How to prostrate....On CHIN or on FOREHEAD?

Wakas

peace ths,

When someone is "armed to the teeth", are they still armed? Is not the addition of the word "teeth" here the only actual idiom in the phrase? Why does this example not apply to "they fall to the chins" ? It is an identical analogy, except in the first people are actually armed and in the second no one falls because 'the whole phrase has to be an idiom'.

In "armed to the teeth", "to the teeth" is the idiom not just the word "teeth". By definition of "idiom", one word idioms do not exist.

I think "armed to the teeth" is a good comparison in English however.

In 1958, the blessed people "kharruu sujjadan wa bakiyyan". Both SJD and BKY are in accusative. Does this mean that they were neither falling nor weeping?

Before I reply, are you implying this is a "like for like" comparison with "yakhorruun lil'adhqaan sujjudan", i.e. "bakiyyan" names the action/manner in which the people "fall SJD"?
If so, I do not see how it would support either view.

Have you re-translated the word rukoo3 as well? In your article you've translated it as inclining/humbling. Has the physical aspect of this word been eliminated as well?

rk3 ~ bow/incline/humble. It could be translated as a physical bow, but I am not aware of narrowing the meaning more than bow/incline/humble with regard to Quranic usage.

And neither of you have provided any evidence of your linguistic rule. Both of you are simply claiming that the whole phrase has to be an idiom, and continue to do so when faced with multiple everyday examples (like 'armed to the teeth&#039 that break your linguistic rule. As well as Lane's Lexicon that specifically gives examples of this phrase when applied to trees.

Either way, I'll try to dig up some Arabic phrases until I find one like 'armed to the teeth'.

Bro Ayman will be more knowledgeable than I on this issue, BUT having said all that, I would be willing to modify my understanding a little and state that it is theoretically possible for it to mean with extreme humility they prostrate, i.e. that understanding is one option. For sake of argument, even if this is accepted, it still does not change the fact that there is not one unequivocal example in Quran in which humans sujud and it definitely means physical prostration, but there are several examples where it definitely does not. This can be seen in the excellent summary
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Summary-problems-sujud-prostration-Quran.html

Even in the salat verse 4102 "sujud" meaning physical prostration is at best problematic. The evidence is there for everyone to see.

hawk99

Peace All.

I am sorry to disappoint some of you.

Is it optional?. Those who prostrate to the Lord of the universe out of respect,hope and service/worship,do so for their own good . It clearly says so in Qoran according to us who choose this option.( hear and obey the Lord).

The repetitive words/guidelines that we are reminded with are about righteousness and the righteous, being reverent, believing and obeying God and His messenger, observing God's rites, striving in God's cause, upholding God's laws and ethics, uttering the correct words, being truthful and charitable, inviting to good, and forbidding evil, repenting for our sins, belonging to God's party and allies, being steadfast, and never waver or compromise.
There are also many attracting signs for the servers/worshippers, such as God's forgiveness, mercy, support, love and redemption, earning His pleasure and approval, the allegories of all the eternal rewards.
The necessary elements to achieve each of the above are deeply, and fully detailed in Qoran

As emphasized in the following verses, we should be aware of the conditional or partial obedience of God's laws. This is indeed a negative force that only pulls us backward on the race track

We passed the scripture from generation to generation, and we allowed whomever we chose from among our servants to receive it. Subsequently, some of them wronged their souls, others upheld it only part of the time, while others were eager to work righteousness in accordance with God's will; this is the greatest triumph.

... Do you believe in part of the scripture and disbelieve in part?...

Throughout Qoran, it is clear that upholding ALL the laws decreed for us is challenging. God tells us it requires a constant practice, effort, and jihad/struggle.
A little trace of an ego is more than enough to take our belief for granted , lose our focus, block our ears and get distracted by countless personal opinions and guesswork and selfish interpretations... only to regress. Then, what's next ?

Most of those who are giving their personal opinions,are in parts saying they are not sure about other verses or they have not studied such and such...etc Yet they are certain there is no physical prostration?

GOD bless .
Peace.

Well said.

I repeat my challenge

Peace,

Actually this argument can be resolved quite simply by asking

Has Allah forbidden believers from physical prostration? hmm

If Allah has forbidden such a practice please provide proof.

If Allah has not forbidden such a practice how can you?

Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic, I recommend
not doing so since that could be painful. yes

God bless

The practice of prostration precedes the Quran revealed to Muhammad,
If it was pagan or forbidden or even frowned upon by Allah, wouldn't
the Quran say something in this regard? hmm

God bless

peace

ths

In "armed to the teeth", "to the teeth" is the idiom not just the word "teeth". By definition of "idiom", one word idioms do not exist.

I know, I was saying that the phrase becomes an idiom only by the addition of a single word, 'teeth'. And equally, it is only the addition of a single word, 'chins', that makes 'fall to the chins' an idiom.

Before I reply, are you implying this is a "like for like" comparison with "yakhorruun lil'adhqaan sujjudan", i.e. "bakiyyan" names the action/manner in which the people "fall SJD"?
If so, I do not see how it would support either view.

Yes, I am saying that they are for all intents and purposes grammatically identical. Both sujjadan in 17107 and sujjadan and bakkyan in 1958 are accusative and explain the manner in which the falling 'kharra' is being done.
So if you take the whole phrase in 17107 as an idiom, which you and Ayman are claiming is a rule of idioms, then you should be doing the same in 1958 and interpreting 'crying' as non-literal as well.

For sake of argument, even if this is accepted, it still does not change the fact that there is not one unequivocal example in Quran in which humans sujud and it definitely means physical prostration

This is precisely my problem with the 'every word must be explicitly explained in the Quran' school of thought that you are espousing.

Tell me this, can you explicitly find out whether BKY in the Quran means to weep? Nowhere in the Quran does it explicitly state that one must shed tears when BKY is mentioned, therefore it may instead mean 'a state of remorse'. How do we know it means weeping/crying? By looking at a dictionary and referencing how this word has been used by Arabs historically.

And how do we know that naasya means 'forelock'? Never does the Quran state explicitly that it means a forelock, and if we look only at the context it could mean absolutely anything. In 1156 it says that every moving creature's forelock naasya is with God.
Therefore, as you stated, "there is not one unequivocal example in Quran in which humans sujud nasya is defined and it definitely means physical prostration forelock, but there are several examples where it definitely does not."

And my point here is that you are setting an inconsistent standard. You will only accept that sujud means prostration if it is explicitly stated, but you will accept the commonly accepted meanings of thousands of words in the Quran simply by referring to a dictionary. And what's worse, any dictionary of the Arabic language will tell you that sujood means non-physical as well as physical things.

Wakas

Yes, I am saying that they are for all intents and purposes grammatically identical. Both sujjadan in 17107 and sujjadan and bakkyan in 1958 are accusative and explain the manner in which the falling 'kharra' is being done.
So if you take the whole phrase in 17107 as an idiom, which you and Ayman are claiming is a rule of idioms, then you should be doing the same in 1958 and interpreting 'crying' as non-literal as well.

You and I are saying similar except the underlined part below it seems
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html

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.

To confirm/deny this, ideally, I'd like several of those knowledgeable of Arabic to check this.

In any case, in the example 1958, I assume therefore you are saying its possible to take the first part as physical and the latter as non-physical, e.g.

the manner in which they fall (physical) is prostrating (physical) and weeping (physical)
or
the manner in which they fall (physical) is prostrating (physical) and weeping (i.e. with feeling of great remorse, not actually weeping)

IF the 2nd example above is perfectly fine according to the Arabic then that is ok with me, hence my mentioning of adjusting my view in earlier post, to allow for this possibility. I am all about putting the evidence on the table for the various options, then deciding upon which is most sound. I dont have any attachment to any particular view.

This is precisely my problem with the 'every word must be explicitly explained in the Quran' school of thought that you are espousing.

Wrong.
Dont worry, you are not the only one to make this mistake about my methodology.

I know for example there are some words in Quran only used once, e.g. "duluk" in 1778, thus obviously I cannot say they are defined in Quran, in the sense that there is only one possibility. All I can do is gather evidence, taking all avenues into account, e.g. Quran usage, logic, grammar, practicality, classical arabic dictionaries, Quran cross-reference etc............. to arrive at various options, then once I do that, I opt for the one that is most sound.

My methodology
Quranic evidence takes priority

With regard to this particular case, what I'm saying is simple. But unfortunately those who advocate "sujud=prostration", or, "sujud means prostration when it comes to humans" simply cannot stomach the Quranic evidence. So here it is for all to see in bold and enlarged

There are several examples of human SJD in Quran, not one shows an unequivocal example of it meaning prostration but some examples of human SJD in Quran show it definitely cannot mean prostration.

So what does that mean? Well it's simple to those of rational mind, and it is as exactly as I concluded in the article
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html

It simply means that no credible argument for SJD=prostration and therefore prostration during upholding/establishing the salat can be made using The Quran.

Sure you can say sujud=prostration COULD be one POSSIBLE meaning in SOME occurrences, but that's about it.

ths

Wrong.
Dont worry, you are not the only one to make this mistake about my methodology.

I know for example there are some words in Quran only used once, e.g. "duluk" in 1778, thus obviously I cannot say they are defined in Quran, in the sense that there is only one possibility. All I can do is gather evidence, taking all avenues into account, e.g. Quran usage, logic, grammar, practicality, classical arabic dictionaries, Quran cross-reference etc............. to arrive at various options, then once I do that, I opt for the one that is most sound.

My methodology
Quranic evidence takes priority

With regard to this particular case, what I'm saying is simple. But unfortunately those who advocate "sujud=prostration", or, "sujud means prostration when it comes to humans" simply cannot stomach the Quranic evidence. So here it is for all to see in bold and enlarged

There are several examples of human SJD in Quran, not one shows an unequivocal example of it meaning prostration but some examples of human SJD in Quran show it definitely cannot mean prostration.

So what does that mean? Well it's simple to those of rational mind, and it is as exactly as I concluded in the article
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html

Sure you can say sujud=prostration COULD be one POSSIBLE meaning in SOME occurrences, but that's about it.

Again, you are not applying this methodology consistently. Are you going to re-examine the meaning of 'forelock' in the Quran? We know that in at least one verse, it cannot literally mean forelock. And there are other words like this as well.

Secondly, regarding "the Quranic evience takes priority", you have not shown that the Quranic evidence contradicts with what I can find in any Arabic dictionary whatsoever. Every Arabic dictionary will tell you that sujud means prostration, and also 'follwing closely, humility, obeisance, paying respects, etc'.

In fact, can you cite a single example where a word used in the Quran means something manifestly different from what an Arabic dictionary states that it means?

In any case, in the example 1958, I assume therefore you are saying its possible to take the first part as physical and the latter as non-physical, e.g.

the manner in which they fall (physical) is prostrating (physical) and weeping (physical)
or
the manner in which they fall (physical) is prostrating (physical) and weeping (i.e. with feeling of great remorse, not actually weeping)

IF the 2nd example above is perfectly fine according to the Arabic then that is ok with me, hence my mentioning of adjusting my view in earlier post,

I don't think you're following what I'm saying here. You and Ayman have both stated that the entire sentence must be an idiom, and that if traditional Muslims believe 'chins' is non-literal, then they have to accept that 'sujud' here is non-literal as well. You stated

So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical.

My response was that you are both reading 'kharra' as non-literal physical falling.
Therefore, applying your own logic, 1958 where it says "they fell, prostrating and weeping", we must interpret that whole sentence non-literally to be consistent.

Therefore, applying your argument about idioms, 1958 has to be entirely non-physical

kharruu (non-physical) sujjadan (non-physical) wa bakiyyan (non-physical)

If we interpret them as literally weeping with tears, then this breaks the rule of idioms that you and Ayman are espousing.

That was my only point in comparing 1958 with 17107.

My own interpretation is that these are all physical, and the only idiom is "they fell to the chins", wherein they still fall to the ground. The idiom works like "armed to the teeth", where the person is still armed, and 'to the teeth' adds emphasis to emphasize that they are very thoroughly armed. In the same way, in 'fall to the chins', the person still falls down to the ground, and 'to the chins' only emphasizes a total and complete crash.

So

17107 yakhirruuna lil-adhqaani sujjadan
1958 kharruu (physical) sujjadan (physical) wa bakiyyan (physical)

The emotional aspects of humility, obeisance, worship are all embedded already in the standard meanings of these words. Ie no one cries unless they are feeling bad.

To confirm/deny this, ideally, I'd like several of those knowledgeable of Arabic to check this.

I've given this some thought but haven't found any idioms in Arabic yet that match this exact type of idiom.. the problem is where to look for idioms in classical Arabic. I've so far only been able to find lists of colloquial idioms.

Nevertheless, i'll keep an eye out for an idiom that matches 'armed to the teeth', where the action still literally takes place, and one word has been added non-literally to add emphasis.

Wakas

Underlined emphasis mine

Secondly, regarding "the Quranic evience takes priority", you have not shown that the Quranic evidence contradicts with what I can find in any Arabic dictionary whatsoever. Every Arabic dictionary will tell you that sujud means prostration, and also 'follwing closely, humility, obeisance, paying respects, etc'.

That was not the purpose of the article. The aim of the article was stated right at the start of the article. The word "sujud" is commonly taken to mean prostration, so Quran was analysed to see how this holds up. It didn't hold up very well. Simple. My conclusion etc is re-stated in my prior post thus there is no need to go over it again.

Please do not confuse me saying no credible argument can be made with the sujud=prostration argument has been refuted.

When I mentioned 1958 I was not citing the only possibilities. I have little issue with taking it "non-physical". It would be good to analyse other similar examples however.

Timotheus

I prostrate on my forehead. at first i found the question strange so i tried prostrating on my chin.. it feels quite strange.

traditionally Prostration to God is done on the forehead. While The word does have a deeper meaning then just physical prostration, From my experience many people try complicating things to much and seek interpretations contrary to the straight foward commands in the Quran, Which while I am not at all saying we should not sincerely seek knowledge and understanding of Quranic concepts, The quran does warn us against seeking deviant interpretations and distorting words, as well as following our own desires. i believe prostration in salat is a physical symbol of our state of submission to God, Exalted is He. And is part of all Gods revealed religions, the Quran the bible and many other religious texts are full of Examples that indicate prostration in the general sense is a PHYSICAL ACT, as well as i said as a symbol of whats in our hearts.

hawk99

Peace,

I repeat my challenge

Actually this argument can be resolved quite simply by asking

Has Allah forbidden believers from physical prostration? hmm

If Allah has forbidden such a practice please provide proof.

If Allah has not forbidden such a practice how can you?

Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic, I recommend
not doing so since that could be painful. yes

The practice of prostration precedes the Quran revealed to Muhammad,
If it was pagan or forbidden or even frowned upon by Allah, wouldn't
the Quran say something in this regard? hmm

God bless

peace

hawk99

Peace,

I repeat my challenge

Actually this argument can be resolved quite simply by asking

Has Allah forbidden believers from physical prostration? hmm

If Allah has forbidden such a practice please provide proof.

If Allah has not forbidden such a practice how can you?

Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic, I recommend
not doing so since that could be painful. yes

The practice of prostration precedes the Quran revealed to Muhammad,
If it was pagan or forbidden or even frowned upon by Allah, wouldn't
the Quran say something in this regard? hmm

(physical) Voice included

Say "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman by whatever
name you call upon Him, for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names.
Neither speak your Prayer aloud, nor speak it in a low tone, but seek
a middle course between."

(physical) Ablution a prerequisite

O you who have believed, when you rise to prayer, wash
your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads
and wash your feet to the ankles.

God bless

peace muscle

hawk99

Peace,

I repeat my challenge

Actually this argument can be resolved quite simply by asking

Has Allah forbidden believers from physical prostration? hmm

If Allah has forbidden such a practice please provide proof.

If Allah has not forbidden such a practice how can you?

Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic, I recommend
not doing so since that could be painful. yes

The practice of prostration precedes the Quran revealed to Muhammad,
If it was pagan or forbidden or even frowned upon by Allah, wouldn't
the Quran say something in this regard? hmm

(physical) Voice included

Say "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman by whatever
name you call upon Him, for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names.
Neither speak your Prayer aloud, nor speak it in a low tone, but seek
a middle course between."

(physical) Ablution a prerequisite

O you who have believed, when you rise to prayer, wash
your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads
and wash your feet to the ankles.

(physically) facing the qibla

I am currently "facing" my computer but bear with me while I try
to do it spiritually

God bless

peace muscle

Wakas

I repeat my challenge

Actually this argument can be resolved quite simply by asking

Has Allah forbidden believers from physical prostration?

You can repeat all you want but that was not the original question asked by the author of the thread.

But if you insist on repeating yourself, perhaps you can quote the person in this thread who said one cannot prostrate or it is forbidden.

Perhaps then you will stop repeating yourself and actually understand what is being said.

hawk99

You can repeat all you want

Thank you

but that was not the original question asked by the author of the thread.

The original question was

Peace All

As I am a new member, I don't know if there's any post regarding this issue. If yes,please share the link.

My question is How should I prostrate in Salah? Is it on my chin or on my forehead?

Regards,
z.neion

My answer

Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic, I recommend
not doing so since that could be painful. yes

But if you insist on repeating yourself, perhaps you can quote the person in this thread
who said one cannot prostrate or it is forbidden.

If you've noticed I've added to my challenge each time, please feel free to
rebutt if you can jedi

God bless

Wakas

With all due respect hawk99, the only relevant point in your posts was "Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic...". As for the rest, you have shown in the past you do not bother to read articles referenced, so no point in replying.

hawk99

With all due respect hawk99, the only relevant point in your posts was "Of course prostating on your "chin" is idiomatic...". As for the rest, you have shown in the past you do not bother to read articles referenced, so no point in replying.

) The challenge stands. jedi

aboosattar

On chin.
If you guys want further info about slat in quran.
Check this chennal.
https//youtu.be/9grQnx_qasE