The meaning of the words of the Quran by a rational mathematical equation
-
Peace…
I won’t ask each and every word.. don’t worry dude.. but you have to study each and every word according to what you accepted (formula)…. Isn’t it? No need to be embarrassed … we all are learning and students of quran...when we call us students.. needless to say further.. Btw thank you for your reply… So you take makka as Proper noun while it has other derived meaning…okay…What made you to give priority to take makka as proper noun based on your formula? Why it should be proper noun according to formula? Once you have taken a word as proper noun in quran it can only be a proper noun for that place…. I don’t want to distort your topic, but hope at least relevant what I am asking…Do you think those who didn't take the word makka as proper noun and still follow your formula went astray or went something seriously wrong for them?
Peace to you,
Did you look at what i said about the textual context in my last post?
Otherwise, Mazhar anwers you very well. I quote him
"
The Ayah you referred wherein the word occurs only once in the Frame 5 of Chapter named meaning "The Victory".Frame has Ayah 24 to 27. After overpowering an army in the battlefield the triumphant army captures the main/capital city to establish its reign. There is always possibility of resistance and hand to hand fight in the midst of city. The text itself shows that it is the name of City. Her other particular feature is also mentioned.
"
=> the textual context is enough clear. After, beyond his own proper noun, you can say that this name comes from "destruction" and that it has a connection with reality that is why they call their city "makkah" (a place which knew many destructions). In my region for example I know a city whose name is the concatenation of two words city + mist (strong characteristic). But this remains speculation from the quranic point of view because he never says that this city specifically experienced multiple destruction (or it was not clear to me...). Is this the implicit meaning of your question?
The formula is generic but i have some differences in its application with what proposes Mazhar. That's why we can differ about certain minor or major Quranic words or ideas .
For example, in 2-2685 he translates the word "l-faḥshāi" as meaning "he prompts you people to indulge in shameless sexual obsessive attitude." I don't find the same conclusion (i will give my reasoning applying my formula - if you are interested). Unless I am mistaken, I think that I reason more in terms of close correspondence between words and ideas than him, inside a frame as he calls it or between frames. The Quran is traversed within it by the principle of symmetry (para-synonymic or antynomic ..) and/or binarity. -
Peace to you,
Did you look at what i said about the textual context in my last post?
Otherwise, Mazhar anwers you very well. I quote him
"
The Ayah you referred wherein the word occurs only once in the Frame 5 of Chapter named meaning "The Victory".Frame has Ayah 24 to 27. After overpowering an army in the battlefield the triumphant army captures the main/capital city to establish its reign. There is always possibility of resistance and hand to hand fight in the midst of city. The text itself shows that it is the name of City. Her other particular feature is also mentioned.
"
=> the textual context is enough clear. After, beyond his own proper noun, you can say that this name comes from "destruction" and that it has a connection with reality that is why they call their city "makkah" (a place which knew many destructions). In my region for example I know a city whose name is the concatenation of two words city + mist (strong characteristic). But this remains speculation from the quranic point of view because he never says that this city specifically experienced multiple destruction (or it was not clear to me...). Is this the implicit meaning of your question?
The formula is generic but i have some differences in its application with what proposes Mazhar. That's why we can differ about certain minor or major Quranic words or ideas .
For example, in 2-2685 he translates the word "l-faḥshāi" as meaning "he prompts you people to indulge in shameless sexual obsessive attitude." I don't find the same conclusion (i will give my reasoning applying my formula - if you are interested). Unless I am mistaken, I think that I reason more in terms of close correspondence between words and ideas than him, inside a frame as he calls it or between frames. The Quran is traversed within it by the principle of symmetry (para-synonymic or antynomic ..) and/or binarity.Peace both Iyykaka and Mazhr..
If you get true guidance with the way you study the Quran then what else you can ask...
But for me Makka is not proper noun.. I am happy with.. I don't want to divert your topic to one of the mightiest of discussion/debate... God will we all know the exact truth.. Pls carry on your intended topic..thank you for of you for sharing thoughts.. ... -
Peace jkhan,
May god guide us to a better understanding of his last Holy Scripture.
Please share your thoughts on what "makkah" means in a new post.
Peace Iyykaka...
Thank you for your request... But unfortunately I don't like to involve in which not much to say... I am sure Makka / Becca topics would have been debated in this forum... You will get some idea..
All I have to say within my knowledge and guidance that Makka is not a place.. Becca most probably a place... Why it is not important for me these locations in connection with my salvation is coz it has nothing to do for my after life... But for research it has much value...
For example if I don't know where the location of Masjid AL haram after thorough study of quran then why should I resort to a location hypothetically or follow the majority since everyone go to a place so shoukd i.. I don't prefer guess work to my belief... I will only do what is clear to me from quran... If Makka is a proper noun for you then you probably may be knowing where the location is or may be not... Not at all significant for me where Makka is and what is the benefit of it...But for your info... The current day Makka cannot be the mother of towns for sure.. To prove that you need to hide many a glaring proof from quran at the expense of so called holy city in Makka KSA.. Not a single evidence within quran... Only evidence you may grab is this 4824 if taken as pronoun... But it won't give any support but for the sake of love people may attach to this verse and claim Makka is mentioned in quran..
I am not so blind... God save me...
As per quran definitly there were rituals took place from Ibrahim to Mohamed at certain one place... But once the demise abd end of prophets such place has no value. If you notice the fundamental reason to converge to that place... -
Peace Iyykaka...
Thank you for your request... But unfortunately I don't like to involve in which not much to say... I am sure Makka / Becca topics would have been debated in this forum... You will get some idea..
All I have to say within my knowledge and guidance that Makka is not a place.. Becca most probably a place... Why it is not important for me these locations in connection with my salvation is coz it has nothing to do for my after life... But for research it has much value...
For example if I don't know where the location of Masjid AL haram after thorough study of quran then why should I resort to a location hypothetically or follow the majority since everyone go to a place so shoukd i.. I don't prefer guess work to my belief... I will only do what is clear to me from quran... If Makka is a proper noun for you then you probably may be knowing where the location is or may be not... Not at all significant for me where Makka is and what is the benefit of it...But for your info... The current day Makka cannot be the mother of towns for sure.. To prove that you need to hide many a glaring proof from quran at the expense of so called holy city in Makka KSA.. Not a single evidence within quran... Only evidence you may grab is this 4824 if taken as pronoun... But it won't give any support but for the sake of love people may attach to this verse and claim Makka is mentioned in quran..
I am not so blind... God save me...
As per quran definitly there were rituals took place from Ibrahim to Mohamed at certain one place... But once the demise abd end of prophets such place has no value. If you notice the fundamental reason to converge to that place...How to obey it?
Pointers of explicit nature are embedded within it (the House) which is exclusive peculiarity of it.
مَّقَامُ إِبْرَٟهِيـمَۖ
The standing place of Iebra'heim is therein.
وَمَن دَخَلَهُۥ كَانَ ءَامِنٙاۗ
And whoever had entered therein he was in a state of amnesty and security.
وَلِلَّهِ عَلَـى ٱلنَّاسِ حِجُّ ٱلْبَيْتِ مَنِ ٱسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ سَبِيلٙاۚ
Beware, the Huj - pilgrimage of the House is an obligation imposed upon such people who have the capacity and wherewithal to travel towards it (the House) for the awe and reverence for Allah the Exalted.
وَمَن كَفَـرَ
And if someone disavowed to discharge this obligation —
-
Dear Big brother Mazhar...
Peace..
I am of the opinion you are someone in my presumption that you are going to current day Makka and perform haj in whatever way you do... Hope my guess is right... No issue for me.. But in case if you want advice based on quran that anyone else should go there, what is your proof that Makka is the place and current day masjid AL haram is the spot and we should as believers go there? How do you confirm that?I have no clue if I go to current Makka (of course I have been there more than dozen times) what is Safa what is Marwa ehat baith al atheeq etc.. For me No haj without the presence of a prophet....
-
Peace jkhan,
Thanks for sharing your opinion about Makkah.
Just a rectification please don't attribute to me the fact that actual Makkah is the Makkah of the Quran.
It is the feeling (i may be wrong) i have by reading your last post directed towards me. If, by the textual context, i admit that the place at the time of the prophet and for the quraich tribe a city/territory was called mekkah, that does not necessarily mean that this quranic place corresponds to the current place we known today.
The truth is above all even if it is difficult to accept it or it destroy my strong beliefs.But, if Allah wills, I would discuss this after having exposed the structure of sura 2 on my site (i hope in english too).
-
Peace jkhan,
Thanks for sharing your opinion about Makkah.
Just a rectification please don't attribute to me the fact that actual Makkah is the Makkah of the Quran.
It is the feeling (i may be wrong) i have by reading your last post directed towards me. If, by the textual context, i admit that the place at the time of the prophet and for the quraich tribe a city/territory was called mekkah, that does not necessarily mean that this quranic place corresponds to the current place we known today.
The truth is above all even if it is difficult to accept it or it destroy my strong beliefs.But, if Allah wills, I would discuss this after having exposed the structure of sura 2 on my site (i hope in english too).
I have not attributed to you.. If u read my thread you would get it.. But proper noun means that you have to approach for something to suit the verse... If you are not sure where the this proper noun is located then haj is at from reality to you if you still want to do haj if you think it is a thing to be done... That's what I said to Mazhr.. Confirm me the location within quran...
-
Dear Big brother Mazhar...
Peace..
I am of the opinion you are someone in my presumption that you are going to current day Makka and perform haj in whatever way you do... Hope my guess is right... No issue for me.. But in case if you want advice based on quran that anyone else should go there, what is your proof that Makka is the place and current day masjid AL haram is the spot and we should as believers go there? How do you confirm that?I have no clue if I go to current Makka (of course I have been there more than dozen times) what is Safa what is Marwa ehat baith al atheeq etc.. For me No haj without the presence of a prophet....
Then what should we understand from many of the verses without his presence?
-
Then what should we understand from many of the verses without his presence?
Peace...
You shouldn't have posed this question to me.. Coz we know we don't have any prophets as messenger to bring the messages of God after last prophet... ... For that we have complete verses from God to refer... For the yester community without prophets messengers they are not complete.. Coz they will have to depend on their own otherwise.. With prophets living among them or during their era they always had the opportunity to ask questions and even debate on days like haj... Messages wide spread and things were clarified to vast number of people by converging to the predestined place from the time of Ibrahim which was same.. And they return with the message and spread... No-one would have had the book of quran until it was completed.. So during entire life of Mohamed people were listening to him to get their message... Among them the good ones.. "we hear we obey"
Before Mohamed Israelites had their respective books.. And of course prophets and Messengers... Similarly it would have been all around in major cities of the world ... Though we have no clue, God promises that He sent Messengers to all Umma.. There is meaning when God calls FIRST HOUSE BUILT FOR MANKIND... so.. Distant communities would have their house similar to what Ibrahim built to gather and deliver messages.. Suppose if people lived in Mexico after Ibrahim then God would have definitely located a house to converge to deliver messages for respective messengers... But God definitly prefered Israelites and surrounded.. Otherwise He doesn't need to build His first house somewhere around where Ibrahim lived.. As per quran Ibrahim lived not far from where Lut lived..Now we don't have Prophets bringing messages to be delivered... Suppose if one of those prophets lives now his duty will be to deliver the message.. So probably he would have opted the same spot or any other where most of other prophets from Ibrahim to Mohamed converged during four months period on given days to spread message with debate... That would reach whole world.. But it's not God's plan.. God severed His messages through prophets with intent leaving His final book preserved word by word.. ..
Yes we have many areas which we have to study without any prophets presence... We are totally different community.. Aren't we? Can we be equal to a community that lived with the presence (visible / not visible) of a prophet messenger that also while delivering messages?.. For Me.. No..
Yes Mazhr.. We have to understand many a things on our own using what they left ... But how to practice even before understand the message.. So.. We learn and dedicate time... But they were privileged to get message live on the spot or yearly during haj.. So they converged on purpose .. Why we need to get together to a place which has no verification and what for? Are we short of messages? To listen to whome? Are we receiving messages there? Who is there in Makka for you to listen to?
God says in quran 2227 "And proclaim to the people the Hajj, they will come to YOU (singular).. "
So according to verses it shows that Haj was started with Ibrahim by designating a house to deliver messages and not to equal anything with God.. and God says people will come to Him(Ibrahim)... Same when it continued with other prophets.. People will come towards prophets.. Everyone was not living with respective prophets but far.. So whoever God wanted to reach the message will gather there.. So it will be the duty of prophets to deliver the message yearly whatever came to them apart from what they delivered to their own people living with them instantly ..God said people will come to Ibrahim so do to other prophets to a place assigned for their own benefit... So without prophets no haj for them... But for us we can always debate coz we have the complete book... We don't need research years and years and figure out hypothetically a place and go there and do rituals... No way... For them everything was well known... Just God making more clear.. That's why God never included that successful believers are those who performed Haj.... We are doing haj.. As long as we learn and debate in right way... But it is not must we should do so.. But for prophets it was must.. Their duty is to deliver and to deliver people should converge and be served and keep the place clean and tidy and keeo certain rules etc etc. The core of haj is debate and spreading message...
Your question is "Then what should we understand from many of the verses without his presence"...
No need his(prophet) presence as God decided no need.. As God decided to preserve the book and stands as the guide then look for it...
For example if you understood salat is 5 times a day and while your fellow brother Waqas understood 2 times then both of you would do what you understood... Same way .. If Makka is for you the place to do haj then do it.. But for me it is not... So.. did any prophet came to intervene in what we do? After all your our decision... But who is guided, God will know.. But yester community with prophets they knew what to do... We are not far from them.. If we choose the right option then we also same like living with prophets.. That right option can only come from God to us... -
Salam,
Back to rational analysis what does means "bibaṭni" before the word makkata (the context was already explains by Mazhar above) ?
4824
And He (is) the One Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them bibaṭni Makkah, after that He gave
you victory over them. And is Allah of what you do All-Seer. (classic translation)- Quranic Grammar
bibaṭni = P – prefixed preposition bi
N – genitive masculine noun
This form appears 17 times as the noun baṭn (بَطْن)- Intratextuality
This form appaears 17 times, distributed as follows
- 2 times figuratively (with the idea of resurrection in the same verse)
- 14 in the physical sense
- 5 animals
- 9 women
- 1 time with the preposition bi = "in/into"= Preposition generally marking the position inside a space.
Another example 237 "biwādin" = in a valley/wadi.
- Ideas inside this root word
The concrete meaning of this form is the "belly".
This root mainly contains the following conceptual ideas
- The inside, or interior, of anything (not apparent, obvious)
- middle/midst
- The lower, or lowest, part.
- More from Lexicons
in Lane's lexicon we find these ideas
- "Thus بَطْنُ وَادٍ means The interior of a water-course or riverbed . "
- "Also A low, or depressed, tract, or portion, of land, or ground;"
- Conclusion
Litt. "into the belly of makkah" ie Enter the heart of/inside/in the intimacy of Mecca ie it designate to "cross the road inside the city, which is not apparent from outside the city, and that divides the city into 2 sides.
A question that remains open does the core of makkah form a geographical depression (In geomorphology, a depression is a topographic trough whose bottom altitude is lower than that of neighboring regions and whose slopes converge) with possibly a permanent or temporary watercourse?
-
Peace..
So Makka is proper noun as per your formula and not strange it is a proper noun for most and they all know where this proper noun is located... No harm.. If that is the guidance you feel you got what I can do.. I am innocent from what you do.. Vice versa
But for me Makka in 4824 is "Mass" (a heavily crowded situation) ...
In that Mass (Messenger + his believers(ready to fight) + large number of disbelievers who are ready to fight and attack + unknown considerable number of innocent believing men and women)
Bi-batani makka.... In the midst of Mass. that's my taking ..
If they were in the heart of Makka then that can only be as per current day Kaaba surrounded masjid AL haram...
The word stamp / trample is very vital here for me... Both believers from messenger side and disbelievers were made to keep away from fighting by Allah intentionally .. Coz there were considerable number of believing men and women who were not recognizeable by believers.. ...
Had they fought those innocent believing men and women would have been victim of great stampede " in the midst of heavy crowd "....God saved themFurther God says THEY(disbelievers) were the people who barred the believers from reaching to masjid AL haram... Note.. If they were already in the heart of Makka then they are already in masjid AL haram (.as per current acceptance) .. this shows while they were in the midst of mass they were not in masjid AL haram... Further, already believing men and women were present among disbelievers so they didn't hinder them.. Had it been masjid AL haram.. Story would have been different..
What is midst of Makka and what correlation with midst of Makka and trample of people? Is Makka so small to get trampled...
-
Peace..
So Makka is proper noun as per your formula and not strange it is a proper noun for most and they all know where this proper noun is located... No harm.. If that is the guidance you feel you got what I can do.. I am innocent from what you do.. Vice versa
But for me Makka in 4824 is "Mass" (a heavily crowded situation) ...
In that Mass (Messenger + his believers(ready to fight) + large number of disbelievers who are ready to fight and attack + unknown considerable number of innocent believing men and women)
Bi-batani makka.... In the midst of Mass. that's my taking ..
If they were in the heart of Makka then that can only be as per current day Kaaba surrounded masjid AL haram...
The word stamp / trample is very vital here for me... Both believers from messenger side and disbelievers were made to keep away from fighting by Allah intentionally .. Coz there were considerable number of believing men and women who were not recognizeable by believers.. ...
Had they fought those innocent believing men and women would have been victim of great stampede " in the midst of heavy crowd "....God saved themFurther God says THEY(disbelievers) were the people who barred the believers from reaching to masjid AL haram... Note.. If they were already in the heart of Makka then they are already in masjid AL haram (.as per current acceptance) .. this shows while they were in the midst of mass they were not in masjid AL haram... Further, already believing men and women were present among disbelievers so they didn't hinder them.. Had it been masjid AL haram.. Story would have been different..
What is midst of Makka and what correlation with midst of Makka and trample of people? Is Makka so small to get trampled...
Peace jkhan,
Thanks for sharing.
I quote you "Makka in 4824 is "Mass" (a heavily crowded situation)"
=> In the Quran the appropriated word for "mass", in connection with the territory made famous by Abraham and Ismael, is more Bekka. indeed as Tabari underlined the word bakkah derives from the Arabic root bakka meaning to be tight, gathered in a crowd and the term bakkah has the fundamental meaning of gathering. Furthermore, the structure of the textual unit where this word appears is in direct place with Hajj (massive gathering of pilgrims in a place to celebrate God in two major ways).
I quote you "The word stamp / trample is very vital here for me.".
48-24
And He (is) the One Who withheld their hands from you and your hands from them within Makkah, AFTER
that He gave you victory over them. And is Allah of what you do All-Seer.
48-25
They (are) those who not firmly disbelieved and hindered you from Al-Masjid Al-Haraam while the offering (was)
prevented from reaching its place/destination.
And if not (for) men firmly believing and women firmly believing not you knew them
that you may TRAMPLE them and would befall you from them any harm without knowledge.
That Allah may admit to His Mercy whom He wills.
If they had been apart surely, We would have punished those who disbelieved among them (with) a punishment painful.=> Do not mix two different time sequences
- In 48-24 we are AFTER Muhammad "conquered" Makkah (in blue),
- in 48-25 we are BEFORE Muhammad "conquered" Makkah (in blue) => a flashback.
For the relationship between makkah and masjid al haram it seems clearer once the structure of sura 2 exposed (god willing - soon).
-
Thank you dude for your response...
But unfortunately you seems you have complicated with or without perceiving.. IT'S NOT AFTER or TWO SEQUENCE OF TIME..
carefully read again without having any prebiased perception on these verses...
God says WITHHELD (kaffa) each others hands... i.e No war / fighting took place.. WHEN no fighting took place? In fact when they were in the midst of Mass.. Agree??
Soon after, God says WITHHELD hands, God refer AFTER THAT... It means God never referring to the crowded situation but after that crowded period.. Probably... Coz there were no war or fight as per 4824...but only referring another occasion in which in fact fighting took place.. Without fighting You can't have victory.. ... So in same verse 4824 two key factors ( *No fighting and Victory against the same disbelievers) .. Ponder pls...
In 4825 God brings back the story of 4824 until part.. ... Saying if they were separated, we would have punished... Remember while all of them were crowded no FIGHTING.. And in 4825 no FIGHTING but pointing out the same disbelievers and what they did to believers once upon a time... But had there not been those group of unfamiliar believers story could have been different...
Definitely one set of believers no need to trample another set of believing men and women within a mass...It is not two different time of sequence.. No one conquered Makka as you claim by this verse.. All imagination of conquering imaginary Makka which never existed with the advent of this verse... .
God with obvious words confirms that Bakka is the place of first house..396...So to summarise....
*** 4824 first part No fightimg... Second part Victory, of course no victory without fighting..*** 4825 referring the first part of 4824 as flashback... Coz 4825 not referring any fighting or victory...
-
Peace Jkhan,
I do not agree with your conclusions. But I recognize that the use of the English term "conquered" in my last post was not really appropriate.
But before we start, we have to clarify a point about what you said "of course no victory without fighting" = a victory can be the result of a fight or not (unless I misunderstood your point).So now, let's take a larger overview to better understand these 2 verses 48-24 and 48-25.
These two verses are part of a larger whole which goes from verse 18 to verse 27. I will not go into the details of its structure here but we will highlight some important inks-elements (Translation from shakir)
"
Certainly Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquility on them and rewarded them with a near victory,
And many acquisitions which they will take; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.Allah promised you many acquisitions which you will take, then He hastened on this one for you and held back the hands of men from you, and that it may be a sign for the believers and that He may guide you on a right path.
And others which you have not yet been able to achieve Allah has surely encompassed them, and Allah has power over all things.And if those who disbelieve fight with you, they would certainly turn (their) backs, then they would not find any protector or a helper.
Such has been the course of Allah that has indeed run before, and you shall not find a change in Allah's course.
And He it is Who held back their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca after He had given you triumph over them; and Allah is Seeing what you do.It is they who disbelieved and turned you away from the Masjid al-Harâm and (turned off) the offering withheld from arriving at its destined place; and were it not for the believing men and the believing women, whom, not having known, you might have trodden down, and thus something hateful might have afflicted you on their account without knowledge-- so that Allah may cause to enter into His mercy whomsoever He pleases; had they been widely separated one from another, We would surely have punished those who disbelieved from among them with a painful punishment.
When those who disbelieved harbored in their hearts (feelings of) disdain, the disdain of (the days of) ignorance, but Allah sent down His tranquility on His Messenger and on the believers, and made them keep the word of guarding (against evil), and they were entitled to it and worthy of it; and Allah is Cognizant of all things.
Certainly Allah had shown to His Messenger the vision with truth you shall most certainly enter Masjid al-Harâm, if Allah pleases, in security, (some) having their heads shaved and (others) having their hair cut, you shall not fear, but He knows what you do not know, so He made besides that near victory.
"Thus, we have 2 different time sequences
- Aborted attempt of Pilgrimage to Masjid al-Harâm => prevented. Negotiation with not fight (almost!)- In red below
- then, another year, Pilgrimage success to Masjid al-Harâm without final victory over the Makkans = Triumph - In Orange below
In green in the text, the result of the transition from time sequence 1 to time sequence 2 = ultimately, Triumph for Allah.
"
Certainly Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquility on them and rewarded them with a near victory,
And many acquisitions which they will take; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.Allah promised you many acquisitions which you will take, then He hastened on this one for you and held back the hands of men from you, and that it may be a sign for the believers and that He may guide you on a right path.
And others which you have not yet been able to achieve Allah has surely encompassed them, and Allah has power over all things.And if those who disbelieve fight with you, they would certainly turn (their) backs, then they would not find any protector or a helper.
Such has been the course of Allah that has indeed run before, and you shall not find a change in Allah's course.
And He it is Who held back their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca after He had given you TRIUMPH over them; and Allah is Seeing what you do.It is they who disbelieved and turned you away from the Masjid al-Harâm and (turned off) the offering withheld from arriving at its destined place; and were it not for the believing men and the believing women, whom, not having known, you might have trodden down, and thus something hateful might have afflicted you on their account without knowledge-- so that Allah may cause to enter into His mercy whomsoever He pleases; had they been widely separated one from another, We would surely have punished those who disbelieved from among them with a painful punishment.
When those who disbelieved harbored in their hearts (feelings of) disdain, the disdain of (the days of) ignorance, but Allah sent down His tranquility on His Messenger and on the believers, and made them keep the word of guarding (against evil), and they were entitled to it and worthy of it; and Allah is Cognizant of all things.
Certainly Allah had shown to His Messenger the vision with truth you shall most certainly enter Masjid al-Harâm, if Allah pleases, in security, (some) having their heads shaved and (others) having their hair cut, you shall not fear, but He knows what you do not know, so He made besides that a near victory.
" -
Peace....
Whatever you have written in your last reply, I don't see any debate but mere verses...
If conquered is not the right option just pls replace it with right word so that readers will have an idea what you mean by conquered Makka...
Regarding victory in verse 4824 ... You will definitely find that it is not a morale victory or victory without fighting... God used the word OVER THEM .. This time hands were withheld but when God gave victory (ẓā fā rā) it was fighting... Gave victory over them. You can get advantage or morale victory without fighting or terrorizing them to surrender.. but you can't get victory over anyone without fighting. Specially in a war. You can't merely call we won OVER THEM... and note the word AFTER THAT.. what it indicates is they didn't fight amidst crowd (hands withheld) but after that hands were not withheld and gave victory over them.. By the word of punish we can imagine it was not meant mere morale victory but war... But it was to happen but God withheld hands.. But gave what's missed out on another occasion.Strange part is.. If you even take it as not a victory without fighting then why did you intentionally called it "conquered Makka " two times..(that is your genuine view as of all conventional muslim) How can one conquer without fighting unless one or the other surrender? Even to surrender one side need mighty power exposed either before fighting or during fighting...
-
I am not as an expert in English as you are brother. For me the word "conquer" (i put it in quotation marks the first time i used it) can be used in different context but maybe it is too loaded with warrior connotations. This is why by using this term I recognized that I could introduce confusion..And of course the translation of Shakir (i used it as reference) can be improve. But the debate around the word "conquer" is not the substance of the debate.
At one point in the debate, debate is almost useless. Only God can change hearts (sense of reflection), for you as for me.
It is more useful to invite to meditation, reflection by taking as support the text which must unite us the Quran.
And thanks to you because your posts invited me to meditate again this passage of sura 48.The Quran is not only the reflection of a language but also of the way of structuring a thought. this structuring of thought influences the understanding of the text. It is this structuring that i wanted to introduce with colors. Meditate on it, and you will see that God gives the keys to understanding himself he is the supreme arbiter.
And that the access formula in the textual sense of the quran confirms the traditional vision so good otherwise it is not a problem for me to go beyond old production.Peace to you brother and that his speech (words + structure) is highlighted as it deserves.
-
وَهُوَ ٱلَّذِى كَفَّ أَيْدِيَـهُـمْ عَنكُـمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُـمْ عَنْـهُـم بِبَطْنِ مَكَّـةَ
And He the Exalted is the One Who withheld the hands of them (Non-believers) away from you and the hands of you people away from them in indulging hand to hand fight in the interior of Mecca —
مِنۢ بَعْدِ أَنْ أَظْفَرَكُمْ عَلَيْـهِـمْۚ
After He the Exalted had made you people overwhelm upon them.
Root ظ ف ر
وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيـرٙا .4824٢٤
And Allah the Exalted was watching everything that you people were acting upon.The fact mentioned in the first line is an event that happened after the time and event mentioned by the Prepositional Phrase coupled with two successive Possessive Phrases and followed by Prepositional Phrase. It shows no full fledged war had taken place, and victory was gained without much bloodshed. The Topic of the Narrative is
إِنَّا فَتَحْنَا لَكَ فَتْحٙا مُّبِينٙا .4801١
Indeed Our Majesty have gained victory for you (the Messenger ), in the manner of decisive and vivid victory— -
Peace brothers…
My English…lol…
Dude… You have not written Conquer of Makka in two places blindly or accidentally … So if not Conquer, just replace with the right word or just point where in quran Conquering / bla bla of makka is stated.. I told you I may be distorting your topic and I withdrew… but you only dragged me in again.. anyway.. God will..DEBATE is no harm at all… with debate I have reached this far not only in this forum but personally as well… Debate shows us our weaknesses and strengths… If we are honest we can learn from our weaknesses and find the right path… Of course God will, we will get guidance…. Who knows through what God intend guidance…. Will everyone talk to us what they feel within their heart how they got guidance…. What you, me and everyone here on this forum if they are true believers doing only to pass right message as per their understanding of quran… That’s all..
In addition to that… word “Fathi” never gives me an impression as victory gained fought… It only gives me something like conquest or subjugation or simply being in a satisfied situation well under control and dominance over another….war could be part of it and may not be in all Fathi… For example.. if you read with much pondering, you will grasp what I grasped in sha allah..
5710 “How is it with you, that you expend not in the way of God, and to God belongs the inheritance of the heavens and the earth? Not equal is he among you who SPENT, and who FOUGHT before the “Fathi”; those are mightier in rank than they who SPENT and FOUGHT afterwards (after ‘Fathi’); and unto each God has promised the reward most fair; and God is aware of the things you do.”1101-2 “When comes the help of God, and Fathi, and you see men entering God's religion/system(deen) in throngs, …”
So Fathi is not merely fighting and gaining war victory… it seems beyond that of long term struggle came to an end with dominance.. there could be some near or short term Fathi… But Fathi is different in quran… it is not two groups fight and one win at one instance… By order of revelation of quran you may find… 4824 second part is just a victory over a war / fight...
Unfortunately both you and mazhr never gave me any concrete support from quran to give the meaning to Makka as Proper noun in comparison of verses 4824-25….. rather than directly or indirectly your minds are prejudiced to current day Makka by this verse which I have no reason to accept within quran… God knows the real story…. May God guide us.. -
Salam!
Arabic scholars say that everything of great importance has numerous names/words for it in Arabic. I wonder why the word/name for sword is not present in AQ while it is said that there are almost 300 words for sword/types of swords in Arabic.
Peace!