Nearness and Guidance -> Knowledge and Wisdom = Peace and Prosperity
-
Cut the hands, or...?
There is a very controversial decree, among many, in the polluted version of the interpretation of the recitation (Qur'an). Let us take a look at how things really are.
The issue (allegedly 'cut'
Traditionally used to decree the deliberate cutting of the hand of criminals. There any many circumstantial problems regarding the interpretation however as we will soon see. I will use Monotheist Translation as reference with my added corrections. This is the best translation I have found so far although it has errors where other versions (sometimes by even sectarians) are right. Let us take a look at 1231, to some people's disgrace I have added notes in parentheses to explain what I think in the investigation (they are NOT part of the original Arabic text), and my corrections/editing to the Monotheist Translation in bold
1231 So when she heard of their scheming, she sent for them and prepared a banquet (?) for them, and she gave each one of them a knife (?). And she said ?Come out to them,? so when they saw him they exalted him and cut separated their hands (in amazement), and they said ?Praise be to God, this is not a human being, but a blessed angel! (he looks good)?
Read it slowly and thoroughly and you see that it is quite a clear sentence. The women sees Joseph and they react strongly because Joseph is inferred as a quite handsome man and their bodily expression is to quite literally throw their hands in some kind of outwards motion. The banquet (muttaka) and knife (sikknan) I put question marks around because we have no other reference within the recitation (as far as I could find at least) to these words to compare them.
The same phrase is returning in 1250.
1250 And the king said ?Bring him to me.? So when the messenger came to him, he said ?Go back to your master and ask him what was the matter regarding the women who cut separated their hands? Indeed, my Master is aware of their plans.?
To me here it could be that the phrase is not to be read literally but like a kind of idiom. Much like lost their deeds (minds) as to what was planned to do. Hands are used at other instances of the recitation quite allegorically. See that even God has hands(!). What we can say as a summary though is that the women never cut their hands at all. They might have held knives, but they were distracted.
If you take a look at the word's occurrence in 7160 you will see that most translations represent this word as it is suppose to
7160 And We separated them into twelve patriarch nations; and We inspired Moses when his people wanted to drink ?Strike the stone with your staff,? thus twelve springs burst out of it. Each people then knew from where to drink. And We shaded them with clouds and We sent down to them manna and quail ?Eat from the good things that We have provided for you.? They did not wrong Us, but it was their souls that they wronged.
It does not indicate that there is any cutting action but separating. If the word would have implied a physical "chopping" motion it would not be used here to divide. The hands are also in plural which may infer that the women make a separating movement with them.
Same here
7168 And We divided them through the land as nations. From them are the upright, and from them are other than that. And We tested them with good things and bad, perhaps they will return.
Please look at 227
227 The ones who break the pledge to God after making its covenant, and they sever seperate/"blur" what God had ordered to be delivered, and they make corruption on the earth; these are the losers.
See that the word does not have a cutting implication at all when "corrected".
2166 When those who were followed will disown/separate those who followed them, and they will see the retribution, and all excuses will abandon them.
I think that Monotheist have turned around the Arabic letters a bit but picked a decently good translation. The word still does not imply any physical cutting but very abstract separation. It is a motion of two or more objects from each other with no implied severing.
Interesting, my friends, here comes the rejectors opponents again, I take the following verse because it gives a better contextual feeling
3127 Thus He will sever separate/dissociate a group of those who reject oppose, or disgrace them; then they will turn back frustrated.
3128 You will have no say in the matter, for He may pardon them, or punish them; for they are astray.
3129 And to God is what is in the heavens and in the earth, He forgives whom He pleases, and He punishes whom He pleases; and God is Forgiving, Merciful.Is not God wonderful?
533 The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut separated off from alternate sides or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution.
I am not sure as to what the original language implies, but to me it looks like imprisonment. Imagine chains when the hands and feet are separated. Anyway, from a literal standpoint you see that the narrative implies killing straight away, or execution, or imprisonment or exile. It steadily presents four solutions of different degree. That is my 10 cents. It looks like an old idiom of depriving someone of their rights as a punishment (for a time).
Same idiomatic language reoccurs in 538
538 As for the thief, both male and female, you shall cut separate from their resources "imprison them" ? as a penalty for what they have earned ? to be made an example of from God. God is Noble, Wise.
You see that the language is idiomatic.
Now let us go back to 1231 and unwind the "mystery" with the women's cut hands
1231 So when she heard of their scheming, she sent for them and prepared a banquet (?) for them, and she gave each one of them a knife (?). And she said ?Come out to them,? so when they saw him they exalted him and cut their hands were pacified (in amazement), and they said ?Praise be to God, this is not a human being, but a blessed angel! (he looks good)?
You see. The mystery of the cutting of hands in 1231 is solved forever. And praise be to God, the Almighty.
Just because, let us continue for a little longer.
644 So when they forgot what they had been reminded of, We opened for them the gates of all opportunities; and when they were happy with what they were given, We took them suddenly! They were confounded (and
645 It was thus that the remainder of the wicked people were wiped out; and praise be to God, Lord of the worlds.
645 The evil-doers of the people were separated (recognized); and praise be to God, Lord of the worlds.
646 Say ?Do you see that if God were to take away your hearing and your eyesight, and He seals your hearts; which god besides God can bring it to you?? See how We dispatch the signs, but then they turn away.645
And do not thank me but thank my Master and your Master. I only clarify the Master's decree.
694 ?And you have come to Us individually, just as We had created you the first time; and you have left behind you all that We have provided for you; and We do not see your intercessors with you that you used to claim were with you in partnership; all is severed separated between you, and what you have claimed has abandoned you.?
772 We saved him and those with him by a mercy from Us, and We destroyed separated the remnant of those who rejected opposed Our signs/calls, they were never with faith.
7124 ?I will cut off your hands and feet from alternate sides en-shackle/separate your hands and feet, then I will crucify you all.?
86 They argue with you about the truth when it has been made clear to them; as if they were being herded towards death while they are watching!
87 And God promises you that one of the two parties will be defeated by you; and you wish that the one least armed be the one. But God wishes that the truth be manifest with His words, and that He eliminates the remnant separates the source of the rejecters opponents (that the truth is apparent).
88 So that the truth will be manifest, and the falsehood will be finished; even if the criminals hate it.I think I will cut it there. No more to argue about.
God bless you
-
Thank you very much, brother Zulf! D
Btw, do you agree with brother Man of Faith's opinion about kufr/kafir?
Peace.
To be both frank and ernest, I haven't read up on it. I guess I'll have to check it out. So I can't really tell you, at present. But I'm sure it's both interesting and well worth reading, what MoF writes.
Peace and cheers )
-
Ok.
Is it possible if the meaning of kufr/kafir covering both of them (reject + oppose)?
Well. If you reject whatever is revealed then you oppose it. See
510 And those who reject oppose and deny Our revelations, they are the dwellers of Hell.
But you need to note you have to take action to be regarded as kafir.
God bless you
-
Peace,
Never mind. I did not think it through before posting (this post).
-
To be both frank and ernest, I haven't read up on it. I guess I'll have to check it out. So I can't really tell you, at present. But I'm sure it's both interesting and well worth reading, what MoF writes.
Peace and cheers
Ok, brother!
Peace. May Allah bless you.
-
Well. If you reject whatever is revealed then you oppose it. See
510 And those who reject oppose and deny Our revelations, they are the dwellers of Hell.
But you need to note you have to take action to be regarded as kafir.
Then, in this case,
before someone action to "oppose" God (and all/part of His revelations), then before that, he/she must be "reject" first.
What I can understand is they reject first and then they oppose,
because... how can someone "oppose" something if they don't "reject" it first? confused
I think opposing is some kind of further action taken after someone rejecting.
So, perhaps we can say that if someone called kafir, then he/she committed both (reject + oppose)??
Peace.
-
Peace,
And some people may oppose God without perceiving and without really rejecting in the first place due to ignorance. This is why the concept of disbelief does not work. And some people have faith but while giving God partners. They oppose God, but may not reject God intentionally, however their ignorance causes them to oppose God. See what I mean?
God bless you
-
Dear Brother Man of Faith
Salamun Alaikum.
I read your post with a lot of interest and appreciation. May Allah increase you in wisdom.
I wanted to discuss the translation of the word ?kufr? with you. I see that you have translated it as ?oppose? ? and I kind of understand why. However, linguistically the term k-f-r refers to the act of covering and hiding something not exactly ?opposing?. There is a separate term ?shqqu? (sh-q-q) which is probably linguistically closer to the term ?oppose?. This term has been used in verses 4115; 813; 1627; 4732 and 594.
May I, with due respect to your studies and analysis, suggest an alternate way of understanding the word k-f-r? I believe the literal rendering of hiding or covering is exactly what this word is all about. Allah SWT has given each of us the conscience ? the sense of right or wrong, good and bad. We have the option to cover up / hide these senses or we have the option of believing in them and submit to our creator. Kufr is the act of deliberately hiding the conscience or the faith.
For lack of a most suitable English term, I usually would translate it as the act of ?repressing faith?.
Let?s now put the understanding in practice. Let?s look at verse 26
Kufr as oppose Indeed those who oppose - it is same for them whether you warn them or don?t warn them, they won?t believe.
Kufr as repress Indeed those who repress (faith) - it is same for them whether you warn them or don?t warn them, they won?t believe.
When any messenger starts preaching ? there is a general tendency for his people to oppose him, because we all fear change and want to stick to status quo. It would go against common sense to say to the messenger that those who oppose you would never believe ? in that case the messenger would only give the warning to those who do not oppose him!
On the contrary, if you read the term as repress / hide / suppress / cover-up faith it would mean there is a group of people who deliberately repress / hide / suppress / cover-up their conscience / faith / common sense ? this group of people will never believe the messenger. This now makes logical sense.
Also the act of ?opposing? is an externally visible act so it should be clear to everyone who is an opposer (kafir). But the act of hiding / repressing (faith) is an internal act ? not visible from outside.
Hope you can consider my suggestions with an open mind.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
Peace,
I appreciate your efforts, but these people oppose. They are not merely hiding the truth. And, as you probably is often the argument is baked into that meaning because if you hide something then you do something to oppose it. These people take action against the truth and do not simply deny/reject. It is very prevalent in the war contexts of the recitation (Quran).
And the word you suggested is the direct apparent behavior when someone is in opposition and actively work against you. It does not mean to oppose but hostile.
Forget traditionally inferred meanings. Check how the phrases' literal quality is usually interpreted and you see they are often nonsensical based on the rejected or even hider kind of argument.
These people want to suppress the one they kafaroo and that is the "hiding" in that case you are propagating. Yet hide is not the appropriate interpretation because see how the literal quality will end up then. To oppose means you wish to suppress someone, similar to hide, and is the correct definition for Kaffir. They are NOT passively hiding anything but they are actively hostile toward the author of the text and its receiver. Summary is that the traditional interpretation as rejector is wrong because to reject is not an argument to fight against someone or be stern with them.
The traditional interpretation gives fuel to oppression and to sectarianism.
God bless you
-
Dear Brother Man of Faith
Salamun Alaikum.
I have no intension of engaging into an argument with you. Most probably you and I understand pretty much the same thing with k-f-r. But because of our difference of understanding / use of the English term there are some confusions.
I do agree with you that kufr is not "passively rejecting" or "being disbeliever". I understand that kufr is a deliberate and active process of hiding / repressing our conscience and faith (even after the truth has become apparent to us) - which would often lead to the act of opposing... but not necessarily always. Please refer to verse 541 which talks about a specific group of "kafir" who say "we believe" with their mouths but do not believe in their hearts. In other words they do not necessarily "oppose" but repress (faith) internally.
Let's take the example of the following 2 people
-
a rejectionist who does not believe in any form of established religion but believes in a supreme authority (i.e. God), believes in accountability for his action (in this life or the other) and lives a righteous life solely based on his consiousness. He opposes established religions because he has always been exposed to the negative aspects of religion and feels that established religions do more harm than good.
-
a hypocrat who externally pretends to be a "good muslim" but internally actively represses any faith or conciousness. Given a chance he would not hesitate to kill, lie, cheat or rob people. But publicly he maintains the identity of a religious person for the sake of popularity.
Of the above 2 categories I would believe the second person to be closer to kufr although publicly he would never "oppose" God or His commandments.
Once again - I am not trying to get into an argument. I am just trying to clarify our understanding through a discussion.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Best regards,
Arman -
-
I think it should mean something else. .
And if two factions among the believers should fight, <- both "opposed" each other, but both are Believers
then make settlement between the two.
But if one of them oppresses the other, <- one of them "opposed" the ordinance of Allah, but they are Believers
then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah .
And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly.
Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.
49.9 -
Peace,
And some people may oppose God without perceiving and without really rejecting in the first place due to ignorance.
God bless you
IMHO, if they're truly in ignorance, then I think "opposing God" may not suitable word to call them.
I prefer to say that they are in the state of committing negative attitude/s out of their ignorance.
Perhaps it's not really appropriate to call such people as kafiroon/kafirun.
However, I think that most likely each human at some point (or even many times) of their life will be given sign/warning/lesson by God, and looks like human can choose to accept or reject these signs.
So, I don't think God abandon His creation by not giving them any "signs". There are so many signs for us,
and after so many signs... how come people keep stay in ignorance?
Perhaps they always choose to reject signs, so finally they become "blind".
Peace.
-
"Here you have the truthful word for reject."
Peace my brethren,
Here is the word for deny or reject
5012 Before their denial/disbelief/rejection was that of the people of Noah, and the dwellers of Al-Raas, and Thamud.
5013 And ?Aad, and Pharaoh, and the brethren of Lot.
They are offered something which they do not accept whereas they deny or reject it.
239 And those who disbelieve oppose and deny/reject/disbelieve Our revelations, they are the dwellers of Hell, in it they will abide.
210 In their hearts is a disease, so God increases their disease, and they will have a painful retribution for what they have denied/rejected/disbelieved.
Here you have the truthful word for reject.
Kafir, on the other hand, is when you take action, i.e. oppose in word or physical response.
And note that disbelieve does not even fit the context and is an invented word. There is no disbelief but simply rejection or denial.
287 And We gave Moses the decree, and after him We sent the messengers. And We gave Jesus, son of Mary, the clear proofs, and We supported him with the Holy Spirit. Is it that every time a messenger comes to you with what your souls do not desire, you become arrogant? A group of them you deny/reject, and a group of them you kill!
311 Like the behavior of the people of Pharaoh and those before them. They denied/rejected Our signs so God took them for their sins. God is awesome in retribution.
360 The truth is from your Lord, so do not be of those who doubt.
361 Whoever debates with you in this after the knowledge has come to you, then say ?Let us call our children and your children, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then, let us invoke and make the curse of God upon the liars rejectors.?362 This is the narration of truth, there is no god except God; and God is the Noble, the Wise.
363 And if they turn away, then God is aware of the corrupters.375 And from among the people of the decree are those whom if you entrust him with a large amount he gives it back to you, and there are those whom if you entrust with one gold coin he will not return it to you unless you are standing over him. That is because they said ?We have no obligation towards the Gentiles.? They say about God denials while they know.
Know the almost literal translation sounds a bit weird in English. But lie could as well be used in paraphrasing.
God bless you
-
I think it should mean something else. .
And if two factions among the believers should fight, <- both "opposed" each other, but both are Believers
then make settlement between the two.
But if one of them oppresses the other, <- one of them "opposed" the ordinance of Allah, but they are Believers
then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah .
And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly.
Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.
49.9And they oppose (k - f - r) God if they insist on continuing the fighting.
-
IMHO, if they're truly in ignorance, then I think "opposing God" may not suitable word to call them.
I prefer to say that they are in the state of committing negative attitude/s out of their ignorance.
Perhaps it's not really appropriate to call such people as kafiroon/kafirun.
However, I think that most likely each human at some point (or even many times) of their life will be given sign/warning/lesson by God, and looks like human can choose to accept or reject these signs.
So, I don't think God abandon His creation by not giving them any "signs". There are so many signs for us,
and after so many signs... how come people keep stay in ignorance?
Perhaps they always choose to reject signs, so finally they become "blind".
Peace.
Peace,
If you do what God does not like, causing oppression and injustice, then you are a kafir no matter if you are aware or not. It does, as we already settled, not mean disbelieve but to oppose someone and it does not have to be to oppose God but anyone.
God bless you
-
Peace,
So if you curse someone by yelling "Kaffir!!!", then you actually yell in English, "opponent!!!". It is so misguided to yell that nope
God bless you
-
Dear Brother Man of Faith
Salamun Alaikum.
I have no intension of engaging into an argument with you. Most probably you and I understand pretty much the same thing with k-f-r. But because of our difference of understanding / use of the English term there are some confusions.
I do agree with you that kufr is not "passively rejecting" or "being disbeliever". I understand that kufr is a deliberate and active process of hiding / repressing our conscience and faith (even after the truth has become apparent to us) - which would often lead to the act of opposing... but not necessarily always. Please refer to verse 541 which talks about a specific group of "kafir" who say "we believe" with their mouths but do not believe in their hearts. In other words they do not necessarily "oppose" but repress (faith) internally.
Let's take the example of the following 2 people
-
a rejectionist who does not believe in any form of established religion but believes in a supreme authority (i.e. God), believes in accountability for his action (in this life or the other) and lives a righteous life solely based on his consiousness. He opposes established religions because he has always been exposed to the negative aspects of religion and feels that established religions do more harm than good.
-
a hypocrat who externally pretends to be a "good muslim" but internally actively represses any faith or conciousness. Given a chance he would not hesitate to kill, lie, cheat or rob people. But publicly he maintains the identity of a religious person for the sake of popularity.
Of the above 2 categories I would believe the second person to be closer to kufr although publicly he would never "oppose" God or His commandments.
Once again - I am not trying to get into an argument. I am just trying to clarify our understanding through a discussion.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Best regards,
ArmanPeace,
No worries. I am just set to clarify things and not to get into fights or arguments. You can think it means something leaning towards disbeliever or rejector, but then you will have to live with certain inconsistency, and which gives fuel to sectarians.
To oppose does not mean I would beat you to death or hurt you physically, but it can also be to start yelling at you and oppose you in mindset and to spread lies about your cause.
God bless you
-
-
Therefore, your contention is based on "conjecture", so it is fine as an opinion. . . and it can be anything as you can imagine. . .
Well, conjecture has a negative implication on someone who bases things on very few arguments and as you may have seen if you have bothered to read that I have actually analyzed the discourse and checked the literal consistency and it is a viable theory. Thus does not necessarily have to be conjecture. It is easy to dismiss just about anything as an opinion if one likes.
Anyway is it my opinion or is it a fact that they oppose God if they keep fighting despite that you tell them not to and return fire? What is it that you really argue against here?
Mischief, injustice and corruption is to oppose God and I suppose you would not deny this?