Could this be the valley of BAKKAH?
-
The verb is passive; and the ergative-proxy subject refers back to First House, and the whole sentence is adjectival definition/portrayal of it.
Yes I know, the house was placed, i.e. the house receives the action expressed in the verb, i.e. hence use of the passive verb.
What is your point?
-
I also discovered another stunning "coincidence", in 397 "whoever dakhala/enters it", the word "dakhala" is used many times in AQ, but the ONLY times it ever refers to a obvious non-physical/place is God's deen in 1102 and the peace/self-surrender/ssilm in 2208.
Do I understand correctly that your interpretation for Bakka is then 'going within' as in seeking guidance through contemplation...entering the esteemed place within you as set down by the grace of God?
-
peace JSS,
Please see reply 17, the quoted part, that is my current understanding. If BKK can mean "within" then what you mention is a possibility but unlikely due to the next verse. The next verse, 397, poses even more problems for the traditional understanding.
As a side note "the semi-circular wall of white marble (Hatim)" may be somehow related or a throwback to marwa (Lane flint stones, white fragile stone where a cooking fire is started, the stone on which an animal is slaughtered).
-
What? The verb is passive and the house is the object. How can the house simultaneously be the subject and the object of a passive verb? Wakas is right, the subject is Allah.
In the active voice, the subject of the verb is the one who does the action described by the verb, and the object is the one acted upon The waiters will collect the plates.
In the passive voice, this situation is reversed the subject of the verb is the one acted upon by the verb, and the one who does the action - if mentioned at all - is relegated to a separate phrase, typically beginning with by The plates will be collected by the waiters.
The passive can be used for a variety of purposes; for example, if the identity of the doer of the action is unknown, if the writer desires to conceal the identity of the doer of the action, as in The vase was broken, or if the writer wants to put special emphasis on the object or the action rather than on the doer of the action, as in The bomb was defused by experts.
Microsoft? Encarta? 2006. ? 1993-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. -
The verb is passive; and the ergative-proxy subject refers back to First House, and the whole sentence is adjectival definition/portrayal of it.
It was addressing this quote of yours
This weights the translation heavily in favour of God/We being the ones who placed al bayt in 396.
And obviously ignoring basic rules leads to arriving at misguided conclusions and perceptions.
-
In the active voice, the subject of the verb is the one who does the action described by the verb, and the object is the one acted upon The waiters will collect the plates.
In the passive voice, this situation is reversed the subject of the verb is the one acted upon by the verb, and the one who does the action - if mentioned at all - is relegated to a separate phrase, typically beginning with by The plates will be collected by the waiters.
The passive can be used for a variety of purposes; for example, if the identity of the doer of the action is unknown, if the writer desires to conceal the identity of the doer of the action, as in The vase was broken, or if the writer wants to put special emphasis on the object or the action rather than on the doer of the action, as in The bomb was defused by experts.
Microsoft? Encarta? 2006. ? 1993-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.What?
What?
The 'house' is the of the verb.
How can it simultaneously be the and the doer of the verb?
-
Who is saying so?
A passive verb does not reflect the doer/ of the verb.
Then why are you objecting to Allah being the faa'il of the verb? Every verb needs a faa'il so what exactly is your objection?
The verb is passive; and the ergative-proxy subject refers back to First House, and the whole sentence is adjectival definition/portrayal of it.
This is a verbose, round-about way of saying the subject of the verse is the house. One does not need to be versed in nahw to see this, it is self-evident. Wakas is suggesting the faa'il of the verb is Allah. You are yet to show he is wrong or even present an alternative. The ergative-proxy subject of this sentence refers to the lack on content in your posts, and the whole sentence is adjectival definition/portrayal of it.
-
Wakas is suggesting the faa'il of the verb is Allah.
Everyone knows about the faa'il but He is not mentioned here in the verb we are talking about. If you perceive the difference between an active and passive verb, that might have helped understand the whole Ayat. Let us not equate with if we wish to understand the meanings and perception conveyed individually by both.
-
Yet more contradiction in the traditional understandings?
Commentary of 2127
Ibn Kathir "...This Ayah indicates that this was different supplication than the first one that Ibrahim said when he left Hajar and her son Isma`il in Makkah, before the Sacred House was built. This prayer, it appears, was said after the House was built..."
Al-Jalalayn "...dwell in a valley where there is no sown land, namely, Mecca, by Your Sacred House, which had been there since before the Flood..."Commentary of 396
Ibn Kathir "...the Ka`bah that was built by Ibrahim Al-Khalil..."
Al-Jalalayn "...it was built by the angels before the creation of Adam..." -
Peace,
I just wanted to add that I think this conversation is illogical and nonsensical. The Quran is not a dictionary. WD3 also has multiple meanings, one of which is to place. You can use the word even when you place something up high, like on your top shelf. It just means to place or to put. Additionally the FOUNDATIONS of the house were raised. Houses are built from the ground up. Additionally dakhala also means to enter places. The sons of Jacob (God bless him) entered Egypt, a place. And there are plenty of instances in the Quran were dakhala is used to enter a physical place. I too in the place was not comfortable with the idea of one physical house being so central to our religion. But I was wrong and my conclusions about Bakkah and makkah and how they are used in the Quran were wrong as well. Wakas and many here have seen those conclusions which I have now removed from my website. I just have one word of advice. Not everything that is traditional is bad and Abraham (God bless him) is indeed an key player in our beliefs, and hence the house he built there and invited people to make pilgrimage to. This is an Abrahamic ritual that we perform to honor the signifance behind the house Abraham built for the worship of God and what he did for God. It is a ritual that the Quran has sanctioned. There is nothing wrong with that. Think about what it means and to whom it is connected more than the place that it is in or that it is a physical house.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Re The Quran is not a dictionary
- Of course it isn't, but AFAIK it is one of the earliest sources and extant works in Classical Arabic. It is also the most important work in Classical Arabic prose. This gives it a unique and significantly influential position.
- AQ does not define words as such, but IF 482 is true then it uses them with the utmost precision, coherence and logic, thus any odd/unusual usages deserve close examination, hence discussion and analysis.
- If a word in AQ appears 50 times and it always means X, then when it does not mean X, this deserves closer examination, hence discussion and analysis.
Can you bring a Classical Arabic reference showing WD3 is used for when a man builds a house/building/structure? It would not negate how AQ uses it, but it would be interesting.
Lane explicitly states it is the opposite of RF3 (which is the word Abraham uses when raising the foundations), and its primary meaning is to put down.And there are plenty of instances in the Quran were dakhala is used to enter a physical place.
Yes I know, but you seemingly miss the point. In its other uses, the only non-physical place is deen and the ssilm/peace/self-surrender, thus IF a non-physical interpretation was chosen, this just so coincidentally happens to fit. Whether its a coincidence or not, remains to be seen and can only be determined by discussion and analysis.
and hence the house he built there and invited people to make pilgrimage to. This is an Abrahamic ritual that we perform to honor the signifance behind the house Abraham built for the worship of God and what he did for God. It is a ritual that the Quran has sanctioned. There is nothing wrong with that.
Do you mean one specific house only?
Also, do you have an article where you have translated and explained the key terms and procedure during HJJ?
Thanks.
-
Peace,
I understand your points but I think you are skewing your analysis and view of the issue. The Quran can justify known understandings, but it does not define or, better yet, pidgeon hole any meanings. If the Quran uses a word 50 times in one way and then uses it twice in another way that does not put those two uses under suspicion if the meanings can be justified through other examples. So, since you understand that the Quran does not define words, let's clarify that the Quran does not pidgeon-hole meanings or claim exclusive authority on the usage of Arabic words. Yes wada3 in some sense can be the opposite of rafa3 and in some senses not. One meaning of wada3 would seem to be the opposite of rafa3 but wada3 can mean to place, even if placing the building involves building it from the ground up, i.e. raising it. The contradiction you seem to imply is very, very extreme and illogical. It is as if you were taking the sentence 'I know no-one but him' and saying that this is a contradictory sentence because the sayer is saying that he knows no-one and knows someone at the same time. You are seeing the trees but not the forest.
As for dakhala, I used to see that verse as referring to the family of Abraham (God bless him) and in some ways it can still be taken this way. I think it may be a fault of traditional Islam that from what we know no-one goes into the house. However, the phrase 'dakhala 'alaa' means the same as 'ataa ilaa.' And in some cases it is has been shown that these prepositions can be omitted still giving the same meaning.
No I have not written an article about hajj, but I might have to, it seems. I don't know when that will be however, I have been asserting that the umrah which is the ritual performed during hajj to the house in Becca is defined as going around the house and going in between safaa and marwah. I hope to write an article on this. I'll do some digging.
Godbless,
Anwar -
peace,
One meaning of wada3 would seem to be the opposite of rafa3 but wada3 can mean to place, even if placing the building involves building it from the ground up, i.e. raising it.
I am not saying it is impossible, I am saying from the evidence thus far it is improbable. If you come across an example to the contrary I'd be interested to see it.
I think it may be a fault of traditional Islam that from what we know no-one goes into the house.
But even if one went into the house would it actually fulfil what AQ says it will? Would there be clear signs in it, maqam Abraham, makes one secure etc?
Please note, these are not the only problems with this understanding.
I recall reading an article you wrote about HJJ here
http//web.archive.org/web/20050206231622/peopleprogod.org/pilgrimage.html
I assume you have changed your views somewhat. -
WD3 also has multiple meanings, one of which is to place. You can use the word even when you place something up high, like on your top shelf. It just means to place or to put.
Peace Anwar,
This is not the correct perception. Arabic Roots mirror all physical realities regarding the concept/perception infolded therein. will never reflect a thought of distancing away something upwardly. The perception infolded in the Root is to lay down, place a thing at a certain location of reach with the result that it becomes conspicous and evident. And where it is placed conspicuously that location/place becomes , scene, spot, location, position. With this background passive voice is also used in the meanings "to appoint"-see dictionary compiled by Abdul Manan Omar.
-
Peace,
Whatever, I told you what the word means. Look it up in lisaanul-Arab if you want to know the real meaning of the word. Abdul-mannaan's dictionary is severely limited. However, Arabic words CAN have multiple meanings and they often do. As someone who knows Arabic very well i can vouch for that. That's all I have to say really. If you want to believe what you want to out of your own ignorance then that is on you.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Whatever, I told you what the word means. Look it up in lisaanul-Arab if you want to know the real meaning of the word. Abdul-mannaan's dictionary is severely limited. However, Arabic words CAN have multiple meanings and they often do. As someone who knows Arabic very well i can vouch for that. That's all I have to say really. If you want to believe what you want to out of your own ignorance then that is on you.
Godbless,
AnwarLisaanul-Arab says
-
You can read many sites on the archive.org but not all.
