What is the meaning of SuJuD according to The Quran? - new article

Mazhar

2724 "And I found her and her people SJuD to/for the sun instead of God! And the devil had made their works/deeds appear good to them, so averting/hindering them from the path, so they are not guided."
2725 "Will they not SJuD to God who brings out what is hidden in the heavens and the Earth, and He knows what you hide and what you declare?"
Note it says the hoopoe "found" (wajad) them, not "saw" (raayt) them as in Joseph's dream in which he saw the moon/sun/planets SJD to/for him. Of course, moon/sun/planets do not physically prostrate as humans do, so what Joseph saw was something else. Interestingly, if we look at the CAD meanings, the only possibilities seem to be honour, submit, pay respect, make obeisance. So they must have did an observable display of SJD, but not traditional prostration.
Now let us consider what the hoopoe found. We already know that when the shadows turn to the right and left (i.e. any direction) it is SJD to/for God. When shadows are cast, they point away from the sun, thus if we take it as SJD=prostration here then the only possibility is that they were prostrating TO the sun in a directional manner. This deduction may seem obvious to some, but if that is the case, why does it not say "saw" them? In 2743 the reasoning given for her (Queen of Sheba) not realising the truth or error of her ways is "And averted/hindered her what she used to serve besides God".
So let us assume it means a traditional prostration, how can one identify whom the prostration is done to? It is difficult considering God is everywhere and it is a fact that sometimes in many countries people will be prostrating in the direction of the cuboid called Kabbah in Mecca but the sun/moon will also be in this direction. Thus in such cases how can one differentiate? Quite simply they cannot, unless by observing and considering other acts, hence the likely use of "works/deeds" in 2724.
If we actually imagine what the verse implies, i.e. they should have been prostrating to God not to the sun, so this would imply any other direction apart from to the sun, but even if this was the case, it is impossible to conclude what is being prostrated to. It could have been a star, planet, building in that direction, another deity that requires a specific direction. The point is, by seeing a prostration it is impossible to deduce the object of prostration. It could be argued the hoopoe somehow worked it out, but if we go by what AQ actually says, it strongly implies it was their deeds/works that gave them away.
It is interesting that this verse is commonly cited as evidence of physical prostration when in fact it is not. At best, it is neutral.
Some have suggested "hearing and obeying" or "obedience" as the meaning of SJD but this is ruled out by 2724, as it is impossible to do this with the sun, i.e. an object that gives no commands.

And this argument is also the effect of preconceived thought/understanding of the word sjd and an effort to divert it to that direction, otherwise a little attention would have indicated why one used the word "" and the other . One is referring to dream and is using Active participle, while the other is reporting his physical findings in daylight and is using a verb indicating their habitual course of action.

ths

It is heartening to see that Mazhar, Hasan and ths who presumably hold the view of sjd=prostration resort to ad hominen attacks, unevidenced claims and none tackle any of the points brought up in the article via evidence/logic based discussion. This suggests to me I'm on the right track

Show me where I or Mazhar resorted to ad hominem attacks. If you can't, then I shall presume you to be a liar
We have given plenty of evidence in this forum - two people who can read and write Arabic - and you, in characteristic fashion, shrug it all off and stubbornly stick with your own views.
I did not give evidence because I treat people reciprocally. People who treat me well, I treat well. You made the useless unsubstantiated comment of having poor logic in my article, and thus I am returning the favour. This is now the 3rd or 4th time I catch you mocking someone for something you had done already. Typical.
Instead of presuming you're on the right track, which you seem to do enough already, how about presuming that the reason your views have failed to gain much acceptance in this forum in the past few years - is because they are incorrect views.

But I do like the spirit, perhaps I might go and translate a Japanese book now...or maybe a Quechua one ;D

1CELOSTNOWFOUND

Peace All

I am following this thread with great interest. Have any of the other participants in this discussion (specifically Mazhar, ths or Hasan) done a comparative study of the usage of SJD in the Quran? If you have, please post a link to your study. This would be of great help as we can then evaluate you concept of the subject as a whole rather than back and forth retaliations that seem to be taking place between members.

Imraan

Wakas

peace all,

Mazhar,
Once again you make posts with no reference whatsoever to refuting anything. You seem to simply comment without providing anything definitive. Just pick out one thing I wrote in my article and disprove it in a clear and evidenced manner.

ths,
Thanks for clarifying to the forum why you responded the way you did. As for ad hominen attacks, please see "...you will simply have to face the fact that you cannot reinvent the Arabic language to suit your desires." and "Of course, this is easily done by someone who knows no Arabic whatsoever...".

On the contrary ths, it is you who is the liar. In any case, in order to identify an "ad hominen" one must exercise logic. If unsure, feel free to ask someone else.

Imraan,
If you are following this discussion with "great interest", perhaps you can help me out by pinpointing exactly where a definitive point was made by ths/Mazhar/Hasan using logic or Quranic evidence? The same request goes out to other forum members.

1CELOSTNOWFOUND

Peace Wakas

Wakas wrote

Imraan,
If you are following this discussion with "great interest", perhaps you can help me out by pinpointing exactly where a definitive point was made by ths/Mazhar/Hasan using logic or Quranic evidence? The same request goes out to other forum members.

In response to this, I can't pick out such a point. This is why I asked if they may have done a comparative study of the term SJD in the Quran. It doesn't help reacting to selective points in someone's research, while ignoring others, especially if one has not done a wholistic study of the subject. It is always easy to debate in order to uphold one's own understanding of the Quran in isolation. Once a thorough cross referencing is done, though it is not so easy anymore. In fact, once this is done objectively, in my experience one often concludes something very different from what is expected.

I therefore hope that there are studies done by those who refute your conclusions that may provide a balanced view by, at the very least, providing an understanding of SJD that stands the test of universal usage throughout the Quran.

Imraan

Mazhar

Peace Wakas,

The matter gets resolved if you simply answer this question

Why should you do all this? What you want to gain out of it? Please narrate objective that you personally wish to obtain by sjd, in whatever manner you wish to do this.

Mazhar

I am following this thread with great interest. Have any of the other participants in this discussion (specifically Mazhar, ths or Hasan) done a comparative study of the usage of SJD in the Quran?

I hope you have also gone through Wakas's write up linked with first post.

The occurrence of this word which was absent in the write up was pointed out in my first post for consideration.

Peace,

This is also there in the Qur'aan.

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/096.%20Al%20Alq/96.9a.gif
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/096.%20Al%20Alq/96.10a.gif
Have you noticed that man who advises/orally forbids a man/allegiant when he performs Salat?

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/096.%20Al%20Alq/96.15a.gif
Nay, it is certain that if he did not incline himself to desist from forbidding performance of Salat, We will certainly drag him by the forelock;

http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/096.%20Al%20Alq/96.19a.gif
No, the better way is that you should not listen and accept the forbidding word of that man; and you prostrate and consciously incline yourself to get nearer .

Surat Al-Alq-96

Out of 92 occurrences of word made from this Root above is the last one which remained neglected in the study. And that is why I am asking to determine what is the purpose and objective that any one should do it, sjd. What is so unusual in it that it should not be responded?

1CELOSTNOWFOUND

Peace Mazhar,

I don't understand what bearing your reference to the verses in surah 96 has on the discussion. Do these particular verses somehow render the conclusions that Wakas has come up with in his study problematic or contradictory? If it doesn't, I don't find any value in your referencing it.

Imraan

Wakas

peace all,

Imraan,
Thanks for the clarification. You're not the only one. Personally, I love to be corrected and improve my understanding, but if no credible point is made, I see little point in replying.

Mazhar,

Out of 92 occurrences of word made from this Root above is the last one which remained neglected in the study.

9619 is covered in the article. Perhaps you meant something like "not covered in the way I'd like". I repeat Just pick out one thing I wrote in my article and disprove it in a clear and evidenced manner.

ths

Thanks for clarifying to the forum why you responded the way you did. As for ad hominen attacks, please see "...you will simply have to face the fact that you cannot reinvent the Arabic language to suit your desires." and "Of course, this is easily done by someone who knows no Arabic whatsoever...".

On the contrary ths, it is you who is the liar. In any case, in order to identify an "ad hominen" one must exercise logic. If unsure, feel free to ask someone else.

Hahahaha, wakas, I suggest you check this page on ad hominems, since as you so rightly pointed out identifying ad hominems requires some logic.

I wasn't making any statement about the veracity of your article, I was stating a fact that you don't even deny - you don't know Arabic, and are trying to put new interpretations on words in Arabic.

My comment about your article (if you are capable of reading) was

Salaam, I skimmed it, and there is nothing wrong, per se, with your article, except of course for a few absences of logic (such as in kharra sujjadan).
But everyone who is remotely familiar with the language knows that the word has multiple meanings and connotations.

Brother Wakas, if you are sensing any hostility in this forum towards you, (which by now you should), you can thank yourself. I am not the only one who has commented on your attitude towards people, and you know that. If you had fostered an air of brotherhood and mutual discovery in this forum, we would not be wasting our time discussing tit for tat snides like a bunch of children, but the actual merits of your article.

Oh believers! Do not let any people among you mock another, lest they be better than them. 4911

Wakas

Actually ths, I dont sense hostility on the forum at all, only from you.

I wasn't making any statement about the veracity of your article...

That's the most sensible thing you've said so far, and I fully agree. As they say, sometimes a silence speaks louder than words.

;D

ths

Speaking of your article (and language skills) Wakas, you seem to make a blatant mistake

As a side note, there are other Arabic words used in AQ which can have a meaning of physical prostration, e.g. Kaf-Ba-Ba, Siin-Tay-Ra, Ta-Lam-Lam, Kaf-Ba-Ta.

Kabba means to push someone/something. It is used twice in the Quran - neither time to express prostration as you laughably claim. Can you not tell the difference between pushing someone and prostration??
Siin-tay-ra ?? Where did you pull this information from?
Project Quran List gives the following hits for verses with siin-tay-ra

satara vb. (1)
impf. act. 681
pcple. pass. 1758, 336, 522

asatir n.f. (pl. of usturah) 625, 831, 1624, 2383, 255, 2768, 4617, 6815, 8313

istatara vb. ( pcple. pass. 5453

Not one single verse above uses siin-tay-ra to mean anything related to prostration.
Siin-tay-ra is used unequivocally and indefinitely in the Quran to refer to tales, inscription, and the act of inscribing.

Examples

= inscribed
= overseer
= inscribed
= inscribers / registrars
= to inscribe
= tales

So congratulations on that

Ta-lam-lam means to push someone, or to force someone down. It is used once in the Quran, when Abraham puts his son facedown on the ground.
Kaf-ba-ta

Kaf-Ba-Ta = To abase, throw down, restrain, overwhelm, prostrate, expose ignominy, humble, vanquish with humiliation, be laid low and humbled, cause to perish, deny a person what he desires, to disappoint a person, to be enraged and grieved, restrain one's rage in his inside or bosom, smite or hurt one's liver, fall prostrate upon one's face.

kabata vb. (1)
impf. act. 3127
perf. pass. 585, 585

It is used twice in the Quran, and in each time it is used to connote humiliation and defeat.

3127 (arberry) and that He might cut off a part of the unbelievers or frustrate them, so that they turned in their tracks, disappointed.
585 (arberry) Surely those who oppose God and His Messenger shall be frustrated as those before them were frustrated . Now We have sent down signs, clear signs; and for the unbelievers awaits a humbling chastisement

I chose Arberry's translation because he was an actual linguist.

The point is Wakas, you either don't know the difference of willful prostration and shoving someone to the ground, or you just don't care and are only interested in furthering your own view of what sujood is.

Lastly, it may interest you to know that none of your options mean willful prostration, because sujood already means that. My Jewish friend recently told me that in hebrew, prostration during prayer is called "sigd". This naturally complements the view expressed in the Encyclopedia of the Quran that sujood was known to Arabs through Christian and Jewish acts of worship prior to Islam.

A 30-second googling reveals this

In Amharic, Sigd means ?to bow down? and shares its root with the word for temple (mesgid).
From here

san

ths,

this reply is specific to your post which i will quote below.

Oh believers! Do not let any people among you mock another, lest they be better than them. 4911

You ended your post with a very relevant verse. On-the-spot. How your mock-checker left this one is beyond me

My comment about your article (if you are capable of reading) was

There's no need to highlight which one since i'm 100% sure that you have the intelligence to understand my point.

Be careful about details. They will show who you are as you let them slip.

Mazhar

Peace Wakas amd Imran,

I only want anwer to this since I believe it will make the perception of the word sjd very clear.

Quote
Please note, that is not to say body-physical acts are not allowed. A human being is composed of mind, body and spirit and often body-physical acts can serve to show respect, self-abasement and humility, used as a greeting, or focus our mind etc such as the practice of meditation, tai chi, yoga or kneeling when in supplication to God etc. It simply means that the argument for SJD=prostration and therefore prostration during upholding/establishing the salat cannot be made using The Quran.

Why should you do all this? What you want to gain out of it? Please narrate objective that you personally wish to obtain by sjd, in whatever manner you wish to do this.

ths

Be careful about details. They will show who you are as you let them slip.

San, you missed this

I treat people reciprocally. People who treat me well, I treat well. You made the useless unsubstantiated comment of having poor logic in my article, and thus I am returning the favour.

Like I said, I treat people reciprocally. If they treat me poorly, I treat them poorly. You can call this hypocrisy or a character flaw or whatever you like, but i call it The Golden Rule

When I first joined freeminds, I showed the utmost respect to everyone on the forum, until that is, Wakas began to make snarky childish comments about my posts....childish things like questioning whether I can speak English because of a typo.

I've even made several posts on this forum beseeching people to drop the childish jibes. The irony is that in any mainstream Sunni forum you'll hear nothing but the best behaviour....but I guess that is a cultural thing.

This is how I first addressed Wakas, always prefacing my posts with complements and respect

Salaam Wakas,

I just read your link Disproved once and for all salat=prayer
It was really interesting reading, and you make a very compelling argument

Salaam Wakas,

So I went through your articles again..I've gone through them several times over the past few months since I discovered them. They really are great, so thanks for them.

And how was I spoken to?

And I'm now satisfied with this answer.

That is a shame because your above post was very poor.

I respond with courtesy, as I usually try to do

Well firstly, I appreciate the time you're putting into responding to us, given that you've taken part in these discussions in the past,

And these are the response

You created a strawman logical fallacy, yet use terms such as "illogicality". Not to mention you provided subjective and effectively useless % weightings.

It seems you cannot read properly.

I'm afraid after that the discussion descended into snarky jabs, as is the norm now. I made several attempts to induce some more mature behaviour, but to no avail

Hahaha Wakas you really are a master of inferring what you want, and then being arrogant about it.

You have zero courtesy, and have made this debate into an unpleasurable one through the use of ad hominems, one after the other.

You repeatedly accuse me of not knowing how to read properly. Cut it out. It's arrogant, and makes you look like an infant in a schoolyard.

Now I simply choose to treat him the way he treats me. Perhaps it'll teach him a lesson.
I come here to learn about the Quran without dogmatic interference, and to have my views challenged. It's certainly not for the conversation anymore. If you are an ass to people, then they will be an ass to you. This is the first lesson they teach you in kindergarten.

san

ths,

Thank you for your response. I'll leave the specific (personal) points to be answered by the respective person. I will not judge between anyone here.

My personal opinion on this matter from my experience, treating a person the same way he/she treats me, in a negative sense, has never worked well.

Even from the link you gave above, the "Golden Rule"

One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive form)

(the keyword being "positive&quot.

And the way i read it, the "Silver Rule" does not leave out a chance for equally-negative response either

One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative/prohibitive form, also called the Silver Rule)

No, these two rules does not make its followers a "perfect mirror". The second one leads back to the first.

My point is, if, this is a personal game that you are playing, why not try to stay positive and win it?

ths

Thanks san, you are right I do need to check my temper occassionally

Wakas

Thanks ths for actually posting a reply based on the content of my article.

Firstly, it was a side note and I wrote (emphasis mine)

As a side note, there are other Arabic words used in AQ which can have a meaning of physical prostration, e.g. Kaf-Ba-Ba, Siin-Tay-Ra, Ta-Lam-Lam, Kaf-Ba-Ta.

Kabba means to push someone/something. It is used twice in the Quran - neither time to express prostration as you laughably claim. Can you not tell the difference between pushing someone and prostration??

Actually, some translators translate it as "falls on his face", "face close to the ground", "grovelling on his face" etc. This can be easily verified by anyone
http//www.islamawakened.com/Quran/67/22/default.htm

Also, as anyone can clearly see in 6722 no-one is pushing anyone.

A CAD meaning of STR is prostrate but AFAIK this is not used in AQ.

As a side note, you used the word "indefinitely" incorrectly.

Similarly, with TLL. Although my understanding of 37103 is not of laying someone down, prostrate is a CAD meaning. As a side note, Abraham did not push/force him down, as he was willing as can be seen in 37102.

Similarly with KBT, prostrate is a CAD meaning.

Upon reviewing those roots I noticed I had not included two which have now been added Jiim-Tha-Miim and Saad-Ra-Ayn, and I have clarified the wording to "roots" to prevent confusion.

The point is Wakas, you either don't know the difference of willful prostration and shoving someone to the ground, or you just don't care and are only interested in furthering your own view of what sujood is.

Lastly, it may interest you to know that none of your options mean willful prostration, because sujood already means that.

As you can see with KBB and TLL there is no forcing, however you make a critical error which is easily exposed in my article

1315 ...to/for God SJD who is in the heavens and the earth, willingly and unwillingly, and their shadows in the mornings and late-afternoons.
Contextually implying that the same SJD is done by the shadows as well as who is in the heavens/earth, meaning it is unlikely for it to mean prostrate here. If we accept that someone may prostrate physically (nose and forehead on ground) willingly, how can we understand this unwillingly? Does God push people on their faces forcefully so that they fall down on their noses and foreheads unwillingly? It is clear that physical prostration with noses and foreheads has nothing to do with it in this case.

As everyone can see, SJD can be done unwillingly. This is 100% FACT, and refutes your position.

My Jewish friend recently told me that in hebrew, prostration during prayer is called "sigd". This naturally complements the view expressed in the Encyclopedia of the Quran that sujood was known to Arabs through Christian and Jewish acts of worship prior to Islam.

A 30-second googling reveals this
In Amharic, Sigd means ?to bow down? and shares its root with the word for temple (mesgid).
From here

Thanks for this information. That explains perfectly where the concept likely came from, and got interjected into AQ. I notice on that page that celebration is linked to Ezra, and we all know AQ's take on that, see 930. In fact, even in their use of the word, that celebration is not all about prostrating, it is other things also, which relates to what I wrote. I think I will incorporate this info into the article.

ths

Actually, some translators translate it as "falls on his face", "face close to the ground", "grovelling on his face" etc. This can be easily verified by anyone
http//www.islamawakened.com/Quran/67/22/default.htm

Also, as anyone can clearly see in 6722 no-one is pushing anyone.

The point is wakas, that kabba has a connotation of humiliation and abasement. Prostration is not meant to be a humiliating act of defeat.

6722 uses in that sense. The meaning of kabba has not changed in modern times, and still holds this connotation.

Similarly, with TLL. Although my understanding of 37103 is not of laying someone down, prostrate is a CAD meaning. As a side note, Abraham did not push/force him down, as he was willing as can be seen in 37102.

TLL is of laying someone down or pushing someone down. Abraham's son had accepted his fate - but he was still put into position by someone else. This is completely and utterly different from prostration to get nearer to God.

Prostration to God has the connotations of humility, submission, closeness, which are all good things. The words you have put here as 'options' all carry negative connotations, and you know this.

As everyone can see, SJD can be done unwillingly. This is 100% FACT, and refutes your position.

Hahahah...the heavens and the earth are not humans Wakas. Birds and trees and wind are not humans either. That is why birds and trees do not go to heaven, my friend, but humans do. Because they have free will.

Upon reviewing those roots I noticed I had not included two which have now been added Jiim-Tha-Miim and Saad-Ra-Ayn, and I have clarified the wording to "roots" to prevent confusion.

This is so ironic. For someone who is always preaching about the Quran's poetic and linguistic precision "par-excellence", you are willing to throw every random word that has any distantly related meaning to physical movement to appease your preconceived verdict.

No, JTHM does not mean prostration.

778 Thereupon an earthquake overtook them and then they lay lifeless, in their very homes, on the ground.

It is clearly a different word, with a different connotation.

JTHM is used in every single instant to convey a negative destruction by God in this phrase

As for SR3

It is used once, in 697

...violent that He compelled against them seven nights and eight days, uninterruptedly, and thou mightest see the people laid prostrate in it as if they were the stumps of fallen down palm-trees.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that these are the same as prostration during prayer?

That is like saying, "why have a different word for prayer if we can just use 'talk'?"
or why have a different word for Zakah if we can just use the word "give"?
or why have a different word for sleeping if we can just say "lying down"?

None of these words have anywhere near the correct connotation to be used to express physical prostration during prayer.

Wakas

I forgot to say, your cherry-picking of quotes was interesting. One would have thought a simple link to the thread would suffice, so people can read the context. In any case can you quote where I said

...like questioning whether I can speak English because of a typo.

You already lied about me once in this thread (saying I knew "no Arabic whatsoever&quot, I hope this is not a second time.

Hahahah...the heavens and the earth are not humans Wakas. Birds and trees and wind are not humans either. That is why birds and trees do not go to heaven, my friend, but humans do. Because they have free will.

This is where your ignorance and arrogance will be revealed for all to see. Tell us ths, as someone who claims to know/speak Arabic, what does the relative pronoun "man" refer to in 1315?