New article: What is the meaning of "al masjid al haram"?
-
It is interesting to know that the religious corruption of Pagan ritualism started in the Biblical account already. This book is not surprisingly involving the Persians who are responsible for much interference in the interpretation of Quran and "Islam". Daniel is a servant of a Persian king, but the book is written several hundred years later. Despite dealing with Korosh/Cyrus.
Traditionally ascribed to Daniel himself, modern scholarly consensus considers the book pseudonymous, the stories of the first half legendary in origin, and the visions of the second the product of anonymous authors in the Maccabean period (2nd century BCE).
Despite this the book frequently uses first person 'I'.
The visions of chapters 7?12 reflect the crisis which took place in Judea in 167?164 BCE when Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Greek king of the Seleucid Empire, threatened to destroy traditional Jewish worship in Jerusalem.
Why was is written 2nd century BC you think? Propaganda!
Daniel's exclusion from the Hebrew Bible's canon of the prophets, which was closed around 200 BCE, suggests it was not known at that time, and the Wisdom of Sirach, from around 180 BCE, draws on almost every book of the Old Testament except Daniel, leading scholars to suppose that its author was unaware of it. Daniel is, however, quoted by the author of a section of the Sibylline Oracles commonly dated to the middle of the 2nd century BCE, and was popular at Qumran beginning at much the same time, suggesting that it was known and revered from the middle of that century.
Daniel falls into two halves, chapters 1?6 containing six tales of Jewish heroism set in the Babylonian court, and chapters 7?12 containing four apocalyptic visions. This is complicated somewhat by the fact that chapters 1 and 8?12 are in Hebrew and 2?7 in Aramaic. The reasons behind this have never been satisfactorily explained.
There are some very unlikely passages in Daniel.
The Old Testament is to a great extent Persian Zoroastrian propaganda with fire altars etc.
If Daniel uses Qbl to speak of prayer towards Jerusalem then it is a fabrication for why does GOD need such a practice anyway. It is irrelevant. The Biblical Gospels do not mention anything such as it. The Torah (the lawgiving part only) has no mention of a decreed prayer ritual. Abraham is never seen observe a prayer ritual. They may be seen prostrate, but not any particular details, direction or timing.
Quran has no mention of a prayer ritual in a real interpretation. Even in a weak interpretation there are never any coherent details on how to pray. If Quran is an instruction and a guide and a ritual was prescribed, then Quran would coherently say so, not scatter vague hints across the scripture and yet then it does not provide any instruction as on how to perform this nonexistent ritual.
Realize it. There is no prayer ritual. Only clerical propaganda and a fabricated sectarian doctrine forced into an innocent context.
Be well
-
It is interesting to know that the religious corruption of Pagan ritualism started in the Biblical account already. This book is not surprisingly involving the Persians who are responsible for much interference in the interpretation of Quran and "Islam". Daniel is a servant of a Persian king, but the book is written several hundred years later. Despite dealing with Korosh/Cyrus.
Despite this the book frequently uses first person 'I'.
Why was is written 2nd century BC you think? Propaganda!
There are some very unlikely passages in Daniel.
The Old Testament is to a great extent Persian Zoroastrian propaganda with fire altars etc.
If Daniel uses Qbl to speak of prayer towards Jerusalem then it is a fabrication for why does GOD need such a practice anyway. It is irrelevant. The Biblical Gospels do not mention anything such as it. The Torah (the lawgiving part only) has no mention of a decreed prayer ritual. Abraham is never seen observe a prayer ritual. They may be seen prostrate, but not any particular details, direction or timing.
Quran has no mention of a prayer ritual in a real interpretation. Even in a weak interpretation there are never any coherent details on how to pray. If Quran is an instruction and a guide and a ritual was prescribed, then Quran would coherently say so, not scatter vague hints across the scripture and yet then it does not provide any instruction as on how to perform this nonexistent ritual.
Realize it. There is no prayer ritual. Only clerical propaganda and a fabricated sectarian doctrine forced into an innocent context.
Be well
It would serve you well if you were able to distinct the debate concerning ritual prayer from the debate over the qibla/masjid al haram. They are not linked to each other. As I stated before, any static object can have a qibla. Like the houses in misra were orientated to Temple Mount, so do mosques have a qibla wall. In my opinion it is highly recommended to pray in the direction of Temple Mount but it is by no means dogmatic. God is most forgiving.
I dispute your theory on the zoroastrian influence in Daniel. It would make no sense at all Daniel prayed facing Jerusalem if he was zoroastrian. Not only is Daniel evidence inside the hebrew scriptures. So is David. Not to mention Temple Mount is crucial in the story of Ibrahim, Isaac, Solomon. There is not one confirmed messenger in Quran that is not strongly connected to the place, either by location or by focus of prayer.
But feel free to ignore all this lineage of prophets/messengers strongly linked to Jerusalem and experience your faith any which way you feel is right. Just don't pretend you're still adhering to the faith of Ibrahim.
Peace
-
For some Rabbinic and Talmudic evidence, Mof
"...O Jerusalem, the built up Jerusalem is like a city that is united together...Pray for the peace of Jerusalem..." (Psalms 1222-6);
Berakhot 30 ?One should direct one?s HEART towards Jerusalem.?
Brachot 27a If one is praying in the Land of Israel, he should direct his heart towards Jerusalem; If he is standing in Jerusalem, he should face towards the Holy Temple
Why are the fruits of Ginosar not found in Jerusalem? So that the pilgrims should not say "were it only incumbent on us to eat the fruits of Ginosar in Jerusalem, it would be enough" ? Pesachim 8b
Jerusalem is the light of the world ? Bereshit Rabbah 59
The Land of Israel sits at the centre of the world and Jerusalem sits at the centre of the Land of Israel ? Tanchuma Kedoshim 10
All who pray in Jerusalem - it is as if he prayed before the throne of glory, because the gate of heaven is situated there ? Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer 35
From the day Jerusalem was destroyed, God has no joy, until He rebuilds Jerusalem and returns Israel to it ? Yalkut Shimoni Lamentations 1009
1 Kings 846-50 ""If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captive unto the land of the enemy, far off or near; 47 yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither they are carried captive, and turn again, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captive, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have dealt wickedly; 48 if they return unto thee with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies, which carried them captive, and pray unto thee toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name 49 then hear thou their prayer and their supplication in heaven thy dwelling place, and maintain their cause; 50 and forgive thy people which have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee; and give them compassion before those who carried them captive, that they may have compassion on them."
The mizrah of old synagogues all point to Jerusalem
Excavations of ancient synagogues show that their design generally conformed with the Talmudic and traditional rule on prayer direction. The synagogues excavated west of Eretz Israel in Miletus, Priene, and Aegina all show an eastern orientation. Josephus, in his work Against Apion, recorded that the same was the case for Egyptian synagogues. Synagogues north of Jerusalem and west of the Jordan River, as in Bet Alfa, Capernaum, Hammath, and Khorazin, all face southward, whereas houses of worship east of the Jordan all face west. In the south, the synagogue excavated at Masada faces northwest to Jerusalem. The Tosefta's regulation that the entrance to the synagogue should be on the eastern side, while the orientation of the building should be toward the west was followed only in the synagogue in Irbid.
Peace
-
Please keep to the topic of the thread without insults. Thanks.
-
peace rlz,
Can you direct me to where you posted information about the origins of the Arabic word QBL (ideally with source). I would be surprised if my analysis was way off the Hebrew/Aramaic meanings, albeit I do not consider alleged origin words as definitive proof of a meaning when used in Arabic Quran.
e.g.
http//judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/5778/are-the-aramaic-root-%D7%A7-%D7%91-%D7%9C-and-the-hebrew-root-%D7%A7-%D7%91-%D7%9C-related -
It is not like I take religious tradition as a proof there is a religious ritual and a military style prayer. There is immense falsehood in Judah tradition.
The idea of sanctifying a place is a religious idea, but I say a place is not more holy than its inhabitants at one given moment. There is no holiness in the "flesh" than what a spirit makes for itself.
-
Masjids represent the signs of God, they became the platform to unite people's minds for the common cause of Goodness.
Qibla is what one accept to face ( the masjid) to establish our prayers, receive guidance and not turn away. Some people thought its one specific place
that has great value and kept that to be their qiblah, but Quran says, east and west, everything belongs to him and Allah guides whom He wills to. -
peace rlz,
Can you direct me to where you posted information about the origins of the Arabic word QBL (ideally with source). I would be surprised if my analysis was way off the Hebrew/Aramaic meanings, albeit I do not consider alleged origin words as definitive proof of a meaning when used in Arabic Quran.
e.g.
http//judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/5778/are-the-aramaic-root-%D7%A7-%D7%91-%D7%9C-and-the-hebrew-root-%D7%A7-%D7%91-%D7%9C-relatedYour analysis is obscuring the usage of the same aramaic root in Daniel. Coincidentally there it is clear evidence of being a direction pointing to a geographical place. If you don't feel a loanword can be studied from studying its donor language then you are proving my point.
If your analysis was correct the aramaic qbl shouldn't be there in Daniel used as a geographical direction. You further substantiate this by only testing the traditional thesis of Masjid Al-Haram being in Mecca. The thesis of Temple Mount is thrown out the door with very poor arguments (being a place of conflict today - which is factually incorrect).
The historical data for the Temple Mount thesis are totally absent. This while during the era of revelation of Quran, Jerusalem was controlled by byzantine christians and polytheists (persians) - controlling the access of jews to Temple Mount. All three of those historical actors are mentioned in the verses dealing with the Qibla. They should at least be part of your analysis, for that reason alone.
In the entire length of your article the keyword "Temple Mount" is entirely absent. Why are you afraid to test this thesis in your analysis? This is my main criticism your conclusion is preemptive. You can't conclude qibla is not a geographical location when the location of Temple Mount is simply ignored. This illustrates how good a job the sectarians did. Not only do they succeed in convincing many to believe there was a change in qibla ordered by God, they also succeeded in fooling most muslims the masjid al-haram can't possibly be Temple Mount because we all know it is Mecca. When reading your article I get a strong feeling you are still indoctrinated by the hadith fabricated change in qiblah and hadith replacement of Temple Mount by the Kaaba in Mecca. I challenge you to look at those critically. Do you really think some insignificant place that is nowhere mentioned in any contemporary historical record, called Mecca, is the correct identification of masjid-al haram? If you agree it can't be, anyone sincere would examine if the change in qibla itself wasn't a lie.
For online documentation dealing with the qbl loanword in hebrew I would have to google myself. If I find good references online I will link them in this thread.
Peace
-
Rls,
You should be careful using sectarian references (such as the Tanakh) to prove your point. It is not like the Judah doctrine was not full of Pagan corruption. Compare older narratives in the Bible and you see they are never seen observe some timed ritual. Jesus does not observe any prayer ritual in the New Testament.
Daniel has a very questionable origin and Daniel is not mentioned about in Quran.
-
Conclusion of parts 1, 2, 3
The Quranic evidence weighs the evidence in favour of SJD meaning "to submit/honour/pay respect", "masjid" meaning "time of SJD", "al masjid al haram" meaning "the inviolable time of SJD" (i.e. the term referring to the time-period/event of the inviolable months). This understanding provides a logical, coherent and practical answer throughout, and helps answer some of the most difficult questions in Quran exegesis (e.g. 171-8, 1760, 4827, 2142-150).http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/009.%20At%20Tauba/009.%20A3.gif
Indeed the Mushrikuen; the worshipers of hand sculpted statues calling them iela'aha godheads after assigning various names, are but draggled unclean. Therefore, they should not come near "the inviolable time of SJD" after this year. .
-
peace rlz,
If your analysis was correct the aramaic qbl shouldn't be there in Daniel used as a geographical direction.
Please do not confuse your reasoning with sound reasoning. You seem to be implying a usage in a certain occurrence proves that is the meaning in every usage.
I asked you a very simple question, and since you dodged the question, or if you think you answered, that means your citing of an occurrence warrants your conclusion, then I am more than happy to let readers decide for themselves.
Anyone claiming a physical direction during prayer for these verses 2142-150 knows it is built on speculation. The word salat is not even used.
Here is where salat is used AND a physical direction discussed
2177 Piety is not to turn your faces/considerations towards the east and the west, but piety is one who believes in God and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Book, and the prophets, and who gives money out of love to the relatives, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and those who ask, and to free the slaves; and upholds the salat, and who contributes towards betterment; and those who keep their pledges when they make a pledge, and those who are patient in the face of adversity and hardship and when in despair. These are the ones who have been truthful, and these are the righteous.
Simplified
2177 Piety is not to turn your faces/considerations towards the east and the west, but piety is one who........................ upholds the salat...
Conjecture is no substitute for the truth, and Quran cannot be clearer than the above.
-
peace Mazhar,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/009.%20At%20Tauba/009.%20A3.gif
Indeed the Mushrikuen; the worshipers of hand sculpted statues calling them iela'aha godheads after assigning various names, are but draggled unclean. Therefore, they should not come near "the inviolable time of SJD" after this year. .
And your point is?
I imagine your point is how can such people be stopped from a time? It's quite simple really.
You are likely thinking of universal time, e.g. like saying don't let them come near 7 oclock, or do not let them come near January.
But that's not what I am suggesting "al masjid al haram" is. It is a special time wherein al hajj takes place, and clearly this takes place in an area. This special time with its various rules etc is enacted in that area, it's not applied everywhere i.e. universal.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604467.msg311309#msg311309
Of course, I am not averse to thinking of it as "the inviolable time/event/institution of acknowledgement" as long as it links back to what is discussed in the article
The evidence gathered in this article very strongly links the meaning of AMAH to a special time-period/event, e.g. the inviolable months (al ashhur al hurum) wherein the HaJJ/feast/symposium takes place. Whatever meaning of AMAH is chosen, if such a link does not underpin the chosen meaning, then it is highly unlikely to fit in AQ. The meanings of 'the inviolable act/institution/place of SJD' do not have this inherent link.
Further, for those advocating 'act/institution/etc of SJD' without a link to something specific/fixed/identifiable (such as 'al ashhur al hurum', a critical question becomes necessary to answer in the many occurrences of "masjid" what makes it "inviolable" sometimes and sometimes not? I personally do not see how this can be soundly answered, except by resorting to arbitrary reasoning.
In addition an answer is also required as to why AMAH is always singular, whilst "masjid" can be singular and plural. As we can see, by not fixing it to something clearly identifiable, getting a logical and coherent answer to these questions seems difficult. In the same way that the ordinary word "shahr (month/full-moon/moon-cycle)" can be linked to "haram" and refer to something specific, the ordinary word "masjid" can be linked to "haram" and refer to something specific. Its meaning and use then becomes easily identifiable and practical.
So, let's say there are inviolable months wherein al hajj is done, various restrictions are in place etc etc. If one were living at that time, and were to refer to this time-period/event, what phrase/term would one use? Please ponder on this. In my view, AQ uses AMAH.Without this link I don't see how an alternative meaning can work.
-
But that's not what I am suggesting "al masjid al haram" is. It is a special time wherein al hajj takes place, and clearly this takes place in an area. This special time with its various rules etc is enacted in that area, it's not applied everywhere i.e. universal.
Do you think the word "time" can collocate the word "invoilable? Any example from entire English corpus!!!
-
Do you think the word "time" can collocate the word "invoilable? Any example from entire English corpus!!!
Yes.
And no I do not have other examples in English wherein "inviolable" and "time" are used together.Rather than vain/theoretical objections, do you have any solid objections to the hypothesis al masjid al haram ~ the inviolable time of sujud/acknowledgement ?
I wrote the article a while ago, and I haven't seen any so far. I'm looking for things like your view contradicts Quran verse XYZ, it is illogical because XYZ, it is impractical because of XYZ.
Also, rather than attempting to object to my view, why not answer the objections I raise about other alternatives, and tell us how your view can answer them. Please begin your own thread for this with your own article on 'al masjid al haram'.
This is about weighing the evidence of the various options, allowing readers to select which one is strongest. Put your evidence on the table for all to see. Simple.
-
the inviolable time of sujud/acknowledgement
This seems to be improved version of earlier quote
The Quranic evidence weighs the evidence in favour of SJD meaning "to submit/honour/pay respect", "masjid" meaning "time of SJD", "al masjid al haram" meaning "the inviolable time of SJD" (i.e. the term referring to the time-period/event of the inviolable months).
"The invoilable time of sujud" seems a meaningful phrase in the context of As-Salt which is a time bound protocol.
"The invoilable time of acknowledgement" is invalid, meaningless assembly of words.
-
Rather than vain/theoretical objections, do you have any solid objections to the hypothesis al masjid al haram ~ the inviolable time of sujud/acknowledgement ?
Firstly we should know morphological and grammatical features of it before its semantics.
- It is an Adjectival Phrase.
In English Adjective phrase "A word group with an adjective as its head. This adjective may be accompanied by modifiers, determiners, and/or qualifiers. Adjective phrases modify nouns. They may be attributive (appearing before the noun) or predicative (appearing after a linking verb), but not all adjectives can be used in both positions." Adjective is defined as "The part of speech that modifies a noun or other substantive by limiting, qualifying, or specifying"
Further details http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjective_phrase
In Arabic, the noun comes first. The one being described must come first; it is called and also -the one who is described-portrayed.
The adjective follows the Noun. The description must come second; it is called /adjective. It indicates a meaning in its principle without exception meaning without restrictions, like that of time or other restrictions. It functions as qualitative portrayal of the mentioned noun. Adjective's meaning is not for itself, rather its meaning is found in the noun which it modifies. Most often it is a derivative.
The adjective/ will be masculine if the Noun- is masculine. And if the Noun is feminine the Adjective will also be feminine. Similarly if the Noun is singular, the adjective will also be singular and it will respectively be dual or plural if the noun is dual or plural.
The Noun and Adjective must correspond in definiteness. Both should either be definite or indefinite.
The grammatical case of the Noun is determined by external factors and the case of Adjective will always match it.
In this phrase is the Noun- It is singular, masculine, definite.
It is adjective/ in the phrase.
A phrase is a grammatical unit for semantic purposes.
It might give you some clue to rethink what have you so far understood about this phrase.
- It is an Adjectival Phrase.
-
peace rlz,
Please do not confuse your reasoning with sound reasoning. You seem to be implying a usage in a certain occurrence proves that is the meaning in every usage.
Those occurrences should at least be incorporated into your thesis instead of obscuring them. By itself it does not prove anything. But you don't even consider them.
I asked you a very simple question, and since you dodged the question, or if you think you answered, that means your citing of an occurrence warrants your conclusion, then I am more than happy to let readers decide for themselves.
Anyone claiming a physical direction during prayer for these verses 2142-150 knows it is built on speculation. The word salat is not even used.
Here is where salat is used AND a physical direction discussed
2177 Piety is not to turn your faces/considerations towards the east and the west, but piety is one who believes in God and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Book, and the prophets, and who gives money out of love to the relatives, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and those who ask, and to free the slaves; and upholds the salat, and who contributes towards betterment; and those who keep their pledges when they make a pledge, and those who are patient in the face of adversity and hardship and when in despair. These are the ones who have been truthful, and these are the righteous.
Simplified
2177 Piety is not to turn your faces/considerations towards the east and the west, but piety is one who........................ upholds the salat...
Conjecture is no substitute for the truth, and Quran cannot be clearer than the above.
If you would have read me correctly I totally distinct salat from qibla. I think you may have missed that part.
About these verses you quote. See 1778/79
Salat by itself is no guarantee to gain praiseworthiness with God. But it's recommended. I see no argument in there that denies a qibla being Temple Mount.
It only puts those straight who think praying in a certain direction is enough. It doesnt mean anything by itself.I agree with Mazhar your translation is a meaningless assembly of words. Your analysis of the famous wife-beating verses in Quran suffer from a similar phenomenon.
Peace
-
Interesting fact about the siege of Jerusalem (637) the city was conquered without shedding blood. Again the historical record matches the Quran with astonishing precision.
Peace
-
In my opinion it is highly recommended to pray in the direction of Temple Mount but it is by no means dogmatic.
Does any Jew and Christian consider the direction of Temple Mount as http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00028.%20Qabal%20Qaaf%20Ba%20Laam%20Before%20confront/8.gif
-
Christians don't. Jews do. I covered this already in an earlier message in this thread. See Mizrah.
Peace
