What is the meaning of SuJuD according to The Quran? - new article
-
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?
Wakas, there is no "man" in that verse. It says "man fil samaawaati wal ard" - ie whatever beings are in the heaven and earth, as yusuf ali translates it.
But thanks for clarifying your own Arabic skill.
-
Wakas, there is no "man" in that verse. It says "man fil samaawaati wal ard" - ie whatever beings are in the heaven and earth, as yusuf ali translates it.
But thanks for clarifying your own Arabic skill.
You say there is no "man" then quote the transliteration with "man" in it! Allow me to expose you for all to see
From http//arabic.tripod.com/RelativePronouns1.htm
"who" is used for humans.
I know who did that.
The Arabic equivalent would be
Who / Whom
man
This word is specific for humans, and it has only this single form for all cases, numbers, and genders.
And also please cite the evidence I requested about your allegation against me. Thanks.
-
Wakas, there is no "man" in that verse. It says "man fil samaawaati wal ard" - ie whatever beings are in the heaven and earth, as yusuf ali translates it.
But thanks for clarifying your own Arabic skill.
Since when this "human class" is excepted from "whoever/whatever is in the skies and earth"?
-
I thought you meant "man" in english, I was rushing too much. I see that you wrote relative pronoun. However, that doesn't change much. Forcing someone down or pushing someone to the ground is completely different from prostration in prayer, so I don't see what your point is, besides of course simply trying to prove me wrong in anything..
I have always said that sujood is a complex word bearing many many connotations. I am not the one trying to peg a single-word definition onto it like "submission".The Arabic equivalent would be
Who / Whom
man
This word is specific for humans, and it has only this single form for all cases, numbers, and genders.
To quote Muhammad Asad
However, in view of the subsequent reference to "shadows" it is logical to assume
that the relative pronoun man relates in this context not merely to conscious beings but also to
all other physical objects, whether animate or inanimate - i.e., to "all things and beings that
are in the heavens and on earth".So in the context of the verse, it certainly means whatever beings.
So I apologize for rushing, next time I'll take my time, lest you piss yourself with excitement
Allow me to expose you for all to see
Typical schoolyard language as usual. Perhaps I will crank up the font size and add some nice colours everytime I "expose" you for something mistaken that you've said.
I am adult enough to admit when I've said something wrong, and you're right in the sense that willingness does not matter per se.
But as I said before, you cannot make a blanket statement and say that sujood is not physical simply because it is used in a different sense in this one verse.
And the words you posted as 'options' have nowhere near the same connotation. That is simply grasping at straws. Force from a human being is different from force from God. Shoving, or throwing someone can never, and was never used to convey prostration during prayer.
-
But as I said before, you cannot make a blanket statement and say that sujood is not physical simply because it is used in a different sense in this one verse.
(taking the word "physical" aside)
One verse? Don't you notice he's considered all its occurrences in his article?
Maybe it's time for those so keen on opposing Wakas' view to do what Imraan has suggested
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.
-
One verse? Don't you notice he's considered all its occurrences in his article?
This is my point - he doesn't. He doesn't understand Arabic grammar, and so he makes grievous mistakes throughout his analysis. I covered his analysis of 2573 before, as well as his analysis of 17107, both of which are grievously misguided. This isn't a new topic san, we've been discussing this for years, and Wakas has been pushing his interpretations for years now on freeminds.
All I ask is that instead of stabbing blindly in the dark with google translate and other such garbage, that he actually consults a linguist on things to do with arabic grammar that he clearly lacks understanding of, like 2573. Not to do so is as arrogant as me translating a Chinese textbook using nothing but google translate - it's laughable. There are errors throughout his work that have been pointed out repeatedly on the forums by people. This kind of haphazard couch-scholarship is unethical and will only serve to confuse or misguide Asian and Western muslims with no knowledge of arabic.
And lastly, no one has ever denied that sujood is a loaded topic to study. You will never find a single traditional scholar tell you that it simply means bending over. There are dozens of sunni texts which talk about the subtle nuances of the word sujood, and that is all a part of the beauty of the Quran's poetry. However, you will never ever find a scholar who argues that it doesn't have a physical connotation to it - that is only a bid3a of freeminds.
-
Re reply #44
ths, it does not surprise me you failed to read properly. You do this repeatedly.
I noticed you conveniently missed out the first part of Asad's note on 1315
The expression yasjud ("prostrates himself" or "prostrate themselves" is a metonym for complete submission to His will (Zamakhshari), that is, to the natural laws decreed by Him with regard to everything that exists. According to most of the classical commentators, those who submit to God willingly (i.e., consciously) are the angels and the believers, whereas the deniers of the truth, who are "not willing" to submit to Him, are nevertheless, without being conscious of it, subject to His will.
And just because Asad says 1315 refers to all things, does not mean he is correct. In fact, with the use of logic we can show he is very likely wrong, because 1315 uses "man" which specifically means "who/whoever" and then it says "their shadows", thus if "man" referred to all things there would be no need to add "their shadows" on at the end. Further, not all things in the heavens and earth have shadows, thus we can easily see the evidence clearly points to man=who/whoever, referring to human beings.
Of course, such a finding is hard to stomach for anyone who thinks SJD means prostration.
But as I said before, you cannot make a blanket statement and say that sujood is not physical simply because it is used in a different sense in this one verse.
That is why I never made a blanket statement. Unlike some, I try to be accurate in what I say. Allow me to quote you the end line of my article
It simply means that no credible argument for SJD=prostration and therefore prostration during upholding/establishing the salat can be made using The Quran.
Here is a simple challenge open to all
- cite just one verse in the entire Quran where SJD definitely means or can only mean a physical prostration.
Such a simple request.
-
Quran's poetry
Peace ths,
Pl be cautious, don't ever use word "poetry" attributing it to Qur'aan.
Humble, humbleness, humility is a feeling and acknowledgement of grandeur of someone else. And feelings get manifested or need to be manifested particularly when it is with regard to someone else. And what could be the ultimate manifestation of ones expression of humility before some one else? Could it be other than laying one's forhead before him/Him?
-
Interesting. I have read through this in bits all the time thinking of course it means prostration but i think I had a light bulb moment somewhere along the way and I think I can see where Wakas is coming from.
Don't have a lot of time now but in short, there are millions of muslims who physically 'prostrate' but don't SJD, if I got it right on what he's saying. The physical is only the physical part of showing your SJD but not actually SJD itself. It is a complete and total submitting to Gods Will, absolute, 100%, heart burstingly, and one does not have to physically do that to 'do' it. The thing that switched the light bulb on was the unwillingly bit which are those things without free will and submit because that's what they were made to do without free will. We have a choice in 'accepting' it or not but ultimately everyone has no choice as if it were Gods will to extinguish us here and now there is no choice for us anyway, but to willingly submit and totally accept is SJD and the face to the floor is only the physical 'action' of that submission, so SJD can be done without that just as many do the face to the floor without the SJD.
Someone tell me some of that makes sense. laugh
-
Interesting. I have read through this in bits all the time thinking of course it means prostration but i think I had a light bulb moment somewhere along the way and I think I can see where Wakas is coming from.
Don't have a lot of time now but in short, there are millions of muslims who physically 'prostrate' but don't SJD, if I got it right on what he's saying. The physical is only the physical part of showing your SJD but not actually SJD itself. It is a complete and total submitting to Gods Will, absolute, 100%, heart burstingly, and one does not have to physically do that to 'do' it. The thing that switched the light bulb on was the unwillingly bit which are those things without free will and submit because that's what they were made to do without free will. We have a choice in 'accepting' it or not but ultimately everyone has no choice as if it were Gods will to extinguish us here and now there is no choice for us anyway, but to willingly submit and totally accept is SJD and the face to the floor is only the physical 'action' of that submission, so SJD can be done without that just as many do the face to the floor without the SJD.
Someone tell me some of that makes sense. laugh
wow hail
-
We have a choice in 'accepting' it or not but ultimately everyone has no choice as if it were Gods will to extinguish us here and now there is no choice for us anyway, but to willingly submit and totally accept is SJD and the face to the floor is only the physical 'action' of that submission, so SJD can be done without that just as many do the face to the floor without the SJD.
Someone tell me some of that makes sense.
Ayisha,
Well done. It is full of sense. You reminded me of 2218
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/022.%20Al%20Hajj/22.18d.gif
and many from amongst the human beings prostrate;
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/022.%20Al%20Hajj/22.18e.gif
and many are those upon whom the punishment has become incumbent.Surat Al Hujj-2218
-
People should chillax a bit here.
For one, if you are going to post verses of admonishment, keep mind of
612 - O you who believe! why do you say that which you do not do?
613 - It is most hateful to Allah that you should say that which you do not do.This applies to ALL sides.
Also, the entire quran is practically a warning to those whose belief stops at the tongue. Islamic belief is strictly defined by action in the quran and it doesn't take a genius to see that. So those supporting the view of a physical prostration, please explain your understanding on why the creator suddenly turns back and tells us that certain repetitive physical actions are the hallmark of belief?
There is yet undeniably a physical component (ablution).
-
peace OPF,
There is yet undeniably a physical component (ablution).
I agree. However, to clarify, I use the term "physical prostration" so there is little confusion for the reader as to what I mean. You will never see me use a term like "physical salat" or such like because that term is invalid and illogical. Nowhere do I say or imply that "salat" has no physical component etc. This has been discussed several times on the forum. For my view on "salat" see here http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/slw.htm
-
peace OPF,
I agree. However, to clarify, I use the term "physical prostration" so there is little confusion for the reader as to what I mean. You will never see me use a term like "physical salat" or such like because that term is invalid and illogical. Nowhere do I say or imply that "salat" has no physical component etc. This has been discussed several times on the forum. For my view on "salat" see here http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/slw.htm
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 no credible argument for SJD=prostration and therefore prostration during upholding/establishing the salat can be made using The Quran.
There seems a need for arriving at clear and vivid picture about the word .
-- is a verb and active participle. The verb is a word that signifies the occurrence of an action or the existence of a state in association with the past, present or future tense. No other signification is attributable to a verb. The said verb is intransitive.
-
peace all,
Re http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html
Summary SJD ~ submissive, to honour, to pay respect (to give acknowledgement/recognition in a subservient/submissive manner)I am currently writing the follow up to this SuJuD article, which will discuss the terms "masjid", "masjid al haram" and "masjid al aqsa".
Since I am way behind schedule on this, and unlikely to be able to finish it for at least several months, I thought I'd post my preliminary findings here so they can be pondered upon
masjid ~ time of SJD
al masjid al haram ~ the inviolable time of SJD
al masjid al aqsa ~ the farthest/remote/distant time of SJD
The time period in question here is the inviolable months/full-moons/lunar-cycles.Dont worry if you do not understand the above, or even believe it possible, as it will be discussed in detail in the article, God Willing.
The primary reason for the delay in publishing the article, is that I need to vigorously check it, because IF true, it has the potential to completely revolutionise our understanding of The Quran, particularly al hajj, and Islamic history.
And do not follow what you have no knowledge of; surely the hearing, the sight and the heart, all of these, shall be questioned about that.
