The greatest SACRIFICE is truth.
-
Peace all,
Recently while reading a post I came across 527 which is translated as...
Waotlu AAalayhim nabaa ibnay adamabialhaqqi ith qarraba qurbanan fatuqubbila min ahadihima walam yutaqabbal mina al-akhariqala laaqtulannaka qala innama yataqabbaluAllahu mina almuttaqeena
Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam. Behold! they each presented a sacrifice (to Allah) It was accepted from one, but not from the other. Said the latter "Be sure I will slay thee." "Surely," said the former, "Allah doth accept of the sacrifice of those who are righteous.
Note that the verse explicitly says that this version is the TRUTH of the matter and obviously corrects the versions extant at the time (ie. the Judaeo-Christian version of the story).
And yet the traditionists have become duped and follow the understanding of this story as a "sacrifice" or "material offering" to a god. Pagans do this routinely with all sorts of offerings to their idols and deities. The God explicitly says in the reading that no meat reaches Him, and this should therefore explain to us that there are no sacrificial rituals in the God's system.
The word which is mistranslated here is "qurbanan" and many non-Arabic muslim societies name a yearly celebration (just passed) after this term - calling it "Eyd e Qorban, Qurbani Eid, Kurban Bayrami" etc. perpetuating the "qurbanan" means "sacrifice" falsehood.
Qurbanan comes from the root Q-R-B which in every case relates to "nearness, closeness, kinship". The same word is used in 4628...
Falawla nasarahumu allatheenaittakhathoo min dooni Allahi qurbanan alihatanbal dalloo AAanhum wathalika ifkuhum wama kanooyaftaroona
Why then was no help forthcoming to them from those whom they worshipped as gods, besides Allah, as a means to get near (to Allah)? Nay, they left them in the lurch but that was their falsehood and their invention.
The same word and yet in this instance it is not this time translated as "sacrifice" or "offering". Why? Because "qurbanan" does not mean sacrifice.
527 therefore tells us that the sons "approached a nearness to the God" by following the path, and was not a sacrifice of meat or an offering of fruit which is a pagan concept. Therefore the correct translation should be...
Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam. Behold! they each approached a nearness (to the path of the God) ...
I want to extend this to another verse where the "qurbanin" = "sacrifice" is again used and gives a nonsensical result...
Allatheena qaloo inna AllahaAAahida ilayna alla nu/mina lirasoolin hattaya/tiyana biqurbanin ta/kuluhu alnnaruqul qad jaakum rusulun min qablee bialbayyinatiwabiallathee qultum falima qataltumoohum in kutum sadiqeena
They (also) said "Allah took our promise not to believe in an messenger unless He showed us a sacrifice consumed by Fire (From heaven)." Say "There came to you messengers before me, with clear Signs and even with what ye ask for why then did ye slay them, if ye speak the truth?"
Now this is saying that the people had promised not to believe in a messenger unless "He" showed us a sacrifice consumed by "Fire". The "He" and "Fire" are clearly stretches of the imagination of to try and create some sort of plausible story. And if they take "qurbanin" to be a "sacrifice" then this is exactly the sort of nonsense that results.
The truth of the matter is that again "qurbanin" here relates to closeness or nearness just as Q-R-B implies. So the correct translation is...
3183 They said "The God took our promise not to believe in a messenger unless he showed us a closeness that was passionate" ....
I believe the "consumed by fire" is an idiomatic phrase meaning "very great", "fiery", or "passionate". Even in English this is an idiomatic cognate (we have things like 'fire in the belly' meaning a hunger or passionate desire).
We should therefore correct this misunderstanding of "qurban" meaning "sacrifice" in our translations and know that to become near to the God we should not sacrifice truth for myths.
5610 Then there is the elite of the elite.
Waalssabiqoona alssabiqoona
5611 They are those who will be closest (to God).
Ola-ika almuqarraboonaBest wishes and peace.
-
Peace be upon you Truth,
Good work D
-
Peace Truth,
I'm following you so far, and it's making sense. However, how do you complete 527 in this context? If it is "approaching nearness" that is being discussed, how is the nearness accepted from one brother and not the other, and how did the the other brother stray so far to the point of saying, "I will slay thee"?
My initial guess would be that one brother was further from the path of Allah than the other, and upon realizing Allah's dismay, he strayed completely to the point of violence.
Looking forward to your reply.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Truth,
I'm following you so far, and it's making sense. However, how do you complete 527 in this context? If it is "approaching nearness" that is being discussed, how is the nearness accepted from one brother and not the other, and how did the the other brother stray so far to the point of saying, "I will slay thee"?
My initial guess would be that one brother was further from the path of Allah than the other, and upon realizing Allah's dismay, he strayed completely to the point of violence.
Looking forward to your reply.
Peace,
TayPeace Tay,
Your thoughts mirror mine.
390 Those who disbelieve after believing, then plunge deeper into disbelief, their repentance will not be accepted from them; they are the real strayers.
953 Say, "Spend, willingly or unwillingly. Nothing will be accepted from you, for you are evil people."
954 What prevented the acceptance of their spending is that they disbelieved in the God and His messenger, and when they observed their obligations, they observed them lazily, and when they gave to charity, they did so grudgingly.
We are not told about the background of the two sons, but one was by nature 'evil' given that he resorted to violence and murder with ease.
The moral is that one's intentions aren't always fulfilled or accepted if one's heart is not in it.
Regards.
-
Peace Truth,
Thanks for the references bro. On point as usual. I do, however, think that the other brother would be better described by 390, then to call him "evil by nature", since 527 is stating that both brothers were approaching nearness to the path of Allah.
Your thoughts?
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Truth,
Thanks for the references bro. On point as usual. I do, however, think that the other brother would be better described by 390, then to call him "evil by nature", since 527 is stating that both brothers were approaching nearness to the path of Allah.
Your thoughts?
Peace,
TayYes, I was hesitant to label him as evil; therefore the inverted commas, and I would agree that 390 or the grudging approach as described in the other verses is a possibility.
Peace.