Salat & the Kaaba

Meteora

Sorry in advance if this has been asked. My question isn't that general though so that's the main reason I made the topic (search didn't help enough).

This isn't really about hajj, but about salat. I can't shake off the feeling aiming a ritual prayer towards (and prostrating towards) the famous Kaaba in Mecca is just made-up. Even supposing this is the actual Kaaba in the Quran, I don't think there's any command to physically pray towards it, let alone prostrate in its direction.

Can someone show me the verse closest to implying we should pray and prostrate towards the Kaaba (the one in Mecca)?

Thanks in advance.

Wakas

The verses commonly cited are 2142-150.

Analysis here
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html

The following is a list of the problems regarding this traditional explanation

It is entirely an interpretation based on external sources (i.e. traditions). The terms "kaabah", "mecca", "AMAH", "turn your wajh/face/consideration", "masjid" etc are NEVER discussed elsewhere in AQ involving a specific physical direction, nor is an example given of anyone performing salat in a particular direction. Some cite 4102 but please see part 1 of this series for its analysis.
The word "qiblah", and its root (QBL), cannot be shown to clearly mean "prayer direction" in any AQ occurrence.
All traditional commentators translate the only other occurrence of the specifc noun "qiblah" (apart from these verses) in 1087 as "oratories / places of worship" not "prayer direction". The likely reason is that to do so would make little sense as 1087 says "...and make your houses a qiblah...". Further, they turn it into a plural here, whilst elsewhere it is singular.
In addition to 2142, the following verses also clearly imply turning to a specific direction is irrelevant, e.g. 2115 says "for God is the east and the west so wherever you turn so there is God's wajh/presence/consideration...", 2177 "...it is not righteousness that you turn your wujuh/faces/considerations towards/qibala the east and the west...". Note the similar words used "turn/walla", "wherever/ayna", "wajh/face/consideration", and these messages (the only ones of their kind) are only found in chapter 2, and the only times verb form 2 of "turn" is used in chapter 2 are 2115, 2142-150, 2177. Some commentators explain this away by saying there was no prayer direction initially, and later this was abrogated, and so on. However, note that in terms of sequence, this same message is given prior to AND after the "change of qiblah" verses. Interestingly, some traditional commentators accept that any direction is not special, and the only thing that makes it special is God having imposed it, no other reason.
The verses do not say turn in the direction of the "Kaabah", but AMAH. One may ask then, what does one do once inside AMAH or next to it.
The verses do not say turn your wajh DURING salat, this is an inserted interpretation. In fact, it explicitly says "wherever you are" / "wherever thou start or come forth", implying no limitation, and if so, this would make it impossible to face one direction all the time.
Technically, it is impossible to face an object on a spheroid (i.e. earth) if you are a long distance away from it. One actually faces a random point in space, and even if one were to draw a line on the earth's surface in a direction towards the intended object being even one degree off can result in being many miles away from the object. Thus, it is actually near impossible to do, unless in close proximity to the object, so if one wishes to take this interpretation, one must accept facing one direction is symbolic only.
8 ) Note how 2141 clearly implies the past is the past, but according to the traditional understanding the verses which follow are about resuming the qiblah of Abraham et al. Seems a mixed message.
The reason given for the apparent change in qiblah is "not will be for the people against you debate", and "that I may complete My favour upon you and so that you may be guided". The traditional commentators try to explain these away using traditions, see Al Jalalayn (altafsir.com), ibn Kathir (qtafsir.com), Asad (quranix.net). Interestingly, traditional Islamic history shows that their relations with the Jewish tribes of Medina only worsened after this point - potentially contradicting the reasoning offered in AQ.
2145 says "...nor will they follow each other's qiblah..." - a much missed point is the fact that the traditional understanding of "qiblah" as "prayer direction" requires the people of the book to have a minimum of TWO different "qiblah" or "prayer directions" in order to make sense logically, i.e. Jews pray one direction, Christians pray another. I did not find a commentator who explained this away. It is possible they did not realise this. However, there is apparently some evidence to suggest early Christians prayed facing east, and Jews faced Jerusalem, thus satisfying the two-minimum criteria. To me the context of this suggests people can have many qiblah, even their own individual qiblah, i.e. more than two.
If these verses were revealed in Medina, as alleged, then the direction of Jerusalem from there is clearly north-west, not west. Further, there may be some evidence Christians prayed to the east, but Jews do not pray to the west, thus the use of "east" and "west" in 2142 are unlikely meant to be taken as discussing prayer directions, as some claim. Most traditional commentators do not claim this however.
If facing the cuboid called "Kaabah" pleased the messenger, as implied in 2144, then it should be noted it was full of idols at the time, as even accepted in traditional sources. They allege that since it was the first house dedicated to worship, built by Abraham, this was more important than the fact it was filled with idols and a pagan symbol, hence "pleased".
IF the cuboid called "Kaabah" was also the qiblah of Abraham, as agreed upon by traditionalists, then it should be noted prophets Moses and Jesus (who came after Abraham) were NEVER recorded, in any source, as visiting it nor facing it during prayer. This would be extremely unusual. Thus, the explanation sometimes given is that Jerusalem was the legitimate qiblah for Moses/Jesus, and then the original qiblah (i.e. cuboid called Kaabah) was restored with the final revelation, i.e. Quran. This requires us to believe for some reason God changed it, then restored it, and now seemingly assigns blame to the people of the book for not accepting this change. Can we really blame them for not changing, as this explanation is tantamount to God being the source of confusion, which is unacceptable in my view. Further, it is implied in 2146 that some of the people of the kitab/book know that this change is the truth, implying somewhere in their own scriptures this qiblah is mentioned or that their qiblah will be superseded by a future messenger etc - if so, where is this information? Perhaps further research needs to be done in this area.
AMAH as a building likely did not exist at the time, as admitted by traditional sources, and refers to the area/site (see Encyclopaedia of Quran, volume 3, p77). How this was delineated is anyone's guess. Please note some commentators regard AMAH as Mecca in some verses, e.g. 928.
As is clear from the last part of 2144, the only requirement for knowing the true "qiblah" is to be given the decree/scripture from our Lord. There is no requirement to have a compass or to consult a geographical map to know the true "qiblah" from our Lord.
IF the Jerusalem qiblah was appointed by God, then this indirectly implies the messenger was dissatisfied with such a qiblah when 2144 says "...We see thy face/consideration shifting in the sky..." and "...that will please thee...", i.e. was the messenger dissatisfied with a command from God?
The use of masculine suffix pronoun "hu/it" in these verses is somewhat problematic (see bold blue in the above translation), as IF "it" refers to AMAH as a physical building then it seems odd (e.g. they recognise it/AMAH as they recognise their sons). Tafsir Al Jalalayn states the "it" in 2146 refers to Muhammad, Ibn Kathir says it could be Muhammad or Kaabah but unfortunately for him the latter is a feminine noun so it cannot be that. Perhaps Ibn Kathir meant AMAH. Some translators imply the "it" refers to the qiblah but again, this is a feminine noun (see the use of feminine "ha/it" in 2143 for confirmation of this). For me, the variance is telling. It should be strongly noted that in AQ Abraham is never said to have built AMAH, nor is it explicitly mentioned in his presence, thus for the people of the writ/decree to link this to Abraham and recognise AMAH as the truth is somewhat difficult.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to state with certainty what the masculine pronoun "hu" refers to, but in my humble opinion, the flow and logic of the verses suggest it=AMAH, especially considering the usage of "it is the truth from your Lord" in 2144, 2147 and 2149.
1 2145 would imply that if the messenger were to follow their qiblah after these revelations then he would be a wrongdoer and following their desires, yet he was apparently following it previously. Is there a precedent for this in AQ, i.e. doing X is allowed then a future revelation clearly changes doing X to desires/wrongdoing? Not to my knowledge.
The expression "turn + wajh", is used in 679 and rendered as "I shall turn my face to the One who created the heavens and the earth..." but explained as "making his religion and works sincere" (e.g. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas), likely because this was prior to the alleged building of the cuboid called "Kaaba", thus to render it as a physical direction when such a place did not exist would be problematic for Traditionalists, yet they take this same phrase to mean physical directional command here. Also see "wajh" in 'Verbal Idioms of Quran' by Mustansir Mir. This shows that this phrase does have a link to mindset/sincerity/intention/approach/etc even in traditional sources. The phrase is also used in 2822 (albeit "turn" is verb form 5 not 2) and likely denotes an actual physical turning of one's face, but uses the Arabic word "tilq'aa" for "towards" not "shatra (in the direction)" like these verses. Perhaps "til'qaa" is more appropriate for a physical turning towards, also see 747. It is somewhat peculiar "shatra" is used in 2144-150, rather than the more common "ila/to" for example, IF it did mean a physical face turning towards/to something.
As a side note, also recall how in part 2 it was shown the phrase "aqim wajh" had no link to a physical face or directional command.
IF it was a reference to turning towards another direction in prayer, then to me, it seems odd that in 2142 it states the foolish (al sufahau) will ask "what has turned them from..." when this seems like a reasonable question to ask. Think about it, if you were there as an observer, and a group prayed towards X then Y for about 18 months (as the traditional story goes) then back to X again, wouldn't you also ask "why"? If so, you are of the foolish ones according to the traditional understanding.

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

In the name of God, the most Gracious, the most Merciful

While reading this I get the feeling some Quranists are starting to abrogate verses in the Quran purely through wishful thinking.

Some of the Quranists start losing the prayers, even if it is quite clear that we are commanded to pray by standing, bowing and prostrating. The circumstantial evidence is prominent, yet some of our brothers and sisters interpret the verses in strange ways.
Maybe the wish to differentiate with traditional Muslims is so big we fall victim to wishful thinking, interpreting the verses the way our mind wants.

Saying no to Hadith does not mean we should stop obeying God's hadith, in that case we would not even need the Quran. The Quran is a guide, easy to learn (thus also easy to interpret with a clear honest mind) and having access to it is not exclusively a must, but it certainly makes our salvation easier. Believing that Quran is the word of God is required though.

Most important, you can verify it yourselves by reading the Quran, is to believe in God alone, the Hereafter and to be righteous. Righteousness is self-explanatory, every human knows the foundation of being a good person (charity, being helpful, lawful, obedient, patient, kind etc), i.e.
a role-model.

The Qiblah is explained too and is the sacred mosque in Mecca (or Becca). It was changed during some period to expose hypocrites, but eventually changed back.

May God guide us in the right direction.

ps. I wrote the Basmala because everything I do I try to do in the name of God ds.

Borakk

Sorry in advance if this has been asked. My question isn't that general though so that's the main reason I made the topic (search didn't help enough).

This isn't really about hajj, but about salat. I can't shake off the feeling aiming a ritual prayer towards (and prostrating towards) the famous Kaaba in Mecca is just made-up. Even supposing this is the actual Kaaba in the Quran, I don't think there's any command to physically pray towards it, let alone prostrate in its direction.

Can someone show me the verse closest to implying we should pray and prostrate towards the Kaaba (the one in Mecca)?

Thanks in advance.

There is a high probability that Muhammad never saw the Kaaba in his life. The earliest mosques do NOT point to Mecca.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604866.msg317964#msg317964

GODsubmitter

Peace,

In the name of God, the most Gracious, the most Merciful

While reading this I get the feeling some Quranists are starting to abrogate verses in the Quran purely through wishful thinking.

Some of the Quranists start losing the prayers, even if it is quite clear that we are commanded to pray by standing, bowing and prostrating. The circumstantial evidence is prominent, yet some of our brothers and sisters interpret the verses in strange ways.
Maybe the wish to differentiate with traditional Muslims is so big we fall victim to wishful thinking, interpreting the verses the way our mind wants.

Saying no to Hadith does not mean we should stop obeying God's hadith, in that case we would not even need the Quran. The Quran is a guide, easy to learn (thus also easy to interpret with a clear honest mind) and having access to it is not exclusively a must, but it certainly makes our salvation easier. Believing that Quran is the word of God is required though.

Most important, you can verify it yourselves by reading the Quran, is to believe in God alone, the Hereafter and to be righteous. Righteousness is self-explanatory, every human knows the foundation of being a good person (charity, being helpful, lawful, obedient, patient, kind etc), i.e.
a role-model.

The Qiblah is explained too and is the sacred mosque in Mecca (or Becca). It was changed during some period to expose hypocrites, but eventually changed back.

May God guide us in the right direction.

ps. I wrote the Basmala because everything I do I try to do in the name of God ds.

I agree with you @Man of Faith!
handshake

It is interesting that the first thing some "revisionists" want to do is to get rid of the contact-prayers...

peace

GODsubmitter

There is a high probability that Muhammad never saw the Kaaba in his life. The earliest mosques do NOT point to Mecca.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604866.msg317964#msg317964

high probability? ...

?History would be a wonderful thing ? if it were only true.?

Very well said by L. Tolstoy...

Wakas

peace MofF,

While reading this I get the feeling some Quranists are starting to abrogate verses in the Quran purely through wishful thinking.

Some of the Quranists start losing the prayers, even if it is quite clear that we are commanded to pray by standing, bowing and prostrating. The circumstantial evidence is prominent, yet some of our brothers and sisters interpret the verses in strange ways.
Maybe the wish to differentiate with traditional Muslims is so big we fall victim to wishful thinking, interpreting the verses the way our mind wants.

The Qiblah is explained too and is the sacred mosque in Mecca (or Becca). It was changed during some period to expose hypocrites, but eventually changed back.

I can understand why you'd say that, but I'm only interested in evidence. You posted zero Quranic evidence.

good_logic

Peace Wakas.

Obeying God is part of submission. There are those who see rituals and there are those who do not. It is what you make of these verses ? And how you see redemption?

All that was asked of them was to serve/worship God, devoting the deen/religion absolutely to Him alone, observe Salat and give the Zakat

You shall recite what is revealed to you of the scripture, and observe Salat for the Salat prohibits evil and vice. But the remembrance of God (through Salat) is the most important objective. God knows everything you do.

O you who believe, Sawm is decreed for you, as it was decreed for those before you, that you may attain salvation.

The most important beyt established for the people is the one in Becca; a blessed beacon for all the people.

In it are clear signs the Maquam of Abraham. Anyone who enters it shall be granted safe passage. The people owe it to God that they shall observe Hajj to the beyt, when they can do/afford/have the means to... it. As for those who disbelieve, God does not need anyone.

The soul and Him who created it. Then showed it what is evil and what is good. Successful is one who redeems it. Failing is one who neglects it.

Indeed, those who reverence the rites decreed by God demonstrate the righteousness of their hearts.

And serve/ worship your Lord, in order to attain certainty.

May the lord guide our hearts and minds to serve Him by understanding His words and commands.

Peace.

Wakas

peace gl,

It is what you make of these verses ? And how you see redemption?

I agree it is all about one's interpretation, but I would hope one bases their interpretation on evidence and which option has the most evidence for it etc.

Quran is simple to understand, if one simply goes with the evidence. This is my view. I dont mind if someone has different views to me but I do have a problem if someone claims Quran says XYZ but presents little/no evidence for it.

For example, for someone to say " "salat" means "prayer" in Quran" " but be unable to cite one verse which conclusively proves it is not ideal. Likewise, for someone to say " "sujud" means physical prostration in Quran" " but are unable to cite a verse which conclusively proves it is not ideal.

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

So you mean millions and again millions of people are idiots because they do physical prostration? Is that not proof enough? Besides the Quran enjoins the same ritual, but I will not bother trying to prove something so many have already proven. Believe what you believe and I will believe what I believe.

May God bless you with understanding

Wakas

peace MofF,

I did not say stupid.

Numbers do not prove anything. Christians are large in number, are they right?

The majority of people on earth misguided/disbelievers
If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only conjecture; they only guess. (6116)
This is the right religion, but most people do not know. (3030)

Most of those who think they believe in God are actually idolaters
So many proofs in the heavens and the earth are given to them, but they pass by them, heedlessly! The majority of those who believe in GOD do not do so without committing idol worship. (12106)

Some of those who think they are guided/believers are not
Some He guided, while others are committed to straying. They have taken the devils as their masters, instead of GOD, yet they believe that they are guided. (730)
On the day when we summon them all, we will ask the idol worshipers, "Where are the idols you set up?" Their disastrous response will be, "By GOD our Lord, we never were idol worshipers." Note how they lied to themselves, and how the idols they had invented have abandoned them. (622-24)

If you are interested in my view on sujud, feel free to read/study
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html

Meteora

Yeah, that argument about so many people doing something should mean it's right is dumb, for the reasons mentioned above. Christians worldwide are also large in number (outweighing Muslims even) so indeed following the majority on Earth will give you a big plate of nothing. For the record, I think I'd've been a much happier individual had I been raised Christian in Europe or South America...just saying.

Ok, and a thousand or so people will convert to Islam by the next month, guess what they'll be doing? Blind-following Sunni Islam. All the women in the group will don Sunni women clothing, the men will probably stop shaving for a while and they'll blindly do what the mainstream Muslims are doing, NOT because it makes sense but since they don't want to feel left out. This is the same reason my family's following blindly. They don't want to be declared outcasts by the major religious sect, and heck think that by being rational at all in religion then you'll inevitably be lead to disbelief. Hell, just a few hours ago my parents literally got pissed I didn't group-pray maghrib with them, despite in their awfully stupid religion group prayers aren't even mandatory - just recommended...what next? Am I going to get harsh reactions for not getting part of my labias and clitoris cut off if I was a girl, because it's, like group prayers, only recommended in said religion? No compulsion in religion means you're not going to build hard feeling towards your own son just because he doesn't attend some polytheistic prayer with you. You'll love him for who he is and should be comfortable with him believing what he wants.

WHY should I care that I'm one in 1,000 Muslims who, for example, think Sahih Bukhari and Muslim is man-made horsecrap? Why should I care that I don't blind-follow which the Quran clearly tells us not to anyway, and that I believe prostrating to this physical object which according to sources around may or may not even be "bayt Allah" is polytheistic, not that the Quran even says to do such a thing. Simply visiting a location or residence like "the house" of Allah to do something there is not and I mean nothing close to prostrating to an object people claim is God's house!

For the record I lol'd at the bit pointing out that technically it's impossible to face it and if you tried you'd be technically facing a point in space anyway.

justamuslim

Peace,

So you mean millions and again millions of people are idiots because they do physical prostration? Is that not proof enough? Besides the Quran enjoins the same ritual, but I will not bother trying to prove something so many have already proven. Believe what you believe and I will believe what I believe.

May God bless you with understanding

I don't think I was an idiot. Neither do I think that my family and millions others are idiots. I believed that physical prostration at fixed times was from God till I came to learn that this is not true.

A lie told and passed on through the generations still remains a lie and doesn't become the truth just because millions of people believe it. A lie was told that God had a son from a human mother which millions came to believe to be truth. Just the same, an understanding or belief held by many regarding verses in the koran doesn't mean that it is right or true.

I am not interested in what millions believe what God said. i am interested in and what matters to me is what God said. At the end, I have to face God.

justamuslim

If you are interested in my view on sujud, feel free to read/study
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html

Thanks for the link. Do you have other links like these?

justamuslim

Yeah, that argument about so many people doing something should mean it's right is dumb, for the reasons mentioned above. Christians worldwide are also large in number (outweighing Muslims even) so indeed following the majority on Earth will give you a big plate of nothing. For the record, I think I'd've been a much happier individual had I been raised Christian in Europe or South America...just saying.

Why do you say that? I went to catholic schools and I sure was not happy kneeling down on pews, sitting, standing, singing, trying to keep awake listening to the preacher. The nuns sure were anything but pleasant and you dare not slouch, dose off.... Sitting next to an old lady dressed in her finest Sunday outfit with cheap perfume - oh that is torture! I sure would not be happy if my mom threw cold water on my face if i didn't get out of bed Sunday am to get ready for church - which is what mother of a friend of mine did. If you don't go to church, then you will be looked down upon. You can't go to the store without someone asking you how come you didn't go to church. I think you would be miserable in a different way. It is the same in every community.

justamuslim

Peace Wakas.

Obeying God is part of submission. There are those who see rituals and there are those who do not. It is what you make of these verses ? And how you see redemption?

Here is what I really would like to know and if anyone here knows where did this definition salat=ritual worship come from? Anyone know the history? The origins?

Even if you interpret sujud=physical prostration, how did people come to define salat=physical ritual which involves this many rakahs, with all the details?

If anyone here see ritual in the verses quoted by good logic, really would like to know.

Can someone take these verses and point out the rituals in the verses, as the more and more I look and understand the verses in the context, the less and less I see rituals.

Meteora

The traditional method of salat is justified nowhere in the Quran. Traditionalist take whatever verses they want and twist them to mean what they want. The rest of the details (which are man-made) come from the Sunna i.e. the supposed teachings and traditions of Mohamed, which is no more fictional than the Harry Potter series.

Also, I would've been much happier since, even though I'd be going through what you mentioned (which is what I still went through being raised in a Muslim family) I would not have had my genitals mutilated. THAT is MUCH worse than what you simply highlighted, once you realize the full difference between a cirumcised and natural penis.

Wakas

peace justamuslim,

In terms of other links like those, well there are many articles online that discuss various issues of Quran based islam. If you meant specifically on sujud there are other articles perhaps online. There are certainly posts on this forum and others discussing it.

Here is what I really would like to know and if anyone here knows where did this definition salat=ritual worship come from? Anyone know the history? The origins?

Even if you interpret sujud=physical prostration, how did people come to define salat=physical ritual which involves this many rakahs, with all the details?

Good questions.

For me, it is quite simple http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/slw.htm

My understanding of the regular/timed salat/bond of the mumineen is a regular reading/oration/study of Quran. This can still be seen in the Traditional ritual prayer, i.e. they recite Quran, and especially in the Friday khutbah/lecture wherein they relay what Quran says (and Traditional Hadith mixed in), and the audience nods or give a verbal recognition/acceptance of what is being said etc.
It is likely that at the time Jewish/Christian/Zoroastrian/pagan ritual worship involved set routines, certain movements, praising God/deity etc. Since Quran only specified the basics of the regular/timed salat, it is very likely there was no fixed procedure, thus people would have picked and chose what they liked, and this likely led to a mix, gradual modification. In such an environment all is required is certain state/religious leaders to decree a certain thing and it becomes part of the ritual. It would be gradual over a period of time.

Many people have written about this, on this forum, and articles, especially the Zoroastrian influence.

JewishDude

Hi Everyone,

Here is my two cents again. I think we get too worried about the how and the why. The more important item is the meaning and how meaningful the practice is. I think Allah wants us to pray to him regularly, several times a day (many arguments about how many times). This is because prayer helps to give meaning to our lives. It is a time for reflection, it is a time to look outside ones self to something bigger, a time to put things into perspective about our purpose, a time to connect with Allah. This provides for a meaningful life and a meaningful relationship with Allah and more meaningful relationships with others. So when the Quran says "turn your face" some people want to know turn towards what? If the Kaaba is a focal point for people so that they can focus on prayer more effectively, then what is wrong with it? If it makes prayer and connection with Allah more meaningful and doesn't contradict the Quran, I don't have a problem with it.

JewishDude
peace Salam, Shalom, Peace peace

GODsubmitter

Hi Everyone,

Here is my two cents again. I think we get too worried about the how and the why. The more important item is the meaning and how meaningful the practice is. I think Allah wants us to pray to him regularly, several times a day (many arguments about how many times). This is because prayer helps to give meaning to our lives. It is a time for reflection, it is a time to look outside ones self to something bigger, a time to put things into perspective about our purpose, a time to connect with Allah. This provides for a meaningful life and a meaningful relationship with Allah and more meaningful relationships with others. So when the Quran says "turn your face" some people want to know turn towards what? If the Kaaba is a focal point for people so that they can focus on prayer more effectively, then what is wrong with it? If it makes prayer and connection with Allah more meaningful and doesn't contradict the Quran, I don't have a problem with it.

JewishDude
peace Salam, Shalom, Peace peace

Thank you for putting things into perspective and simplifying the issue.

Baruh Hashem

Shalom