Where's the Tablet?
-
Peace all.
I've been reading a book called 'The Choice' by Ahmad Deedat, and it appears that his understanding of the tablet is that it is a fixed source from which it is delivered to the world, and that fixed source is with God. But to be honest, Idon't understand the significance of a tablet (which is always understood to be something physical elsewhere in the Quran), which is with God, I think it mames more sense to have something preserved and within our reach, like the mummified body of pharoah, as promised in the Quran. Is it becuase of Ahmad Dedat that the generally idea is that it is something with God?, or is it becuase of other verses in the Quran, I don't understand why people don't understand it as something physicsal. Or maybe my understading is faltering lol
-
Peace Natu,
Your view may be correct that the 'Quran' is recorded somewhere on a tablet.
We know for a fact the Moses received the commands from the Almight on a tablet (which he broke into peices when he saw his people worshipping the calf, then gathered it afterwards).
If we want to talk archeology, there are a few things we are yet unable to locate
- Noah's ark (mentioned in the Scripture that it has remained as a sign)
- Lot's city (again, mentioned in the Scripture. My belief is this is Petra)
- The Torah (written on tablets and then broken by Moses. Later carried in what became known by Jews as 'the ark of the covenant')
- Mohammed's copy of the Scripture (we know he penned it with his hand, but we do not know what happened to it).
- The metal closure that Zul Qarnain made in the East (considered a dam, either against water or against lava...my guess is the latter).
-
Peace Natu,
Your view may be correct that the 'Quran' is recorded somewhere on a tablet.
We know for a fact the Moses received the commands from the Almight on a tablet (which he broke into peices when he saw his people worshipping the calf, then gathered it afterwards).
If we want to talk archeology, there are a few things we are yet unable to locate
- Noah's ark (mentioned in the Scripture that it has remained as a sign)
- Lot's city (again, mentioned in the Scripture. My belief is this is Petra)
- The Torah (written on tablets and then broken by Moses. Later carried in what became known by Jews as 'the ark of the covenant')
- Mohammed's copy of the Scripture (we know he penned it with his hand, but we do not know what happened to it).
- The metal closure that Zul Qarnain made in the East (considered a dam, either against water or against lava...my guess is the latter).
Peace all,
Are these 'relics' important in any way? (Except the original Qur'an of course, that's VERY important). Just a thought, given that people sometimes idolize 'relics' (Shroud of Turin, beard of the Messenger, Buddha's tooth, etc.).
I've been reading Umberto Eco's 'Baudolino' and in that novel he portrayed a band of medieval swindlers who manufactures fake Christian relics ('fragment of the cross', 'holy grail', 'spear that pierces Christ's side') for profit.
Just a thought.
-
Are these 'relics' important in any way? (Except the original Qur'an of course, that's VERY important). Just a thought, given that people sometimes idolize 'relics' (Shroud of Turin, beard of the Messenger, Buddha's tooth, etc.).
The same should apply to quran, don't you think?.. just as the things Layth mentioned?
Peace
-
Peace.
If we want to talk archeology, there are a few things we are yet unable to locate
I would say that these are things that were are CURRENTLY unable to locate, but we must try at least to find the tablet, which I believe is the one the Muhammad wrote on by hand. The way I see it, I dont think God would have it written down and kept that tablet himself, and then inspired Muhammad to write down that tablet, effectively making a photocopy of it. There would be no point God having the master copy because it would be preserved in a tablet in access to him, but not to us, which is the whole point of the Quran. To me, it appears that the first time it was written down was when Muhammad was inspired to write it down, not written as the tablet first, and then read out by God (inspired) to Muhammad, who then wrote it down and made a second tablet. I believe that the first tablet is what Muhammad wrote down, because thered be no need for God to keep the tablet for himself, he knows what he says anyway.
Are these 'relics' important in any way? (Except the original Qur'an of course, that's VERY important). Just a thought, given that people sometimes idolize 'relics' (Shroud of Turin, beard of the Messenger, Buddha's tooth, etc.).
The same should apply to quran, don't you think?.. just as the things Layth mentioned?
We should consider them proofs of the truth of the reading, things that over time humans have forgotten the location of, though if God says that they are there, it means that currently we just dont know where they are. My thoughts are that at this moment in time we are in need of that tablet.
Just a thought, given that people sometimes idolize 'relics' (Shroud of Turin, beard of the Messenger, Buddha's tooth, etc.).
Some things Ive always wanted to see are the Buddhas earlobes, were they really that big and fat as shown in his statues? roll
-
Peace brother Wakas,
The next interesting question to ask oneself is what constitutes preservation? My personal view is that the question "is the original message/text still extractable?" overides all others. Thus, removal of tashkeel/diacritical/vowel marking is acceptable, because the original text/message is still extractable. Furthermore, an addition of verses does not nullify preservation, because the original text/message is still extractable. A deletion nulifies the promise, not an addition.
I agree about tashkeel/vocalization marks being a non-issue because we can all read Arabic texts such as Arabic newspapers, etc. that are completely devoid of vocalization marks without any problems. So copies of the great reading without vocalization marks are equally readable. In fact, the early text was without vocalization marks. Those were only added in later manuscripts.
159 is talking about preservation of "thikr"/reminder/rememberance. Thus "additions" nullify preservation as much as substractions (if not more). This is for the simple reason that additions would remind of the wrong things. This is confirmed by 4141-42. I think that 159 can be understood in the light of 4141-42.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace brother Natu,
We should consider them proofs of the truth of the reading, things that over time humans have forgotten the location of, though if God says that they are there, it means that currently we just don?t know where they are. My thoughts are that at this moment in time we are in need of that tablet.
How would the tablets be proof of the truth of the reading? The God clearly tells us the proof that the reading is from The God in 482. There is nothing in 482 or anywhere else about "tablets" being proofs of the truth of the great reading. What if we find tablets dating from the time of the prophet tomorrow? How do you know if their content is the truth? I hope that you can see that just because they are "tablets" this doesn't make them "truth".
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace brother Natu,
We should consider them proofs of the truth of the reading, things that over time humans have forgotten the location of, though if God says that they are there, it means that currently we just dont know where they are. My thoughts are that at this moment in time we are in need of that tablet.
How would the tablets be proof of the truth of the reading? The God clearly tells us the proof that the reading is from The God in 482. There is nothing in 482 or anywhere else about "tablets" being proofs of the truth of the great reading. What if we find tablets dating from the time of the prophet tomorrow? How do you know if their content is the truth? I hope that you can see that just because they are "tablets" this doesn't make them "truth".
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
Peace Ayman.
I guess your right ayman in saying that it would be proof of the reading, however, I'm sure if we found things like Noah's ark and carbon dated them or something, it would make people think. Perhaps they're not proofs, but they will make people think. They won't be 'miracles', they will be 'signs'. With regards to tablets being found, even if we do find a tablet tomorrow, and carbon dating shows that it is old, we still can't be sure that that is the tablet that has been preserved, I just think that it will give us a firmer base to work from apart from the 'Golden Quran' as it is called, and Layth's work could possibly become easier. (His article 'Which Quran?). So I'm not saying they will be proofs or miracles, i'm just saying that it would be goo to go out looking for the tablet, instead of assuming it is with God.
-
Natu,
...however, I'm sure if we found things like Noah's ark and carbon dated them or something, it would make people think. Perhaps they're not proofs, but they will make people think. They won't be 'miracles', they will be 'signs'.
I hope these verses help. )
Chapter 26
- T?.S.M
- These are the signs of the Scripture of clarity.
- Perhaps you are grieving yourself that they do not become believers.
- If We wish, We could send down for them from the heavens a sign, to which they would bend their necks in humility.
- And not a reminder comes to them from the Almighty, except that they turn away from it.
Peace
