Easy to "understand" or easy to "remember/memorize"?
-
Of course we can look to dictionaries in order to understand the meaning of words. I do not see anything wrong in that, how would we learn the language otherwise? peace
-
Just to note guys, there are two words which approximate to understanding fiqh and fihm.
-
? Remembrance
people who are not distracted by trade or commerce from the remembrance of God and the observance of prayer and the payment of the zakat -- fearing a Day when hearts and eyes will be convulsed, so that God may reward them according to the best of their deeds and give them more out of His bounty. God provides for whoever He wills without measure. (2437-3
THEN, that if they keep firmly to the path, We shall certainly shower them with blessings abundant, so as to test them by this means for he who shall turn away from the remembrance of his Sustainer, him will He cause to undergo suffering most grievous. (7216-17)
When we say Alhamdullilah, Subhan?Allah, and Masha ?Allah, etc... It should not be spoken in parrot form. How we remember/praise the God should reflect our deepest gratitude and respect for the Lord of the worlds. When we mention the Supremes? names and understand the Attributes of the Most Merciful, we are directing our reverence toward the God.
peace -
Scrappy, i think a deeper meaning of dhikr can be obtained if we read from 24/35-36 , the verse of the light and the houses bearing light....
-
When we say Alhamdullilah, Subhan?Allah, and Masha ?Allah, etc... It should not be spoken in parrot form. How we remember/praise the God should reflect our deepest gratitude and respect for the Lord of the worlds. When we mention the Supremes? names and understand the Attributes of the Most Merciful, we are directing our reverence toward the God.
peaceyes, it is easy to use some expressions in an automatic and empty way... especially if it is custom in your society. The expression 'inshallah' has been subject to this in at least Pakistan... where many people seem to use it as a means to escape responsibility and truth of opinion.
Sorry, a bit off-topic perhaps. -
Dhikr means nothing but remember, remembrance, etc.
I have read many times people using this verse (especially the 19ers / Rashad Khalifa followers) as to mean that the Quran is easy to understand. That is just plain non sense. brickwall The fact that there is doubt is the most clear prove that the quran is not easy to understand, because the translator who translated Dhikr as "easy to understand" has not understood the verse (or those who translate it as "easy to remember".
Not only that, but it would also create clear contradictions. God has already said that some people will understand God's signs, while some people will be sent astray with His signs.
226
Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable-- (that of) a gnat or any thing above that; then as for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord, and as for those who disbelieve, they say What is it that Allah means by this parable He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it! but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors, -
apparently, the quran must be easy to commit to memory, judging from all the madrasas producing all those hafiz who can recite the arabic quran from memory... people who are otherwise uneducated or otherwise with undeveloped memory skills.
also, how easy the quran is to understand depends totally on the reader... and has nothing to do with the book itself (apart from being free from contradictions...)
-
Memorising and reciting in ritual salah is a powerful exercise. I highly recommend it.
-
Salam James,
Without any kind of hostility or derision, let me ask you this Why did you mention dictionaries in particular?
No hostility taken. )
I mentioned dictionaries because they seem like a good place to go to know the meaning of a word, especially one from another language. What other alternatives are there? I mean, I took French in school, and we learned the meanings of words and the grammar. I can only assume that these definitions are commonly accepted by French speakers and written down in dictionaries. My teachers never left us to guess what the meanings of the words were, and I hope they weren't just making things up as they went along.
Based on the common understanding of people on this forum, it would not be wise to rely on the testimonies of "muslim scholars" as to what a certain word or phrase means as they seem to have distorted much of what is in the Qur'an.
-
Peace all.
Over and over again I and other have said "The Qur'an/God says the Qur'an is easy to understand". I believe this is from the repeated statement "Walaqad yassarna alqur-ana lilththikri fahal min muddakirin". As far as I have found in my research the root Dhal-Kaf-Rah does not carry the meaning "understand".
Any thoughts?
Peace everyone,
We made the Quran easy to learn. Does any of you wish to learn?
The Quran in my opinion is easy to learn because of its flow and rhythm, which are
helpful tools that aid in memorization.just my opinion
-
Aha thanks James, I really appreciate a good discussion and it's not easy to get one. Most people are very defensive and irrational when it comes to religious beliefs.
About what you said on the French school, that to me is a living linguistic experience. I studied modern Arabic and there was never any dispute about etymology of words! This is because the meaning can easily be tested out - if you went to a store and asked for qahwah (coffee) and the guy gave you a pencil, you'd know something was wrong.
And that is my point, really. A language can be empirically tested for effectiveness when it is in a living situation. The main linguistic source for classical Arabic is the Lisan Al-Arab which came FIVE HUNDRED YEARS after Muhammad. This is during the time when the Muslim empire had absorbed cultures far beyond its original borders and had experienced tremendous political and ideological upheavals.
Some claim to use 'Kitab Al-Ayn' which is about 100 years after the Prophet. Again, this is a retroactive projection. There is simply no proof such a book existed then. This is no different from the Traditionalists who say there were earlier booklets of hadith when these were reproduced later from later books which mentioned them. The fact is, basing authority of interpretation on age of resource is a guess.
To me, language is a living entity which connects to our living external and internal experience. There is a reason why that computer device is called a 'mouse' rather than a 'goat'. In the same way, if we interrogate the Quran for its usage of words, we would find that if we are reading it correctly, there would be an internal resonance. Sure dictionaries can (and do) help. I just found one insight from the aforementioned Lisan Al-Arab, in fact. But their subjective findings must be acknowledged if we are to remain organic in our approach.
To me, the only objective tools we have are
-
the textuality of the Quran - each word, sentence, passage, chapter aids in delivering the optimum ideas.
-
repetition of words - it uses words consistent and without any kinds of synoyms.
-
its reference to natural phenomena which can help elicit deeper resonance with nature.
thanks )
-
-
Aha thanks James, I really appreciate a good discussion and it's not easy to get one. Most people are very defensive and irrational when it comes to religious beliefs.
About what you said on the French school, that to me is a living linguistic experience. I studied modern Arabic and there was never any dispute about etymology of words! This is because the meaning can easily be tested out - if you went to a store and asked for qahwah (coffee) and the guy gave you a pencil, you'd know something was wrong.
And that is my point, really. A language can be empirically tested for effectiveness when it is in a living situation. The main linguistic source for classical Arabic is the Lisan Al-Arab which came FIVE HUNDRED YEARS after Muhammad. This is during the time when the Muslim empire had absorbed cultures far beyond its original borders and had experienced tremendous political and ideological upheavals.
Some claim to use 'Kitab Al-Ayn' which is about 100 years after the Prophet. Again, this is a retroactive projection. There is simply no proof such a book existed then. This is no different from the Traditionalists who say there were earlier booklets of hadith when these were reproduced later from later books which mentioned them. The fact is, basing authority of interpretation on age of resource is a guess.
To me, language is a living entity which connects to our living external and internal experience. There is a reason why that computer device is called a 'mouse' rather than a 'goat'. In the same way, if we interrogate the Quran for its usage of words, we would find that if we are reading it correctly, there would be an internal resonance. Sure dictionaries can (and do) help. I just found one insight from the aforementioned Lisan Al-Arab, in fact. But their subjective findings must be acknowledged if we are to remain organic in our approach.
To me, the only objective tools we have are
-
the textuality of the Quran - each word, sentence, passage, chapter aids in delivering the optimum ideas.
-
repetition of words - it uses words consistent and without any kinds of synoyms.
-
its reference to natural phenomena which can help elicit deeper resonance with nature.
thanks )
Salaam,
I think this is spot on. For me, there's also the issue that the Quran says that Allah explains the Quran, or is the Righteous Teacher. So if you want to follow the internal logic and ascertain in any way some kind of truth you have to acknowledge that if it is truth then it would be Allah that guided you towards it. So doesn't this take us to the starting point? That if you think the Quran may or may not be true - you need to invoke the help of God? After all, who else will explain it as mentioned already within the Quran?
Not sure if that makes sense, I may have rambled.
-
-
Salaam,
I think this is spot on. For me, there's also the issue that the Quran says that Allah explains the Quran, or is the Righteous Teacher. So if you want to follow the internal logic and ascertain in any way some kind of truth you have to acknowledge that if it is truth then it would be Allah that guided you towards it. So doesn't this take us to the starting point? That if you think the Quran may or may not be true - you need to invoke the help of God? After all, who else will explain it as mentioned already within the Quran?
Not sure if that makes sense, I may have rambled.
Well, this is the thing. 'logic' is a very politicised word. When someone says 'this is logical' , he actually means 'according to MY command of information and MY skills of deduction, the conclusion is X'. How do we know his command is adequate? His language skills may be rubbish or his philosophy skills may be non-existent. No NO, logic is a personal thing. Whatever you know and however good you are with deduction. I may be rubbish at both but at least it's my own logic so I am reading the Quran on my own speed.
I think you're spot on about God guiding and teaching the Quran as well. I believe this is a very spiritual experience. People who have never opened a dictionary or grammar book and even read Saudi translations can be opened to the Quran! How is this possible? There is a spiritual component there and I think we need to tap into it to get into the Quran more deeply.
-
Well, this is the thing. 'logic' is a very politicised word. When someone says 'this is logical' , he actually means 'according to MY command of information and MY skills of deduction, the conclusion is X'. How do we know his command is adequate? His language skills may be rubbish or his philosophy skills may be non-existent. No NO, logic is a personal thing. Whatever you know and however good you are with deduction. I may be rubbish at both but at least it's my own logic so I am reading the Quran on my own speed.
I think you're spot on about God guiding and teaching the Quran as well. I believe this is a very spiritual experience. People who have never opened a dictionary or grammar book and even read Saudi translations can be opened to the Quran! How is this possible? There is a spiritual component there and I think we need to tap into it to get into the Quran more deeply.
Logic and reason are methods that are used on a very individual level. Something like rationality has a lot of associations with Western science maybe, but even then we are still human are these are human methods with flaws.
I really agree with the idea of a spiritual experience. It's like people who know Arabic but don't understand or appreciate the Quran and instead follow Hadiths to the extent where they say only those who follow Hadith are believers, other are disbelievers and punishable by death etc. There are also people who may have never read the Quran but they accept one Creator, and the concept that the Creator is just and justice will occur at some point. It's interesting because those who say that God does not exist, or is unlikely to exist and have created the Quran, those people are using human, limited faculties. There is nothing to say that these facilities can appreciate what the Quran may have to offer. After all, according to them these processes we experience are just created without purpose. We try to use them for purposes and get what we may think are desired results, but they always have that limitation to them. Then the question would be How do we not know the answer lies beyond our limitations and only unlimited faculties can assist in getting there?
-
Logic and reason are methods that are used on a very individual level. Something like rationality has a lot of associations with Western science maybe, but even then we are still human are these are human methods with flaws.
Yes agreed. The basis of the philosophy of science itself was Aristotelian logic till relatively recently. I don't disagree with logical systems but with the AUTHORITY of logical systems. I have seen quranists say something is 'logical' hoping to acquire authority of interpretation. It's like George Bush using the word 'democracy' hoping to acquire legitimacy to invade Iraq!
Or better yet, this is a 'quranic' understanding (and everyone else's is an interpretation) which ,unless the Quran becomes a walking talking entity, is simply nonsense.
These manoeuvres will kill off the free spirit of interpretation which I believe the Quran seeks.
I really agree with the idea of a spiritual experience. It's like people who know Arabic but don't understand or appreciate the Quran and instead follow Hadiths to the extent where they say only those who follow Hadith are believers, other are disbelievers and punishable by death etc. There are also people who may have never read the Quran but they accept one Creator, and the concept that the Creator is just and justice will occur at some point. It's interesting because those who say that God does not exist, or is unlikely to exist and have created the Quran, those people are using human, limited faculties. There is nothing to say that these facilities can appreciate what the Quran may have to offer. After all, according to them these processes we experience are just created without purpose. We try to use them for purposes and get what we may think are desired results, but they always have that limitation to them. Then the question would be How do we not know the answer lies beyond our limitations and only unlimited faculties can assist in getting there?
Exactly. To me, this is because the Quran is a spiritual TOOL rather than a cut and paste board. Instead of ripping out verses here and there trying to form a doctrine, we need to slowly take in the Quran in the measure in which it was given, which to me is the chapter (most people say surah). The current prevalent method of reading the Quran (dictionaries plus grammar = meaning) is to me like appreciating a painting by seeing where paint and brushes came from without ever looking at the picture.
-
Yes agreed. The basis of the philosophy of science itself was Aristotelian logic till relatively recently. I don't disagree with logical systems but with the AUTHORITY of logical systems. I have seen quranists say something is 'logical' hoping to acquire authority of interpretation. It's like George Bush using the word 'democracy' hoping to acquire legitimacy to invade Iraq! Or better yet, this is a 'quranic' understanding (and everyone else's is an interpretation) which ,unless the Quran becomes a walking talking entity, is simply nonsense. These manoeuvres will kill off the free spirit of interpretation which I believe the Quran seeks.
Yeah, don't get me wrong, logic and reason are important. It's that we realise that we can be flawed at times and that our knowledge is ultimately granted by Allah who I believe steers us in the right direction. I suppose in some ways in my comments I am addressing an atheistic perspective that views logic as this tool created through a random process for use in a natural world that we then use to understand other things such as the Quran.
Exactly. To me, this is because the Quran is a spiritual TOOL rather than a cut and paste board. Instead of ripping out verses here and there trying to form a doctrine, we need to slowly take in the Quran in the measure in which it was given, which to me is the chapter (most people say surah). The current prevalent method of reading the Quran (dictionaries plus grammar = meaning) is to me like appreciating a painting by seeing where paint and brushes came from without ever looking at the picture.
That's a really nice analogy and way to think about it. With the Quran, it really is about appreciating it as a whole as well as the parts themselves.