The why and how of the bond mentioned in the reading
-
Peace brother wakas,
I will request if you do not mind, we look at the issue as a whole . I guess that is better.
Could you please explain for me your understanding of why and how of the said bond.
For the sake of simplicity, consider me someone who has just embraced Islam and seek for such explanation.
I will appreciate the gesture.
ZUBAIRUS.
-
peace zubairus,
But the why and how is not necessary. If you agree that the bond (whatever it is) requires one to concentrate, pay attention etc then it is illogical to have these same people look out in a certain direction for enemy etc.
Do you agree or disagree?
-
Peace brother wakas
Peace
4101 And if you go forth in the land, then there is no harm that you
shorten from the bond, if you fear that the rejecters will try you.The rejecters are to you a clear enemy.
4102 And if you are with them and you hold the bond for them, then
let a group from among them stand with you and let them bring
their weapons; and when they have prostrated then let them be
behind you; and let a group who has not yet bonded come and
bond with you, and let them be wary and let them bring their
weapons with them. The rejecters hope that you would neglect
your weapons and goods so they can come upon you in one blow.
There is no sin upon you if you are impeded by rainfall, or if you
are ill, that you place down your weapons. And be wary. God has
prepared for the rejecters a humiliating retribution.
4103 So, when you have completed the bond, then remember God
while standing, or sitting, or on your sides. So, when you are
relieved, then hold the bond. Indeed, the bond for the believers is
a timed scheduleI have never contested the need for concentration. But the fact remains that based on the above verse, security taken into consideration, an arrangement was necessitated.They were even allowed to shorten from the bond.They were allowed to carry their weapons. The level of concentration obtainable at this time may not be as high compared to a normal time.
Generally, a person is more aware of his front than his back. We can easily respond to a danger in front of us. In another way, we can easily be caught unaware from behind.
These has been the baeses of my thinking.peace zubairus,
But the why and how is not necessary. If you agree that the bond (whatever it is) requires one to concentrate, pay attention etc then it is illogical to have these same people look out in a certain direction for enemy etc.
Do you agree or disagree?
Actually in our life, the best approach to issues is to ask why of a thing, then how of it.I want to beleive the act-bond is something you as a person does not as an act of ritual but for a purpose in your life and in a certain way.
These I request you share with me. Possible it might settle every thing.
The gesture will be appreciated.
Peace
ZUBAIRUS.
-
peace zubairus,
My understanding of slw (root of "salat" can be found here
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/slw.htmThe regular/timed bond/salat for the mumineen is reading/reflection/oration of Quran. This requires concentration, paying attention etc as can be seen from many of the verses that discuss the regular/timed "salat", thus I am of the view that to make those undertaking salat to be lookouts for enemy is illogical, thus there is no, as you say, them looking out one direction, others looking out another direction. As M.Asad points out, the expression used has no directional element.
When someone is reading a passage to others however, it is common, for the audience to be facing that person.
Bringing their weapons with them is useful if they are attacked, simple.
-
Peace brother wakas
Thanks for the gesture-the response. But you did not as I requested explaine for me how you as a person uphold the bond. I have gone through the link you referenced.
Now am I right to infer that whenever a person, a mumin, takes the message, read from it,contemplate over it and accept what is said, he/she has upheld the bond ?
I really need to get the issue clear.I have used the word accept instead of submit to get the picture of the issue clear but stand to be corrected.
For the purposeof clarification, I never meant that those upholding the bond are facing a direction in order to look out for the enemy. Definitly they are facing either directions or a direction but I opted for a direction.
Peace.
ZUBAIRUS.
-
peace zubairus,
But you did not as I requested explaine for me how you as a person uphold the bond. I have gone through the link you referenced.
Now am I right to infer that whenever a person, a mumin, takes the message, read from it,contemplate over it and accept what is said, he/she has upheld the bond ?
I really need to get the issue clear.I didn't realise you were asking how I personally uphold the bond, I thought we were discussing the possible directional element in this verse!
You missed about the preparation part, e.g. 56/443, but basically what you said for the regular/timed salat/bond is my understanding, for the mumineen.
-
Peace brother wakas.
Sorry, I took for granted the preparation part.
Now what happen when a mumeen read from the message and he is unable to comprehend what is said uptill the time he stops? I s the said bond upheld?
Peace.
ZUBAIRUS
443 O you who have assurance/trust (ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo), do not come near the bond while you are drunk, until you know what you are saying...
-
443 O you who have assurance/trust (ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo), do not come near the bond while you are drunk, until you know what you are saying...
Peace
What I mean is where one read from the message and is contemplating on the possibilities trying to arrive at the actual meaning.
Peace.
ZUBAIRUS
-
peace zubairus,
There is a difference between understanding/comprehending and acknowledging. Of course, it is preferable to have both I would think.
As far as I'm aware, nowhere in The Quran does it say one must understand 100% of everything mentioned/contained in it. One must aim to do so to the best of their ability, sincerely etc.
Lastly, the person leading the regular/timed salat/bond would likely be more knowledgeable than average, thus the chances of this are reduced.
May I ask what point you are trying to get at, if any? Specifically, how this relates to the alleged directional element in this verse?
-
Peace brother wakas,
Actually I am not particular about the directional element of the bond at the moment but the acceptance/submission/acknowledgement aspect.
The fact is this, one can actually acnowledge what is understood to an extent.
But the issue here is a situation where a person is contemplating on possibilities trying to understand what is meant.
What happen to the bond?
Peace.
ZUBAIRUS
-
peace zubairus,
It means a person may uphold the bond without the acceptance/submission/acknowledgement and it is valid.
That is not my understanding, but if that is yours, each to their own.
It seems you have equated understanding/comprehending and acknowledging/sjd. Evidence?
-
Peace brother wakas,
If you agree that SJD = Submission, you may replace my aknowledgement with submission and respond to my request. If no, do please tell me your exact equivalent of SJD.
Peace.ZUBAIRUS
What (I think) he means is that it is erronous to equate understanding what is being said during the bond with acknowledging/submission (sjd), since one can understand what is being said during the bond yet not submit to/obey (sjd) what is being said/read, since one may be a hypocrite/want to ignore God's signs.
Also, one has missed the point of the bond if one understands what is being said/read but does not obey/acknowledge/submit (sjd). -
Peace brother wakas,
Actually I am not particular about the directional element of the bond at the moment but the acceptance/submission/acknowledgement aspect.
The fact is this, one can actually acnowledge what is understood to an extent.
But the issue here is a situation where a person is contemplating on possibilities trying to understand what is meant.
What happen to the bond?
Peace.
ZUBAIRUS
Peace.
Actually I did not equate understanding with acknowledgement and we are particular about a mumeen upholding the bond.
A PERSON NEED TO UNDERSTAND ATLEAST TO AN EXTENT BEFORE SUBMISSION.Peace.
ZUBAIRUS.
-
Peace brother wakas
peace zubairus,
There is a difference between understanding/comprehending and acknowledging. Of course, it is preferable to have both I would think.
As far as I'm aware, nowhere in The Quran does it say one must understand 100% of everything mentioned/contained in it. One must aim to do so to the best of their ability, sincerely etc.
Lastly, the person leading the regular/timed salat/bond would likely be more knowledgeable than average, thus the chances of this are reduced.May I ask what point you are trying to get at, if any? Specifically, how this relates to the alleged directional element in this verse?
You said one must not understand 100%.Agreed. I said atleast to an extent. I think we are saying the samething and we have taken for granted the language used.
My request is this, when one is upholding the bond,he is confronted with a verse with variose interpretations. He is contemplating on the possibilities to arrive at the actual meaning to the level of his understanding. Sometimes it easily resoved but sometimes this take time.What happene to the bond?
Concluded without submission?
Bond suspended till the meaning is uncovered?
Submission blindly?
This is the request.
Peace.ZUBAIRUS
