that it is difficult to know when one has done sujood and when one hasn't.
But, obviously the mental/emotional aspects of humility and submission are most important, and this raises the problem of people not feeling humble whilst performing the physical act.
That is why the God has reminded us not to do so, in verses such as theseWoe to those who pray but hearts are not in the prayers. Those who want only to be seen 1074-6
And those who, when they are reminded of the revelations of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat. 2573
The problem with your definition of salah is that it is always meaningful, always a conscious decision to humble oneself and show obeisance. But how can one be "heedless" and "unmindful" of his salah according to your definition?
If we understand salah to have physical aspects, then it is easy to understand how some people may be doing the movements blindly whilst thinking of something completely different.
But this is ok, because the salah holds 2 major functions, in my opinion, the macroscopic and the microscopic function.
The microscopic function is the inner function. The one that helps you attain peace and to become closer to your God.
The macroscopic function is the outer function. The one that binds the community, gives it a single identity, and joins it in common worship.So a person may be praying in the mosque for a congregational prayer and have his heart somewhere else. He is still serving the macroscopic function of prayer and benefitting his community, there is immense power in racial and social classes standing shoulder to shoulder, but he ultimately needs to put his heart into his prayer to succeed.
Having said all this, I think that reading from the Quran during salah is of the utmost importance, and that there is a known tradition of this even in hadiths (for example Aisha having her slave lead the prayer whilst reading from the Quran). I think that people out of sheer stupidity and lack of caring have lost this tradition.
EDIT
I forgot to mention. This interpretation of sujood and khrr also works with the other instances of khrr sujjadan
These are they whom God has blessed among the Prophets of the seed of Adam, and of those We bore with Noah, and of the seed of Abraham and Israel, and of those We guided and chose. When the signs of the All-merciful were recited to them, they fell down prostrate, weeping. 1958
Again, they are falling to the ground. Notice that there is no use of the poetic device "dhaqn" - why?
Because the people mentioned in 17107 are proud people who were humbled by the signs of God.
The people in 1958 are all great people, Abraham, Ishaq, Yaqoub, Moses, Haaroon, Ismail, Idris. They were not humbled dramatically, therefore they readily fell to the ground. The people in 17107 were regular people who had to be humbled. Thus, no "chin" appears.
Again in 3215, physically falling is related to sujood
Only those believe in Our signs who, when they are reminded of them, fall down prostrate and proclaim the praise of their Lord, not waxing proud.
Not waxing proud. They are already believers - thus no chin.
Finally, in 3824
And David thought that We had only tried him; therefore he sought forgiveness of his Lord, and he fell down, bowing, and he repented.
Again, we see a term used in salah juxtaposed with falling/physical movement.
Lastly, Youssef's parents prostrating to him in 12100 is a problem, as no one should be doing sujood to anyone but God. But whether we interpret sujood as physical or non-physical, that conundrum still stands, and is another discussion entirely.
-
I think that the reason a physical movement is required is to make it into a conscious act, so that the person can say to himself at that moment "I am making sujood". Otherwise, sujood becomes such an abstract concept that it is difficult to know when one has done sujood and when one hasn't.
Suhood is preceded by a physical act .
is "haal"-i.e. depicts the state one gets into by the preceding act-
is imperfect verb, in Indicative Mood, leaving no room for such like conjectures "figuratively", "idiomatically".
The basic perception infolded in the root is of that light sound which is produced and heard from the flowing water or air; in Urdu we call it , equivalent perhaps would be froufrou, and also refers to the sound produced by the wings of eagle while flying. And then it was used for that falling/moving downward from above that also produces the above type of sound.
The downward mnovement that is "Fall" of anything or person can be caused by external factors where the style of falling, forward, backwards, on the left wing or right wing etc, will be dependant upon the external factor and will not represent the choice of the fallen/falling object or person.
The Indicative Mood of the above verb indicates that this downward movement is the conscious and persistent practice of the doer/subject of verb. Preposition Li explains/clarifies how the downward movement takes place; forward bending in which first the chins go down-fall from their earlier position enabling the forehead to go down on earth touching- resultant state.
