salat = prayer? How do you explain this then...
-
Salaam Wakas,
how many occurrences out of the 90 are clearly used in the manner you suggested?
It is actually not a matter of number. All the TAB that were used in the Qur'an relate to Turn to GOD, and NONE was used to other than GOD. Some of them have GOD mentioned, others are followed by Iman and so forth.
This one does not have all the other associations, yet it clearly talks about the followers of the prophet.
11112 Therefore stand firm (in the straight Path) as thou art commanded,- thou and those who with thee turn (Taba maaaka); and transgress not (from the Path) for He seeth well all that ye do.
Salaam and good bye.
Hussein
-
Salaam Hussein,
All the TAB that were used in the Qur'an relate to Turn to GOD, and NONE was used to other than GOD.
Does God turn/convert to the people "taba Allah"? If what you say above is true then explain the occurances where taba is used for Allah alone. Is it turn to God or God turns toward, or maybe if you so choose, God converts?
Joe
-
peace be upon you Hussein,
All the TAB that were used in the Qur'an relate to Turn to GOD, and NONE was used to other than GOD.
The word simply means turn/repent. The word itself has no inherent association with The God, that is why al quran often mentions The God in the context. Just like the words islam/muslim/iman have no inherent association with The God. The word just means turn/repent, and like in English, neither of those words has an inherent association with The God.
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=repent
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=turne.g. are you implying, for example, a thief must convert in order to be forgiven?
I can find many examples where it cannot mean "convert". This isn't even one of its dictionary meanings. In fact, even the dictionary meanings do not state the word has an inherent association with The God.
Can you find equivalent examples, where it is clearly used in the manner you suggested?
As brother Joe pointed out, I do not regard 11112 as an example.
Wakas
-
Salaam Joe and Wakas,
This will be my last post on Free-minds. However, i am happy to answer your questions at this point and with this I am saying good bye to all of you.
Joe said
I'm hoping that's not your evidence for a conversion theme? It clearly talks about the followers of the rasool and the rasool himself mind you "as also those who turn with thee" .
They all turned to GOD and they all converted to Islam, including the prophet. When you turn to GOD, you are a muslim in many ways because you are also submitting to GOD.
Joe said
Does God turn/convert to the people "taba Allah"? If what you say above is true then explain the occurances where taba is used for Allah alone. Is it turn to God or God turns toward, or maybe if you so choose, God converts?
When GOD uses the TABA, it is used as TABA ala so and so and it means- according to Lisan Alarab- that GOD is helping people turn to Him.
Brother Wakas, for fairness sake, why don't you present one
incident in the Qur'an where T-W-B root was mentioned and the one to turn to was other than GOD. If you did in clear manner then you will prove your case.Salaam all. I have learnt a lot from all of the people here. I will leave you all in peace.
Hussein
-
YEAH DON'T GO BROTHER HUSSEIN. AT LEAST POST AT THE OTHER THREADS PLEASE RECONSIDER ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
-
Salaam Hussein,
When GOD uses the TABA, it is used as TABA ala so and so and it means- according to Lisan Alarab- that GOD is helping people turn to Him.
I do not understand the point of repeating what is already there. The preposition ala/on/to is there and thus we have "taba Allahu AAala alnnabiyyi" - Allah turns to the informer - . Also taba is used in this very ayat 2 times mind you, once with the preposition and once without it.
Joe
-
Salaams All,
Hussein, why are you leaving? Maybe you won't even look at the posts now to answer this question. (
Joe, you wrote
The preposition ala/on/to is there and thus we have "taba Allahu AAala alnnabiyyi" - Allah turns to the informer - . Also taba is used in this very ayat 2 times mind you, once with the preposition and once without it.'Taba' is used twice in the Ayah and twice it came with the preposition '3alaa'.
p.s. I haven't followed the thread but just thought now to take a look at the last posts!
Taj
-
peace be upon you Hussein,
Sorry to hear you're leaving. And if that was your last post, then I see little point in responding if there will be no response. In any case...
Your view that when people twb, its always to The God is questionable. There is no inherent asociation of the word with God, if there was, why mention God in the context. Also, that means according to you every thief must turn to God (i.e. convert?), in order to be forgiven . I assume therefore, you feel there can there be no disbelieving thieves? There is no compulsion in the system/obligation, no forced conversions etc. You are basically saying the thieves, or those who wage war against the God and his messenger they are threatened with punishments, severe ones in 533-34, but if they convert, then they are forgiven. I personlly have not encountered this notion in the entire reading, in fact I think its contradictory to it .
For sake of argument, lets say every time twb is used, its always to The God (which I agree is the majority usage, simply because when people use it, it means repent, and most of the time its repenting to The God), even if that is the case, my point still stands
According to you, there is a clear conversion (pagans to muslims etc.) in 95, 911. My question is, quite simply, out of the other 90 root occurrences, please give us examples where it is also used to signify a clear conversion like you are suggesting for 95, 911. If you present none, I will assume you feel 11112 is the best (&only?) example out of the 90.
p.s. I haven't followed the thread but just thought now to take a look at the last posts!
Perhaps you can share your thoughts upon the thread once you have looked at it, especially if you feel it applies to you.
God bless.
Wakas
-
Taken from Concordance of Quran
Ta-Waw-Ba
taba vb. (I) ~ repent, to be penitent, to do penance; (with prep. ala) to turn towrds someone (in forgiveness); (with prep. ila) to turn towrds someone (in penance). (n. vb.) repentnce, penitance. (pcple. act.) one who repents, penitent.
There is no such preposition in 95, 911. Thus "to" is not implied.
There are examples of specific usage of twb ila/to God , thus al quran could have easily mentioned it in 95, 911, instead of making us assume thats what was meant, if that was what was meant.
Wakas
-
-
Salaamun alaikum all,
Ayat 11113 (pm translation) mentions about those who repented with prophet Muhammad
11113 So stand straight as you were commanded and those who repented with you and do not transgress. He is watcher over what you do.
This repentance is the repentance of someone who is already a believer (mumin) and cannot mean conversion to Islam. There are other ayat in Al-Quran that talk about this kind of repentance
2187 It has been made lawful for you during the night of fasting to approach your women sexually. They are a garment for you and you are a garment for them. God knows that you used to betray your souls so He has accepted your repentance, and forgiven you; now you may approach them and seek what God has written for you.
9114 Those who repent, those who serve, those who thank, those who wander in devotion, those who kneel, those who prostrate, those who order good and deter from evil, and those who keep the boundaries of God. And give good news to the believers.
1332 And as such, We have sent you to a nation as other nations that have come before, so that you may recite for them that which has been inspired to you; while they are still rejecting the Almighty. Say "He is my Lord, there is no god but He, in Him I place my trust and to Him is my repentance."
2432 And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
429 And anything you dispute in, then its judgment shall be with God. Such is God my Lord. In Him I put my trust, and to Him I repent.
669 O you who believe, you shall repent to God a sincere repentance.The above ayat are proof that someone who is already a believer including a prophet can repent to God. Prophet Muhammad and his companion believers were all human and can make a mistake and the repentance is prescribed by Allah for such an occasion
418 Repentance is only for those who commit sin out of ignorance and then repent soon after; these will be forgiven by God, God is Knowledgeable, Wise.
So a believer can make a mistake and then repent soon after and Allah forgives. Thus it is clear that the repentance mentioned in 11113 cannot mean conversion to Islam as brother Hlatif implies.
There is clearly no compulsion in religion
2256 There is no compulsion in the system; the proper way has been made clear from the wrong way. Whoever rejects evil, and believes in God, then he has grasped the most solid branch that will never break. God is Hearer, Knower
After careful consideration of all the above and the fact that ayat 92 to 913 are about the pagans who broke the treaty and their oath, the most likely meaning of 96 would be that if these pagans repent (from breaking the treaty) and uphold their bond (the treaty) again thereby contributing towards betterment, then they are to be left alone. This would be a very good example of how al-salat does not meen the timed prayer of the mumin and al-zakat does not mean giving charity.
A DIFFERENT ANGLE
However, brother Wakas, I would like to add another angle to this discussion and I would like to have your opinion on this. Until ayat 94 the pagans have not broken their treaty. 94 mentions about repenting and IMO this is repenting from setting up partners with Allah
94 And a declaration from God and His messenger to the people, on this, the peak day of the Pilgrimage "That God and His messenger are innocent from all those who set up partners." If you repent, then it is better for you, and if you turn away, then know that you will not escape God. And give news to those who have rejected of a painful retribution.
The repenting of pagans as above clearly means their repentance from setting up partners because of the immediately preceding words. When one repents from setting up partners it is obvious that one starts accepting one God thereby becoming a muslim. So the above repentance "could" mean conversion to Al-Islam.
Now is it possible that in ayat 96 Allah is talking about the same repentance?, that is, the repentance from setting up partners and not the repentance from breaking the treaty. If that is so then 96 could have the alternative meaning of the pagans repenting from setting up partners, thereby becoming muslims, and then upholding salat and bringing forth zakat, thereby now becoming believers. This meaning would then be reinforced by 912 which talks about the same repentance and upholding salat and bringing forth zakat making them brothers in deen. Brothers in deen at least means being muslim as Allah has chosen Al-Islam as deen.
This would not contradict with 2256 because the pagans are not being forced to become muslims. They have an alternative option of surrendering and giving up and seeking the protection of the believers as per 97. IMO the protection is CONDITIONAL and the pagans sanctuary is either within the community of the believers or in the community of the pagans as long as they can easily hear the Word of Allah
97 And if any of those who have set up partners seeks your protection, then you may protect him so that he may hear the words of God, then let him reach his sanctuary. This is because they are a people who do not know
This protection and letting them go is not a free and clear one as brother Wakas implies because it is conditional on them being able to hear the Words of Allah. Also IMO that would automatically imply having another treaty with them after they surrendered and the protection was given to them. So the pagans have 2 options after breaking their treaty they can either repent and become believers or they can give up and seek protection of the believers which will be given to them as long as they can hear the Words of Allah. They do not have the compulsion of accepting the Words, but they will have to make another treaty with the believers.
2 MORE POINTS
-
If we translate 96 meaning that if the pagans repent from breaking the treaty and uphold the bond (the treaty) thereby contributing to the betterment then leave them alone, then this meaning would make 97 redundant. If they are upholding the treaty again then obviously they are protected by the believers. Why give them an option of seeking protection and going back to their sanctuary again in 97 ?
-
In the beginning of chapter 9 when Allah is talking about the pagans who made a treaty with the believers, He does not call them brothers in deen with the believers. However in 912 according to brother Wakas's interpretation the pagans have not converted to muslims and all they did was repent from breaking the treaty and uphold it again, so what is different this time that Allah calls them brothers in deen for doing that?
Peace,
Tanveer
-
-
peace Br. Tanveer, all,
Until ayat 94 the pagans have not broken their treaty.
Strictly speaking yes, but this is clearly implied. The very first word of the chapter tees up the subsequent signs in this direction
baratun = acquittal/absolve
Furthermore, in 94 it states
PM Except (illa) for those with whom you had a treaty from among those who have set-up partners if they did not reduce anything from it nor did they plan to attack you...
Thus directly implying the reference of the prior sign(s) is those who reduced from the treaty or planned to attack you.
The repenting of pagans as above clearly means their repentance from setting up partners because of the immediately preceding words.
That in no way can be called clear. Why cant it simply be about making a public announcement that we are innocent from them, i.e. they broke the treaty, they are to blame.
If that is so then 96 could have the alternative meaning of the pagans repenting from setting up partners, thereby becoming muslims, and then upholding salat and bringing forth zakat, thereby now becoming believers.
For that opinion to hold, you are forced to insert a lot of interpretation into the signs. Please remember they are not referenced as anything other than transgressors/idolaters etc.
This protection and letting them go is not a free and clear one as brother Wakas implies
I did not imply that. That, as far as I understood was Br. Hussein's position, thus I was pointing out its absurdity. That was not my own opinion.
they can either repent and become believers
Just like when the thief commits a crime, they repent, nothing to do with conversion. Same as this case. When al quran wishes to point out its twb/repentance to The God, the word "ila" is used, there is no "ila" here, nor in the thief example.
2 MORE POINTS
1 - why do you think 95 has the clause "if"? The subsequent sign allows for the situation when not everyone accepts the condition.
2 - the next sign, 912 proves they are not brothers in terms of Muslims or believers or in terms of conversion because it states "And if they break their oaths after making them..." Its clear the signs have been referencing "they" with trangressors/idolaters throughout, especially the previous signs prior to 911. If they have converted, why are they still being held to account for their oaths? What is going on? What oaths? Is there a word in the previous sign, 911, that can be connected with a oath/bond/link? Yes! That word is slw.
In fact, based on this new observation, I think the above signs conclusively prove that they are not converts! Beyond reasonable doubt!
Its further reinforced with "uphold the slw... brothers in deen/obligation/system" and then says "break their oaths... denounce the authority of your deen/obligation/system".
Anyone else agree with this observation?
Wakas
As a side note, I dislike capitalising islam into Islam, as if its a magical name/noun/title. Its primary signification is a mindset, i.e. a description.
-
Salaamun alaikum brother Wakas,
Thank you for your explanations, and answers to my questions and points. I think you have conclusively proved your position.
This protection and letting them go is not a free and clear one as brother Wakas implies
I did not imply that. That, as far as I understood was Br. Hussein's position, thus I was pointing out its absurdity. That was not my own opinion.
I apologize for the above. It was a misunderstanding on my part.
As a side note, I dislike capitalising islam into Islam, as if its a magical name/noun/title. Its primary signification is a mindset, i.e. a description.
By Al-Islam I meant The Islam which is submission or surrender to Allah and not just a regular islam meaning submission or surrender which could be to anyone. Maybe I should write islam lillah. That is why I capitalized it to distinguish islam lillah from islam.
Regards,
Tanveer
-
peace Br. Tanveer,
About Al-Islam, I knew what you meant. I was just making an observation. Your response about differentiating any old islam/compliance from Al-Islam is a valid one. Its unlikely though, for someone to use islam in any other way, in fact, thats how it probably got its title.
The way I see it... Muslims with a capital M, implies the primary signification is the title, whilst a muslim, with small m, implies the primary signification is the mindset/description. Same with Islam and islam.
God bless.
Wakas
-
peace Wakas .
So you think 'al quran' changes its reference and now wishes them to repent from idolatry rather than the object of reference the treaty?
they are repenting from both idolatry and from breakng the treaty . as muslims they are not going to fight against muslims ,right ?
You think the word twb can somehow imply 'repent & convert' even though this meaning is nowhere to be found in a classical Arabic dictionary nor in the 87 occurrences of 'al quran'?
the usage of 'repent' alongwith 'salat' and 'zakat' indicates that they 'converted' .
You think 'al quran' actually gives an ultimatum in which people either convert or are punished? And not only that, according to your explanation it doesn't even mention it, just implies it, like its no big deal when this strikes at the very core of the deen!
idolators were going to be killed . it should be considered a mercy from God that their life will be spared and they will be set free if they repent and establish salat and give 'zakat' .
You think the suffix "...hum" somehow miraculously refers to the new converts not mentioned in the context, even though you have not provided one example from the entire quran in which this happens.
it is still refering to the same people .
You think its a mere coincidence the so-called converts are never referenced with a word which would prove they are converts, e.g. mumineen/believers.
their establishing salat and zakat makes it crystal clear that they are no longer idolators . isnt that enough ? by the way they are also called our brothers in 'Deen' . what do u think ?
Do you think thieves also convert or is it just this special case?
no . the thieves are not commanded to establish salat and give 'zakat'.
How do you explain the problem of 912? progressing options etc.
what about 912 ?
that is what i think .
by the way, u say that 'salat' means 'bond' or 'oath' . what exactly do u mean by that . what bond ? i dont get it . please tell me.
peace. -
peace Saladin,
Lets run through it point by point...
they are repenting from both idolatry and from breakng the treaty .
So, even though the object of reference is the treaty in the context before & after 93, you think an additional repentance from shirk is being made here. Unlikely (lets see how many unlikely situations have to arise for your interpretation to hold).
The reason why the word 'mushrikeen' is used in 93 is those people are with whom the treaty was made (it has to make reference to them!), not because it is wanting to use this as an object of reference for the word taboo/repent. The following sign 94 proves beyond doubt the object of reference is the treaty because it uses the word 'illa/except'. Proving the previous sign is on about 'those who reduced from the treaty'. If you disregard this, you are following the least likely interpretation.as muslims they are not going to fight against muslims ,right ?
Please tell me I have misunderstood you. Are you saying the repent/taboo in 93 is implying conversion to muslims? This is not supported by the context whatsoever.
the usage of 'repent' alongwith 'salat' and 'zakat' indicates that they 'converted' .
Ahh, so you're saying 'taboo' does indeed mean 'repent' but the implication of conversion is made by the usage of slw & zkw. Well, at least you're consistent with the word 'taboo'. Firstly, the implication of conversion just by using the words slw & zkw and not mentioning the actual conversion, would come as an absolute shock to the student of the scripture. According to you, 'al quran' treats this conversion as if its nothing and simply implies it and does not mention it directly even though it has huge implications for the whole deen. Unlikely. Can you provide another similar example in which the guilty are required to convert to Islam to escape punishment in the entire quran? Just give me one, thats all I want. If you cant, this means your interpretation is unlikely.
idolators were going to be killed . it should be considered a mercy from God that their life will be spared and they will be set free if they repent and establish salat and give 'zakat' .
They were not necessarily going to be killed, please see 96, so this is a non-point.
it is still refering to the same people .
I'm glad you said this. I agree the suffix "hum" refers to the same people. That is fine for my understanding but if you also take this view, your view gets completely and utterly demolished. If you believe "hum" refers to the same people, then in your view 'al quran' contains a contradiction/error. Lets translate it according to your interpretation, and leave the people of reference in, according to the "hum"...
So when the restricted months are passed, then you may fight the idolaters wherever you find the idolaters, and take the idolaters, and surround the idolaters, and stand against the idolaters at every point. If the idolaters repent, and uphold/maintain the salat and bring forth the betterment, then clear/vacate the idolater's way/path. Truly, The God is Turning/Forgiving, Embracing/Merciful.
BEFORE and AFTER slw & zkw are mentioned, they are referenced as the same idolaters. According to you, a conversion has taken place, so it is impossible for al quran to reference them as the same! Who is right? You or al quran? If you are proposing al quran changes the people of reference mid-sentence then please bring another example of this in the entire quran, if you speak the truth. If you cant, then your view is extremely unlikely.
their establishing salat and zakat makes it crystal clear that they are no longer idolators . isnt that enough ? by the way they are also called our brothers in 'Deen' . what do u think ?
These questions are answered in the article. I assumed you read it, was this a mistake on my part?
no . the thieves are not commanded to establish salat and give 'zakat'.
I'm glad you admitted this. This means you believe the option of conversion is only given with specific wrongdoings and not others. I would be interested to hear your criteria/reasoning of why this option is only given for certain situations and not others.
How do you explain the problem of 912? progressing options etc.
what about 912 ?
This clearly shows to me you either never read the article properly or you never understood this point in my article. Which is it? In either case, I suggest reading/re-reading the article.
by the way, u say that 'salat' means 'bond' or 'oath' . what exactly do u mean by that . what bond ? i dont get it . please tell me.
The article discusses 91-12. Thus 'oath/bond' is an understanding of slw based on these signs/ayatin. Did I ever say this is its blanket meaning in the entire quran? Once again, this shows you either never read the article properly or you never understood the premise of the article. In either case, I suggest reading/re-reading the article.
Please note, I will not entertain any further debate until I am sure you have actually read the article in question and the associated links. This is a conclusion based on your comments and the fact that not once have you quoted from my article.
Wakas
