What Mustansir Mir really says about kharruu liladhqaan
-
Salaam all
There has been a long-term debate on this forum about the interpretation of 17107 and 17109, where God uses the term kharruu liladhqaani sujjadan
The literal translation is they fell to their chins in prostration
The traditional interpretation of this is that is an idiom, meaning they fell to their faces in prostration.
Lane's Lexicon gives us a few similar examples to help us understand this idom
-- A wind blew violently, so that the trees fell, or bent themselves down to the ground
-- The wind blew,and overturned, or threw down, or bent down, the trees
(of a stone) -- The torrent overturned it.All of the above examples use the phrase "to the chins" to mean a dramatic fall, or falling speedily or in earnest.
-
The tree "fell to the chins".
-
The tree was "overturned to its chins".
-
The stone was "overturned to its chin".
However, I learnt of a new interpretation on this forum, whereby the entire phrase is an idiom. I was told over and over again by Wakas that Mustansir Mir holds this view
Professor Mustansir Mir (who is known for his linguistic skills) takes it as an idiom as I have already mentioned.
See Mustansir Mir. If "fall to the chin" is an idiomatic expression, then it would be "fall to the chin acknowledging/recognising" (i.e. acknowledge completely / to the utmost). Simple.
Professor Mustansir Mir is very clear in "Verbal Idioms of The Quran", in which he cites "fall to the chin" as a verbal idiom meaning extreme humility, for the chin represents pride, it is something to be held high, and to fall down on one's chin is to abase oneself, and when used in The Quran means to humble oneself before God, and cites Classical Arabic poem by Imru al-Qays about how mighty trees were humbled by a strong downpour of rain, and they "fell to the chin".
Grammatically, the accusative word "sujjudan" in "yakhorruun lil'adhqaan sujjudan" names the action or manner of the verb preceding. In other words, it describes how "they fell to their chins". So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical.
I have again and again in this forum argued that it is a poetic device to express intensity
Dhaqn is a linguistic way of adding stress to the action of falling. To emphasise that it wasn't just any old fall, but a mighty fall.
Kharruu lilidhqaani is an Arabic saying denoting 'falling swiftly' or 'crashing down'. It is used to add stress to 'kharruu'
So let us see what Mir actually says
kharra Ii dh-dhaqani, to fall down on one's face in humility 17107.
Also 17109.
Kharra 1i dh-dhaqani implies extreme humility, for the chin represents pride-it issomething to be held high-and to fall down on one's chin is to abase oneself, which in the case of the two verses means to humble oneself before God. Describing aflood scene, lmru' al-Qays (2470) speaks of the impact of the heavy rain on huge trees (24/70) fa adIhi yasuh- hu I-mi'a Can kulli fqatin/yakubbu Cali I-adhqini dawha I- kanahbuT, "After each intermission, the clouds began to pour down water, which tossed the great kanahbul-trees down on their chins" (cf. Acshi, 87/56, and ibid., 135/56; Suh., 48/30). Cf. kharra 1i anfihT, as in Damrah ibn Damrah an-Nahshar, Mufadd., 635/9.So let us finally agree that the Sunni view, the logical view, and Mustansir Mir's view all correlate.
The verse means to fall down on one's face in sujood.
It carries with it the connotations of extreme humility, abasement, and falling in prostration. Thus it is clear that 17107 relates falling to the ground with the act of sujood.
-
-
I opened this thinking "this is it, this is where Wakas gets totally and utterly crushed, finally, yes, end of the line!" and then, there was much disappointment. Mustansir Mir was saying what Wakas has been claiming Mustansir Mir has been saying. Why tempt us through enticing topic headers and then not deliver? Why?!
Anyways, a couple comments.
So let us finally agree that the Sunni view, the logical view, and Mustansir Mir's view all correlate.
The verse means to fall down on one's face in sujood.
It carries with it the connotations of extreme humility, abasement, and falling in prostration. Thus it is clear that 17107 relates falling to the ground with the act of sujood.
A summary of the post
-Literal Fell to their chins.
-Traditional Fell to their foreheads?/Fell to their faces (probably assume foreheads since falling on noses would hurt like hell, even gently in my case) and this would not be an idiom. It is taking it literally and just calling chins symbolic and exchanging it with faces.
-Lane's Lexicon Fell with intensity.-The sunni view falling on one's face literally/touching forehead to the ground gently.
-The logical view Would this take into consideration grammar/common sense etc as well? Since a logical view would take into consideration all facts as we know them.
-Mustansir Mir's view This is an idiom because no one falls to their chins in real life literally. I assume the last bit about his reasons because, um no one falls to their chins in real life literally unless pushed intensely and thus not having a choice.Alright, given all this...how do all these views combine in one fell smooth swoop? The Sunni's take it literally as an idiom by falling to their foreheads? So, if taking it literally they should technically fall to their chins with intensity but since they are taking it as an idiom, they fall to their foreheads gently literally. The logical view is currently not presented in this post and our favourite Mustansir Mir's view is that it is figurative/symbolic/anything but literally falling to our chins? Unless the Sunni's would think it is falling with intensity on our chins as opposed to gracefully and by including Lane as part of their defence...I don't understand.
What I think you might be saying is that Mir thinks it is NOT an idiom but actually means falling to our faces with intensity literally? And that this intensity should be internalised and not externalised (i.e. our extreme/intense humility is in our heads but we shouldn't slam our faces into the ground). In which case, I would ask anyone (Mir included) if it's obviously being taken as an idiom (as we are ignoring chins and thus straying from the literal aspect), why are we still insisting that it is only physical and that only the chin out of the idiom should be converted into face somehow? It doesn't make sense? It would be like me saying "out of the fire and into the pan!" if I just jumped out of a burning building into the waiting rescue net (thus calling the net a pan and everything else as is) and I don't think God would make bad puns like I could; I seriously doubt it.
Please explain.
-
I opened this thinking "this is it, this is where Wakas gets totally and utterly crushed, finally, yes, end of the line!" and then, there was much disappointment. Mustansir Mir was saying what Wakas has been claiming Mustansir Mir has been saying. Why tempt us through enticing topic headers and then not deliver? Why?!
How is Mustansir Mir saying the same thing as Wakas?? I am totally confused.
Mustansir Mir says "kharra Ii dh-dhaqani, to fall down on one's face"
Wakas view is that no one falls anywhere, and that it is all an idiom to express humiliation.
Those are 2 incredibly different views.
-Literal Fell to their chins.
-Traditional Fell to their foreheads?/Fell to their faces (probably assume foreheads since falling on noses would hurt like hell, even gently in my case) and this would not be an idiom. It is taking it literally and just calling chins symbolic and exchanging it with faces.
-Lane's Lexicon Fell with intensity.-The sunni view falling on one's face literally/touching forehead to the ground gently.
-The logical view Would this take into consideration grammar/common sense etc as well? Since a logical view would take into consideration all facts as we know them.
-Mustansir Mir's view This is an idiom because no one falls to their chins in real life literally. I assume the last bit about his reasons because, um no one falls to their chins in real life literally unless pushed intensely and thus not having a choice.No, everyone says it's an idiom. Even the sunnis and shia interpret it as an idiom. The problem that we have is which part of it is an idiom - do they fall physically, or do they just get humiliated?
So the views are
Traditional They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Lane's Lexicon They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Sunni View They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Mir's view They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (although he doesn't state what he believes sujood to be. But we can safely assume that he has the traditional interpretation).Alright, given all this...how do all these views combine in one fell smooth swoop? The Sunni's take it literally as an idiom by falling to their foreheads? So, if taking it literally they should technically fall to their chins with intensity but since they are taking it as an idiom, they fall to their foreheads gently literally.
Hahaha, this is becoming so confusing. No the way I see it is that they are all in agreement.
The idiom is the chin, none of them deny that anyone falls to the ground. Mir is regurgitating the traditional sunni view 100%. There is literally no difference to what a sheikh told me, and what Mir has written. The chin is simply a poetic device that seems to be confusing everybody.
Lane's example is a good one
(of a stone) -- The torrent overturned it.
The stone was overturned by the torrent, so it physically rolled over. The poetic device of saying it rolled "on its chin" is added to induce drama, and to express that it was a large mighty stone.
Do you see?
-
Grammatically, the accusative word "sujjudan" in "yakhorruun lil'adhqaan sujjudan" names the action or manner of the verb preceding. In other words, it describes how "they fell to their chins". So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical.
Peace, ths
Good analysis.
Pl take this also as input for further analysis.
He has taken "sujjudan" as "names the action or manner of the verb preceding", i.e. Cognate Adverb . And yet concluded "So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical".
A cognate adverb is a Verbal noun/gerund with a meaning very similar to a mentioned action which could be from a Root different than that of the verb, but must have the same meanings.
Is "sujjadan" a verbal noun or activie participle plural?
Verb is intransitive. Can it have a manner of doing?
Sujjadan is "haal" not Cognate Adverb .
What is indicated by the preposition "li"?
-
Thanks Mazhar
A cognate adverb is a Verbal noun/gerund with a meaning very similar to a mentioned action which could be from a Root different than that of the verb, but must have the same meanings.
Yes exactly. Arabic uses very frequently the Cognate Accusative, as in , or
Also, this link gives an excellent account of the traditional sunni view.
Notice this part
, ( ) ( ) .
He is saying that there is a rotation of prepositions, where the laam takes the form of for poetic purposes (balaaghah).
And in this link, you can find an excellent discussion of the grammatical uses of the letter laam.
The problem with these verses is that they make a clear and unambiguous correlation between physical movement and sujood, and this troubles people who believe, or want to believe, that sujood is only mental/emotional.
I talked before about 2573, but since it relates to Arabic grammar, I'll post it here
So in 2573 we have the following
Shakir And they who, when reminded of the communications of their Lord, do not fall down thereat deaf and blind.
Arberry who, when they are reminded of the signs of their Lord, fall not down thereat deaf and blind;
Pickthall And those who, when they are reminded of the revelations of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat.
Yusuf Ali Those who, when they are admonished with the Signs of their Lord, droop not down at them as if they were deaf or blind;So in this case, we have a rotating harf jarr that doesn't mean "on", but "min ithrihaa" - as a result of it
This is shown elsewhere in the Quran
5113
They are saying and so we would be witnesses "on her" - ie. the miracle.
Shakir and that we may be of the witnesses to it.
Arberry and that we may be among its witnesses.
Pickthall and that thereof we may be witnesses.
Yusuf Ali and that we ourselves may be witnesses to the miracle.So again we have 3alayhaa (on her), and yet the most appropriate translation is "witnesses to the miracle"
728
Shakir And when they commit an indecency they say We found our fathers doing this
Arberry And whenever they commit an indecency they say, 'We found our fathers practising it
Pickthall And when they do some lewdness they say We found our fathers doing it
Yusuf Ali When they do aught that is shameful, they say "We found our fathers doing soLiteral And if they made/did an enormous/atrocious deed , they said "We found our fathers on her
Were their fathers literally on the shameful deed? Of course not! They found their fathers at it.
12105
shakir And how many a sign in the heavens and the earth which they pass by, yet they turn aside from it.
arberry How many a sign there is in the heavens and in the earth that they pass by, turning away from it!
pickthall How many a portent is there in the heavens and the earth which they pass by with face averted!
yusuf ali And how many Signs in the heavens and the earth do they pass by? Yet they turn (their faces) away from them!Literal And how many a sign/verse in the skies and the earth, do they pass on her? and they are from it objecting/opposing
And from what I can tell, there are many more similar verses in the Quran.
The point is, that you would never translate these verses any differently, so why do people insist on forcing an interpretation on 2573, when it follows the same principles as these?
-
Mustansir Mir says "kharra Ii dh-dhaqani, to fall down on one's face"
Wakas view is that no one falls anywhere, and that it is all an idiom to express humiliation.
Both are calling them idioms unless you opine Mir is using it as a literal "idiom" in that only one word is an idiom and everything else as is.No, everyone says it's an idiom. Even the sunnis and shia interpret it as an idiom. The problem that we have is which part of it is an idiom - do they fall physically, or do they just get humiliated?
So everyone claims it as an idiom; we only differ in degrees of idiomacy? I agree. Cherry picking one word to change and calling one word an idiom is kinda not an idiom, more like a pun.Traditional They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Lane's Lexicon They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Sunni View They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (onto their foreheads)
Mir's view They fell to their faces in humiliation - in sujood (although he doesn't state what he believes sujood to be. But we can safely assume that he has the traditional interpretation).Trad/Sunni Don't get it as explained before. Why choose one word out of the rest of the sentence and then call it "symbolic/doesn't matter as it's in the same vicinity" while everything is literally the same?
Mir Based on what had been presented I took it as an idiom clearly. No idea what his affiliations are or why I would safely assume that he has the traditional interpretation unless you opine it's the pun thing.The idiom is the chin, none of them deny that anyone falls to the ground. Mir is regurgitating the traditional sunni view 100%. There is literally no difference to what a sheikh told me, and what Mir has written. The chin is simply a poetic device that seems to be confusing everybody.
Lane's example is a good one
(of a stone) -- The torrent overturned it.
The stone was overturned by the torrent, so it physically rolled over. The poetic device of saying it rolled "on its chin" is added to induce drama, and to express that it was a large mighty stone.
So, the torrent overturned the stone on it's chin...given our previous example, this one is actually clearer as we can clearly say stones have no chins. Now, assuming the torrent turned a man over we'd be sitting and arguing whether it was literally on his chin or just very intensely while some sunni somewhere decides that turning over our faces 5 times a day is an absolute necessity.I have yet to see anyone proving that mechanically doing this and saying it is a necessity and must be done in a certain way because the quran tells us in those exact terms. The traditional ritual prayer set is a set of rules cobbled together from different sources and using the quran to justify some of its parts superficially. This is why we see such confusion regarding certain passages and their supposed implementation. If someone takes it entirely as an idiom, why would he be wrong? If someone takes it as a play on words and decides to do it literally except for that one word, we might laud such liberal tendencies until he goes around insisting that it is the only way it can be taken.
The issue is personally speaking, it's clear to me that it is an idiom. If someone says to me "you know Jen? She fell to her chin utterly and intensely humiliated yesterday"... As delicious as the temptation is to ask why, in the context of this conversation most everyone will assume it to be an idiom...entirely. Unless someone tells me no no, it actually literally happened...in which case you'd ask what he's smoking. Then he would try to explain that she fell on her face not chin and that chin was only a pun enhancing the drama! In the grand scheme of things, why does it matter? Because it is used as justification for something that is an alleged necessity and thus it becomes necessary to put a spin on things to make it fit the current model. Honestly, who would make up the traditional prayer set based on what the quran contains today if we had no idea of the traditional prayer set? Would you say okay, ima gonna do this and this and that too because the quran says it heree...wait a minute, what? That's how it would go. A classic case of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole if you'll pardon the idiom.
-
Cherry picking one word to change and calling one word an idiom is kinda not an idiom, more like a pun.
This is not cherry picking. We have a precedent in the Arabic language from Imru-l-qays, where falling to the chin is used as an idiom. I don't see what the problem is, we aren't cherry picking words, we are explaining the idiom - falling to the chin = falling to the face - that is the idiom.
Secondly, if I say "I cannot come to see you today, because I have a lot on my plate", I am saying that I have a lot to do today. Just because I have a lot on my plate is an idiom, it doesn't mean that I don't have a lot to do.
Saying, "i was up yesterday until the wee hours of the night" - I was up yesterday late into the night.
Just because "wee hours of the night" is an idiom, it doesn't mean that night does not mean night. The "wee hours" is the idiom.
Trad/Sunni Don't get it as explained before. Why choose one word out of the rest of the sentence and then call it "symbolic/doesn't matter as it's in the same vicinity" while everything is literally the same?
Again, we aren't taking it because it's "in the vicinity". Mir gives a pre-Islamic verse to show that falling to the chin means to fall on one's face. And Lane gives several examples from the Arabic language.
The stone is overturned - it falls on its chin.
The tree collapses - it falls on its chin.Mir Based on what had been presented I took it as an idiom clearly. No idea what his affiliations are or why I would safely assume that he has the traditional interpretation unless you opine it's the pun thing.
What pun thing?? Do you know what the traditional interpretation of this verse is?
So, the torrent overturned the stone on it's chin...given our previous example, this one is actually clearer as we can clearly say stones have no chins. Now, assuming the torrent turned a man over we'd be sitting and arguing whether it was literally on his chin or just very intensely while some sunni somewhere decides that turning over our faces 5 times a day is an absolute necessity.
This is a good example. If we say the torrent overturned the stone onto its chin - we all understand that the stone was overturned.
If we say the torrent overturned the man on his chin - it means the man was overturned - simple.It doesn't mean he was overturned "onto his chin", nor does it mean he wasn't overturned at all. I really don't know why you are having such trouble understanding this.
The issue is personally speaking, it's clear to me that it is an idiom. If someone says to me "you know Jen? She fell to her chin utterly and intensely humiliated yesterday"... As delicious as the temptation is to ask why, in the context of this conversation most everyone will assume it to be an idiom...entirely
That's because you are speaking in English, and it is an Arabic saying.
Again, if I say Jen "stayed up last night until the wee hours of the night" - you would assume she stayed up late into the night.
If Jen is a ballerina, and she stumbled in an play, I would say "Jen really fell on her chin yesterday" - as in she fell in a really humiliating way.
Come on man, this isn't rocket science.
I think you should have a look again at Mazhar's post about Cognate Adverbs and my post about Cognate Accusatives. -
peace all,
savage_carrot,
Dont worry, you're not the only one who is failing to make sense of what ths is saying.ths,
You state "Wakas view is that no one falls anywhere, and that it is all an idiom to express humiliation."Where did I say that? If you cannot provide evidence, this will be your 3rd lie about me in as many days.
-
I think you should have a look again at Mazhar's post about Cognate Adverbs and my post about Cognate Accusatives.
I hope Mazhar doesn't take this the wrong way, but I have a hard time understanding any of his posts. As for your discussion on grammar etc...I was actually reading a thread where you, ayman and Wakas participated here http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599857.135 It is a shame a good discussion was cut short due to personal differences but I would be interested in whether anyone picks it up again. Otherwise, I'm kinda okay with what can be concluded from that thread.Wakas, misery loves company (pardon the idiom, again).
-
. ths,
You state "Wakas view is that no one falls anywhere, and that it is all an idiom to express humiliation."
Where did I say that? If you cannot provide evidence, this will be your 3rd lie about me in as many days.Are you seriously going to try to argue that you've never said that? After we have a multiple page debate about it?
To sum it up the "fall to the chin" in sjd argument has been smashed completely, and the sjd=physical prostration argument has been critically damaged to the point where it cannot be considered likely and only a theoretical possibility in some occurrences.
- From here
Thus, we can safely prove "fall to the chin in sjd" is an idiomatic expression, to me, likely meaning to lower oneself to the utmost, i.e. an idiomatic expression for humility.
- From here
Professor Mustansir Mir (who is known for his linguistic skills) takes it as an idiom as I have already mentioned. AQ used th-q-n to mean "chin". But even if we took it to mean "ground" my point still remains.
- From here
It is "khrr" is redundant because one cannot prostrate without falling first. I guess your only recourse is to say we are meant to do an abrupt or violent fall when we prostrate
From hereDhaqn is a linguistic way of adding stress to the action of falling. To emphasise that it wasn't just any old fall, but a mighty fall.
Please show the above to any Arabic speaker, let us know what they say.
Amusingly, you imply the physical prostration we should do is not just any old fall but a mighty one. Perhaps you should consider promoting this translation and investing in a chain of kneepad shops in Muslim countries.
From hereFor sake of argument, let's say it does not make sense, where is your proving that the prophets/messengers did as AQ said to do? i.e. when you hear God's signs "fall to the chin prostrating" / "physically prostrate" (or however you interpret it).
From hereAccording to you, what is the meaning of dhaqn in AQ and the primary meaning in Classical Arabic dictionaries? Does it ever mean "ground"?
- From here
In fact, this entire topic was just us debating whether they actually fall in kharuu sujjadan, so I really don't know how you are going to try to deny that now.
This is the simplest thing in the world. When I say
I stayed up to the wee hours of the night.
Am I staying awake? Or is that a metaphor for something else because there is an idiom in the sentence?
Am I staying up during the night? Or should we take night as an idiom as well according to your half-ass logic?Mustansir Mir states unequivocally
kharra Ii dh-dhaqani, to fall down on one's face in humility
EDIT In summary, this claim of yours
So if "they fell to their chins" is an idiom then "sujjadan" is also idiomatic and is not body-physical.
Has been smashed to bits.
-
San, please stop evading the questions I've asked repeatedly now
You stated
I agree. Cherry picking one word to change and calling one word an idiom is kinda not an idiom, more like a pun.My questions are
"I stayed up to the wee hours of the night." - This is an idiomatic phrase.
Am I staying awake? Or is that a metaphor for something else because there is an idiom in the sentence?
Am I staying up during the night? -
Whoa san, watch out you're on the radar now! (radar meteorite space get it? nm) P
I assume you meant savage_carrot, ths. And I'm only slightly excited at your mistake unlike some allegedly are. You're not getting the point of my posts, they were analogies based on the discussion and I suppose I went overboard (oh no! will they ever stop!).
It is a one word difference, with everything else the same. Sure you could call it an idiom, but you could also call it a pun. It's like "time waits for no man" and then saying you know actually time is the name of a girl and she hates being stood up for dates, thus she will not wait for any man.
Anyways.
-
By the way, if you stayed up till the wee hours of the night you are actually literally staying awake through most of the night regardless of what you were doing.
sorry san, I had it all typed out.
-
According to the aptly named site, UsingEnglish, it is
http//www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/
Savage Carrot I notice you are still evading the question.
It is a one word difference, with everything else the same. Sure you could call it an idiom, but you could also call it a pun
So is "wee hours of the night" - 1 word difference, just like in 17107.
Also, whether you understand it or not does not change the fact that Mustansir Mir, the only actual scholar in this tired bunch, is saying that one does physically fall according to that idiom.
But that is all I have time for, I'll have to return later.
EDIT
Before I leave, I noticed that not a single one of you except Mazhar actually commented on the Arabic grammar I posted about. Given that this is a site about the Quran, written in Arabic, I find that odd.
So while I'm gone, feel free to comment on that, as that is what this debate actually pertains to.
-
Ahh right, the internet google thing search you accused Wakas of being guilty of? Yeah, we're all guilty of something after all...
I am not translating a book using google translate, I am finding out if a particular phrase is an idiom. If you can't tell the difference between those 2 things then sorry.
Also here are some more references for you
http//idioms.thefreedictionary.com/the+small+hours
http//www.goenglish.com/Idioms/Wee+Hours+Of+The+Night.asp
http//www.englishcafe.com/blog/idioms-and-expressions-second-moment-hour-56980
-
http//www.goenglish.com/Idioms/Wee+Hours+Of+The+Night.asp This is how it is actually used in the language.
No, there is no "one word" difference there, it's not even in the same ballpark.
I like the way you slip that in the end though. Classy.
