An ant knows name of a person? A bird knows name of a city?
-
Salaams Br,
just a helping hand......
Normal translation
And he inspected (TAFAQADA)the birds(ALTAEER), then said "Why do I not see the hoopoe(ALHUDHUD), or is he among those absent? I will punish him severely, or I will kill him, else he should have an evident excuse.But the hoopoe did not stay away long, then he said "I have seen what you do not know, and I have come to you from Sheba with news which is certain." 2720-22
Do you guys think that, Solomon literally spoke to them? Or, perhaps, this is a metaphor?
No i think its all a mistranslation fraud
TAFAQADA=to review/make an inquisition into/search out things lost or missed/inspect
ALTAEER= Cause of good or evil/action of a man -good or bad.
ALHUDHUD=proper name of a responsible officer in the army of king solomon.So
And he made an inspection , then said "Why do I not see THE OFFICER, or is he among those absent? I will punish him severely, or I will kill him, else he should have an evident excuse.But the officer did not stay away long, then he said "I have seen what you do not know, and I have come to you from Sheba with news which is certain." 2720-22
As far as i can see all the other places can be simerlarly worked out,where the birds and the jinns accur.
But it is a lot of time waster.
I think anybody can do it and should using the Q.D and The Lanes and i am sure there are others as well..
-
Salaams Br,
No i think its all a mistranslation fraudTAFAQADA=to review/make an inquisition into/search out things lost or missed/inspect
ALTAEER= Cause of good or evil/action of a man -good or bad.
ALHUDHUD=proper name of a responsible officer in the army of king solomon.Salams "simple"
Thanks for helping me trying to understand this.
The problem will be resolved if the word "alhudhud" is refering to a person and not to a bird.
My mother tongue is Urdu. In Urdu hudhud means hoopoe (bird). Urdu has deep roots in Arabic so I am sure in Arabic alhudhud means hoopoe as well. What evidence do we have to support that alhuhud was name of an officer? Or are we reverse engineering and saying this because this is the only way we could explain things? Please elaborate. Thanks in advance.
-
Salaams Br,
Sher khan ?
Sher zaman ?
and i think Br. Layth once said ,
Layth = Lion.
People do use names of animals aswell to my knowledge Br.
May "He" Bless us all.
-
Peace
- Solomon was heir to David, and he said "O people, we have been taught the language of Tair, and have been given of everything. This is a clear favour indeed."
- His armies of jinns(nomads/tribes, people from out of direct society/not seen/rarely seen societies) and men and Tair assembled, formed into ranks, (and marched)
- Till they reached the Valley of Naml. Said the lady of Naml "O Naml, go into your dwellings lest Solomon and his hordes should crush you unawares."
- (Solomon) smiled, amused at her speech, and said "O Lord grant me that I should be grateful for the favours You have bestowed on me and my parents, and do good things of Your pleasing; and admit me among Your righteous devotees by Your grace."
The story of the ants and the bird is simple if people would have looked a bit further. Since words have more then one meaning or background it is interesting what people choose sometimes, and have a distorted idea of a meaning. The arabic naml, means ants, BUT was also the name of a tribe in Syria, even ibn Kathir who is so wrong on 80% of his explanations on the Quran, noted this fact. In his tafseer, he identifies, namlat, the lady of Naml, as belonging to the tribe of Banu Shisan. So it is the tribe that was scared of Solomon's army, which is more logical. Also on the story of the 'bird' that comes in the verses after that, the arabic word hud-hud, means hoopoe, BUT again was also the name of a South Yemen tribe, and men were often named after their tribes as well as birds. Tair is commonly used for birds, but is also applied to winged beings, yet tayyar means fleet-flooted horse, and at-tairan is metaphorically used for marching to jihad. When Solomon says that they had been taught the language of tair, he uses the word mantiq which is used for HUMAN speech, and man alone of all created beings is called haivani-natiq, speaking animal, the language of birds is called saut. The intention behind the use of tair, as of jinn cannot be disregarded. The Tair were a conquered tribe or race and David and Solomon had knowledge of their language. Similarly jinns applies here to the nomadic tribes many of whom were recruited by the king of Tyre for Solomon, see the Bible, chapter Kings 1,5. So they were called not seen ones, because they came from a land and people that were not seen normally. So it refers to where they come from, not the direct situation of if they were seen or not seen at that moment by Solomon and his people. So there country and people are jinn for Solomon and his people, making them called jinns. Hud-hud here is significant because it is known in old records that it was the name of a prince of Midian in the days of Solomon, and some records say he was even the brother of the queen of Sheba. It was by the hand of Hud-hud that brought the letter to Sheba, and he was the one who brought the throne to Solomon, here we have to understand that in the Quran, all the thrones mentioned is used symbolic, as with the Throne of God, meaning the Power/authority of God, same is here, where Solomon was brought knowledge about the 'power', or as to say how her government, how her power was in her kingdom. This is also with the throne of Yousouf, where he put his parents on, they were honored by living in luxury through Yousouf's power in Egypt, and they bowed for him, meaning out of respect.
27 20. When he reviewed the Tair, he said "How is it I do not see Hud-hud? Is he absent?
21. I will punish him severely, or cut his throat, unless he bring a valid excuse."
22. But he was not long in coming, and reported "I have been around where you have not been. I come from Saba with positive news.
27. (Solomon) said 'We shall see if you speak the truth or you are a liar.
28. Take this letter from me, and deliver it to them and withdraw, then see what reply they give in return."
36. So, when the envoys came to Solomon he said "Do you wish to increase my wealth? Yet what God has given me is better than what He has given you. No. Be gratified in your present.
37. Go back to them. We shall soon come with our armies which they will not be able to face. We shall drive them out of (the land) with ignominy, and they will be humbled."
38. He (then) said (to his courtiers) "O you nobles, is there any one who can bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?"
39. A crafty jinn (intelligent person/tribesman/person (part of direct) not seen (society)) said "I will bring it before you rise from your seat, for I am strong and trustworthy."
40. But one who had knowledge of the letter, said "I will bring it to you in the twinkling of an eye." When Solomon saw it before him, (he said) "This is by the grace of my Lord that He may test me whether I am grateful or I am thankless. Yet if one is grateful, he is grateful for himself, and if one is thankless, then surely my Lord is unconcerned and magnanimous."
41. (Turning to his nobles) he said "Change the appearance of her throne. Let us see if she is rightly guided, or is not guided at all." -
The explanations of Muhammad Ali are interesting too
cf http//www.muslim.org/english-quran/ch027.pdfPeace
-
Peace,
Very good. I still have to check more on hud-hud being an ambassador of Solomon, but i know for almost certain that the Tair were a tribe. Also Muhammed Ali agree's with me that the jinn mentioned are a tribe, i have his translation but never knew he believed the same thing alhamdullileh.
-
Peace,
Very good. I still have to check more on hud-hud being an ambassador of Solomon, but i know for almost certain that the Tair were a tribe. Also Muhammed Ali agree's with me that the jinn mentioned are a tribe, i have his translation but never knew he believed the same thing alhamdullileh.
The understanding of Muhammad ali of the word jinn is one of the more relevant, IMHO
You may wish to check in his translation the other verses where the word jinn occurs.About tair, I think it is the cavalry
See http//www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=1968®ion=E1About hudud,
See http//www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=1970®ion=E1Peace
-
oraclemir wrote
I dont mind a Jinn bringing a thrown 2739 because I am not sure what jinn's are.djinns are entities created by god, the way humans are created entities!
oraclemir wrote
But I am having confusion accepting the above mentioned facts about ant and bird because we know what ants and birds are. They are certainly not capable of this intelligence. Or are they? Perhaps after 100 years we would find out that an ant and a hoopoe has higher intelligence? What are the chances for that happening?animals do communicate...and they do have instincts and recognition...it cannot be that dogs start barking just for the heck of it....perhaps humans are more likely to have this tendency! -)
oraclemir wrote
There has to be some other explanation to this.like already mentioned, solomon had special powers...he had been assigned as an army those from amongst the djinns and the humans and the birds.....so it is not surprising he could communicate with them! -)
i would like to mention here that important as it is to reject sunni and shia sources...it is equally important to reject the sources the followers of a certain mirza ghulam ahmad! much of talks about re-interpretations of djinns and solomon's armies by ahmadiyyas are not based on quran, but a commentary by the ahmadiyyat community! a far cry from being a commentary based on quran...it is based on extra-quranic sources doctored to suit the 'sensibilities' of the non-believing world...as well as to project ahmad as the promised messiah! and this promised messiah frequently resorted to sunni traditions to 'prove' himself as their promised messiah! ;D
-
Peace,
Quote
i would like to mention here that important as it is to reject sunni and shia sources...it is equally important to reject the sources the followers of a certain mirza ghulam ahmad! much of talks about re-interpretations of djinns and solomon's armies by ahmadiyyas are not based on quran, but a commentary by the ahmadiyyat community! a far cry from being a commentary based on quran...it is based on extra-quranic sources doctored to suit the 'sensibilities' of the non-believing world...as well as to project ahmad as the promised messiah! and this promised messiah frequently resorted to sunni traditions to 'prove' himself as their promised messiah!
If you study the Quran carefully, you can see that the Quran doesn't talk about jinns as creatures made out of fire. The word jinn refers to hidden beings/things, and in every verse it refers to something different. In the verses with iblis and that jinn were made out of fire, refer to the inner desires that were made out of fire, that it refers to the creation of jinn before us, refer to that the 'evil' side of man were the fisrt part of our design. the jinns of solomon are tribes that worked for him, as their origins are jinn/hidden, sometimes it refers to legends and so on. In 72 it refers to nomads/munks that lived in the desert. By coincedence also ahmedya's belief this, i didn't knew that, i based this on my own knowledge of the Quran. I used logic and reason. You say you don't base it on outside sources, but your understanding of the word jinn was already filled in by outside sources, they made you already approach like you do now.....
-
arnoldyasin wrote
If you study the Quran carefully, you can see that the Quran doesn't talk about jinns as creatures made out of fire.the quran is emphatic in what it says...but i have read that in the ahmadiyyat commentary...that it is symbolic! -)
arnoldyasin wrote
The word jinn refers to hidden beings/things, and in every verse it refers to something different.huh? why would that be? does 'insaan' refer to something different everytime it features in a different verse?
arnoldyasin wrote
In the verses with iblis and that jinn were made out of fire, refer to the inner desires that were made out of fire, that it refers to the creation of jinn before us, refer to that the 'evil' side of man were the fisrt part of our design.that is something u are claiming...it does not constitute as proof! -)
arnoldyasin wrote
the jinns of solomon are tribes that worked for him, as their origins are jinn/hidden, sometimes it refers to legends and so on. In 72 it refers to nomads/munks that lived in the desert.the quran does not talk about origins of any tribe...the ahmadiyyat commentary does talk about them being tribes! -)
arnoldyasin wrote
By coincedence also ahmedya's belief this, i didn't knew that, i based this on my own knowledge of the Quran. I used logic and reason.cool! -)
arnoldyasin wrote
You say you don't base it on outside sources, but your understanding of the word jinn was already filled in by outside sources, they made you already approach like you do now.....not necessarily....primary reading of 5514-15 would give the impression of humans and djinns being entities created by god! that they may be symbolic would at the best be a concurrent reading! i dont think the verses surrounding those verses are symbolic in nature! also to know a view does not necessarily mean endorsing it! -)
peace -)
-
peace
that 'the jinn' thing is symbolic doesn't make sense to me.
3871 For your Lord said to the Angels "I am creating a human being from clay."
3872 "So when I have evolved him, and breathed into him from My spirit, then you shall submit to him."
3873 The Angels submitted, all of them,
3874 Except Satan; he turned arrogant, and became one of the rejecters.So Satan was an angel and he became a jinn because he turned arrogant and disobeyed The Lord.
3876 He said "I am better than he; You created me from fire, and created him from clay."
Thus, angels are created from fire. If jinns are symbolic then angels are also symbolic which just throws everything way off for me.
As I recall, we are to believe in the unseen, why are we to believe in them if they are not mentioned in the quran #1, and #2 why if they are just symbolic
22 This is the Scripture in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous.
23 Those who believe in the unseen, and uphold the contact-method, and from Our provisions to them they spend.As I also recall from the Quran, the Angels pray for those here on earth, they glorify and praise the Lord of the Universe, and carry out certain commands, etc.....
Help me understand
God bless !
-
Peace,
You have to grasp the whole story, and use cross-reference. Also you have to look closely what the word sheitan, iblis, djinn, and malikah. So sjeitan was not an 'angel' , but a 'one in control/authority'. This gives a whole different approach to the concept. Sjeitan is also a classic arabic term for the evil side of man, which became concealed for man's senses.(djinn=concealed/hidden for man's senses) and is one of the things that can control us/have authority on our thinking. And these djinns are the ones like fire, the djinn of fire is always connected that our body is made out of matter. Our body is matter/dust/clay, our desires and ego are like fire. When djinn is called fire, it is always mentioned next to humans being made of clay, which directly refer that the sides of man which are concealed for them(djinn) are made out of fire/are like fire. So this refers only to THESE djinns/concealed things. And not all djinns that are mentioned in the Quran.
People leave these terms as titles, which they are certainly not. They are descriptions of several things. The word human directly refers to ONE species. But itself falls under the walking beings. Many things on earth fall under walking beings. The term djinn means something hidden/concealed for man's senses/ beings/things not directly seen. So this doesn't refer to ONE species, it gives a character description where a lot of things fall under. The same holds for malikah, which means ones in control/authority, which also refers to a lot of things and doesn't determine ONE species, but can denote several things/beings.
This is the biggest mistake people make with approaching the Quran.
Give me your mail, and i can send you a rough version of an article i'm busy with. Which may clearify things. You get it in a couple of weeks, you to KGB.
Peace
-
peace
Well the Quran is Complete, Full-detailed and perfect. And God doesn't play riddles of this magnitude to cause utter confusion (thats my belief)
To me it's pretty simple
Satan was an angel (the angels were asked to fall prostrate) Satan became a devil immediatedly because he disobeyed the lord of the universe. Just like you and I would become disbelievers if we disobeyed the Lord. That's how simple it is for me.
God Bless !
But I am certainly open to hear what you have to say
-
Peace,
I know it is a bit hard to percieve as you have to break away from what is filled in your subconciousness. So it is hard to remove that veil. I had that to in the beginning, and i kept repeating the same thing as you, till i saw what the words really meant in clear-cut arabic, and saw we have given the words titles/fixed meanings and that we dismiss the real meanings of the words.
Quote
Satan was an angel (the angels were asked to fall prostrate) Satan became a devil immediatedly because he disobeyed the lord of the universe. Just like you and I would become disbelievers if we disobeyed the Lord. That's how simple it is for me.satan means=long rope=distanced from God=rebel=evil side=ego
angel=one in control/authority=denotes several things=powers that are in control and beings that 'work' for God.
devil? jinn doesnt mean devil....jinn comes from J-N-N meaning something not seen/hidden. Like also in djenna, meaning the hidden garden.
so you would read it like this
evil side/ego has authority over us and became something concealed for our perception, which rebels against us and God, as God has created it to be so. It is part of our nature we have to learn to overcome. God warns us for our evil side.If you say satan is an angel that became a jinn, you are not following the arabic meaning as you keep the words as titles and don't translate their meanings. So you follow a fixed meaning and not the arabic.
We are warned for this in 2530
Mahjoor means desert/abonden , avoid, fetter/chain/fix position
A horse or camel tied head to foot was called mahjoor, and the rope used for tying, al-hijaar(Taj). Making the animal immobile, as it stuck in its position, where the owners will leave it. The Quran today is thus fettered/chained by custom and tradition, fixed titles and meanings of words, hearsay reports compiled centuries later, and laws and by-laws enacted by men, each group having its own fiqah and shariah, which are held more sacrosanct and given predence over the Quran, and making thus the Quran fixed in meaning, where they want, and how they want. Making the versatile meanings immobile, freezing a certain meaning, and chaining the Quran with that meaning.
So the one word ends up with three meanings and the verse should be translated like so
The prophet will say "O my Lord, my people have deserted this Reading, have treated it as something to be avoided and have fettered/ chained/fixed (understandings in the Reading)." (2530)
I know this all sounds a bit weird as we are taught different things. But we have to read the arabic, not the titles we give to certain words. I will send you the article i wrote in a couple of weeks as it needs some revising.
Peace bro
-
peace bro
in a sense we can agree that the titles need to be translated, but thats not my point my point is that the context surrounding these verses indicate (to me, i am only speaking of me) that this is an actual being.
My question to you is
Who was asked to fall prostrate?
Who didn't fall prostrate?
Are you saying both of these are subconsciouses?
727 "He and his tribe see you from where you do not see them."
By the way, I wish somebody would move this to the main boards, so we can get more views. I am very open-minded. And I would never be stubborn in my beliefs, if it weren't the absolute truth. Also, know my purpose is not at all to debate. Peace bro
-
Peace,
Like i said, it refers to being sometimes, and sometimes to non-beings. Plus the sujood is mostly used as to obey, and not literal falling on the ground. But in my artciel i can explain more.
-
ik75243 wrote
that 'the jinn' thing is symbolic doesn't make sense to me.u are perhaps aware of the traditional (shia/sunni) view!
apart from theirs, is the view of the ahmdaiyyas mirza ahmad, the founder of ahmadiyya beliefs, had claimed to be a messenger receiving revelations from god! he perhaps realised that people would ask miracles of him, so he set about re-interpreting the miracles mentioned in the quran, claiming the quran's description as being figurative (as in the case of christ), or explaining them as natural events (as in parting of the sea by moses)! checking the commentary against the text of quran, the distortion can be verified easily! -) 1 of his problems was djinns and tayr, as according to the quran, they were part of the army of solomon! so had anybody demanded of him a thing similar to solomon's armies, he would have been in a fix in view of the prevalent understanding of the verse! so what he did instead, was a re-interpretation of solomon's armies! thus, djinns of the army were wild tribes and tayr were cavalry! also, the commentary claims that the word has different meanings at different places!
another view is that of djinns being negative thoughts this had been explained to me by some hindus...according to them the entire quran is symbolic as well...they draw a comparison to the hindu epic called "ramayana"! "ram" is an archetype who represents the person on a journey or a person marching towards something! thus "ramayana" ram + ayana, journey/march of ram! similarly, according to them, "muhammad" is a model which has to be realised! as for the djinns being negative thoughts, they perhaps see it as a comparison to the "asuras" (demons)....the symbolic explanation of the churning of the oceans will help explain their understanding of djinns as negative emotions! prior to this forum, i had not heard this view expressed by anybody other than a minority from hindus!
these are the views i already knew (before visiting this forum)
but there is 1 understanding i dont remember having read anywhere before here that of djinns being reptiles! interestingly, there have been many legends around reptiles such as snakes and lizards! infact, according to the traditional view, djinns are believed to take the form of snakes! -S i believe this article is somewhere in the articles section, so u can check it out there! -)
so read the quran try to find ur own meaning, or choose from the above 4, or more if u are aware of! -)
as for myself, based on 5514-15, 1526-27, and 712, unless the description of creation of 'insaan' is figurative, there is no reason to believe the description of the creation of djinns is figurative! -)
-
Peace,
There were already people claiming the same as i told you already. You keep pointing out ahmedya's, but these only agree on it, but were not the people who formed the ideas on djinn and tair. There were already people in India saying this. This ideas are common knowledge on the indian and pakistani lands. Scholars as Saiyyad Sulaiman Nadvi, Dar al-Musannifin and Azamgarh aldo pointed these things out. Also Ibn Kathir mentiones that the Naml in sura 27 are a tribe and not real ants. These scholars lived hundreds of years before ahmedya, so refering to only ahmedya is ignorant. Parwez, Ahmed Ali, Muhammed Asad and Dr.Shabbir all agree on the same issue. All of these translators condemn Ahmedya's.
And jinn means beings/things not seen/are hidden/concealed. And is a description were a lot of things can fall under. Just a lot of things are seen beings/things, not just humans or one species. So there is more to it then the view based on tradition.