Yazidi - Comparative to Quran
-
Peace all,
We have all seen how extreme the antipathy of sectarian muslims can be towards the yazidi in recent events. What's happening now in Iraq has earlier examples during the Ottoman Empire. I think we all can agree the violence exerted by those sectarians is nowhere justified in Quran. I want to start this thread to debate however wether this has any valid grounds from a Quranic perspective. The theological dispute is worth discussing. Is there valid evidence for the dispute? Which of the arguments are valid using Quran only. So please try to refrain from political opinions as far as you can and share your opinion with me on Quranic grounds only if you feel you want to share your light on this matter. Is the Yezidi interpretation of Iblis truly incompatible/heretical with what the original Quranic text indicates?
Following are a few elements in Yazidi faith relevant to this debate, I could distill from my research. They are monotheistic, believe in God as the creator and Angels are emanations of God. One of these Angels goes by the name of Melek Taus, identified by christians and muslims as Shaitan. This is the key to the dispute, Yazidis do not condemn this Angel. They do not attribute evil to Melek Taus and thus get accused of being devil worshippers. In the Yazidi interpretation Melek Taus is the leader of the Angels, created from Gods illumination (Ronahi). The other six archangels according to Yazidi belief were created later with Melek Taus as their leader. The conflict in interpretation begins with the refusal to bow to Adam.
The Yazidi take on these events differ from common Islamic interpretations of the significance of that rejection to bow down it seems to me. Where the Yazidi praise this refusal, conventional Islamic interpretations condemn it. The Yazidi's consider God to be testing that Archangel and believe he made the right choice, got rewarded for it by his appointment as governor of this world. Islam considers that same event to be a denial of God and the falling of that Archangel as a punishment for his refusal to obey Gods command, the time spent in this world only a delay for his final judgment on the last day.
As you can see the two understandings seem very incompatible. It's clear to see why it's fuel for a hostile attitude as it's highly heretical from the islamic point of view. On the other hand it is using a lot of traditional interpretation of verses in Quran. I think it's worth looking at these Quranic verses in detail again and find out wether this theological dispute has any argumentation in the Quranic source or not. Mind you, if you start researching these matters you will be touching core elements of belief. It will involve testing hypothesis that could appear highly controversial.
Maybe all this is wrong. And there is no valid basis to identify Melek Taus as Shaytan in Quran. I'm interested to find out.
I will post my findings in this thread. Thanks everyone already who is going to contribute to it. A first crucial question looks to be "Does God effectively condemn/judge Shaytan?"
-
Relevant quranic verses
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=7&verse=11
This verse mentions Iblis not bowing to Adam unlike the other Angels. This verse does not contain any indication wether Iblis not bowing to Adam was either wrong or right.
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=7&verse=12
Here God asks Iblis why he rejected to bow to Adam. Iblis replies being better "khayrun" than Adam. Iblis declares why he is superior. Up to this point we still find no judgment.
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=7&verse=13
)
The response God gives to this statement does seem to indicate both an instruction and a judgment at first glance. The words we find here that could have some significance about right or wrong are (7138 ) tatakabbara - to be arrogant, (71313) l-ghirna - the disgraced ones.(7138 ) tatakabbara is commonly translated in this verse as to be arrogant. Crosschecking the other occurences of this verb we find it also in context of to be proud, or to be great. There is for me too much ambiguity here to conclude it indicates an absolute judgment. So lets dig deeper. One of the occurences sheds some more light on how we should understand this verb. Skipping a bit forward to 714 we find this verb again. It speaks of "those who are arrogant upon the earth without right". Logic dictates if there is a rightful way to be 'arrogant', it could equally mean being great or prideful. We can not deduce from this verb alone if Iblis is considered to 'tatakabbara' rightfully or unrightfully. It does not reveal anything about Iblis authority to be with pride.
(71313 ) l-ghirna - is commonly translated as the disgraced/debased. Crosschecking Quran the noun formed with this root word we find it is often used meaning small or little. Looking at the active participle occurrences we find this in (71194), (92929), (123219), (273713). Is a hypothetical meaning of reduced, smaller or lower valid? 7119 seems to pass this hypothesis. One could translate this in a meaning of the Pharaoh having become less powerful, reduced in number (military), degraded in prestige, diminished. Without any moral judgment. The occurence in 929 can pass this hypothesis if we consider it referring to an inferior/smaller rank. Smaller from Gods perspective. 1232 refers strikingly enough to "debasing" someone from a high rank to a lower rank. To be more precise in from malakun (1231) to imprisoned (1232). Here also the hypothesis is still valid without moral judgment. One can degrade in rank/status without therefor being guilty of anything. (2737) does not only pass the hypothesis (not containing moral judgment) as it used in verse implying both humiliation and ghirna (diminished, smaller in number). To me this last occurrence to me makes it pretty clear l-ghirna does not contain moral judgment intrinsically. It only speaks of becoming smaller, a lowering in rank, become more little without specifying the moral load of that process.
Next post I'll dig into the other verses related to this topic. So far I do not find any evidence yet of Iblis refusal to bow down being evil. Maybe the next verses will shed some more light.
-
Peace runninglikezebras.
I would have thought is clear?
234
When we said to the angels, "Fall prostrate before Adam," they fell prostrate, except Satan; he refused, was too arrogant, and a disbeliever.There is no doubt "Kaffirin" is wrong?
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Good point. It at least associates Iblis or Iblis' fate with that of the disbelievers/rejecters. wakna mina l-kfirna
I'm still considering other interpretations about the verses in that surah and others but my work is too incomplete yet to conclude anything about it.
-
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?Salm. chapter=7&verse=11
This verse mentions Iblis not bowing to Adam unlike the other Angels. This verse does not contain any indication wether Iblis not bowing to Adam was either wrong or right.
Personally, I think it's quite clear that disobeying God's command is wrong.
And about "sujud", maybe it does not mean bowing nor physical prostration.
Salm.
-
Indeed, it does not mean mean prostration. At least not in a "quranic" sense.
Salaam
-
Peace.
"S J D"has different meaning in different verses in "Qoran" like "salat" and "zakat" do.
Those who give them the same meaning throughout will fall into difficulty, confusion and contradiction!
GOD bless.
Peace. -
peace gl,
Peace.
"S J D"has different meaning in different verses in "Qoran" like "salat" and "zakat" do.
Those who give them the same meaning throughout will fall into difficulty, confusion and contradiction!
"contradiction" is a strong word. Can you provide one alleged contradiction if we give SJD the meaning of to submit/honour/pay respect* in all occurrences?
*or "to give acknowledgement/recognition (in a subservient/submissive manner)". source
-
Peace Wakas.
You already have given"S J D" five (5) different meanings?
Quote to submit/honour/pay respect* ..*or "to give acknowledgement/recognition (in a subservient/submissive manner)"
I said if you give it "one"(1) meaning you will have contradictions.
I may add another one to your list" prostration",otherwise you are fine with that list.
Hope that clarifies for you?
GOD bless you
Peace. -
peace gl,
Perhaps I can clarify. I meant if you choose any one of the 5 following meanings for all occurrences
to submit
to honour
to pay respect
to give acknowledgement (in a subservient/submissive manner)
to give recognition (in a subservient/submissive manner)According to you, what is the contradiction that will result? Please cite an example.
-
I dont dispute sujud can have more than one meaning. I dont see how the other meanings are relevant to shedding light on Iblis' refusal to be effectively judged by God or not though.
714 has Iblis asking for respite until the Last Day. Is this talking about respite from judgment? It seems to suggest so. If we look at another occurrence of this verb eg. 3229 we read that those who disbelieve/reject will not be given respite on that Last Day. Logic dictates if Iblis was granted respite, he's not been judged as disbeliever/rejecter yet. This brings me back to goodlogics argument. 234 states wakna mina l-kfirna. If this would imply Iblis already having been judged as rejecter/disbeliever then it would contradict with him being granted respite. In fact it does not equal Iblis with rejecters. Notice the use of the verb wakana. It means to become. A logic interpretation would be Iblis is given respite just like those who will disbelieve and judged on the Last Day. It expresses a similar fate and process of delayed judgment. It's not illogical God already knows what the outcome will be, but as in a fair trial we get to prove our case. In this sense Iblis fate is common with ours. We can't say this is a punishment by God either. Iblis nowhere objects to this. He even suggests this idea himself.
715 is God granting him this respite until the Last Day as requested by Iblis.
716 has a remarkable beginning. "fabim aghwaytan" traditionally translated as "because you sent me astray". The verb used comes from the root word ghayn ww y. Looking at other occurrences we find associations with "error, evil, deviation". This might seem to imply a judgment. But does it really? What is Iblis deviating from in the first place? If there is a deviation, there must be a straight path. The only straight path this could refer to is the "sujud" to Adam. Iblis' rejection to do so deviated him from a straight path set out by God. One could even argue, in this verse God is negotiating the terms for this deviation with Iblis. Iblis chooses a different path, he listens to Gods terms to do so (respite and judgment on the Last Day). To me, the "aghwaytan" in this verse is no more than a confirmation of that agreement. Iblis identifies himself as being one permitted to deviate in this world and given respite for judgment. After this introduction, Iblis lays out his plans. To sit on the straight path for them.
717 Further sheds light on Iblis' view on his new role in this world. His ambition to make people deviate from God and making a claim about how most of them will not prove to be grateful of God.
718 God ends the dialogue with Iblis. Iblis gets expelled. We cant say Iblis is being expelled against his will or as a punishment. The verses we have seen so far strongly suggest this is Iblis' own choice. We do find madhman and madran describing this being expelled from. madran seems to refer to be abandoned. The traditional meaning of madhman is "blameworthy" which seems to suggest a strong moral judgment. Now what does "blameworthy" mean? Does someone's actions being called blameworthy mean that blame has already been objectively judged equalling guilt as an established fact? No it does not. The deviation of Iblis is questionable and will be judged after Iblis' respite time runs out. Iblis gets expelled and is worthy of Gods blame, but is not judged until the Last Day. If we think about how we get judged this is similar. Do we get judged after every questionable choice we make? No we dont. We are given respite until the Last Day. We can accumulate blameworthiness along the way, but it would be unfair to be judged before that Last Day has come. This same verse tells the ones who will fill jahannama will be the ones following Iblis. This does not include Iblis himself. It only speaks of those people following Iblis and those who get deviated by Iblis.
-
Peace Wakas.
May be I agree with you with a verse like
Do you not realize that to God "Yasjudu" everyone in the heavens and the earth, and the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and the mountains, and the trees, and the animals, and many people? Many others among the people are committed to doom. Whomever God shames, none will honor him. Everything is in accordance with God's will.
But I disagree wth you when " Rakioon, Sajidoon" are used together. It all depends on the context.
For example if one comes to the conclusion that there is no "physical prostration" meaning in any verses , to me this contradicts how I understand the message.
That is my opinion and understanding at present.
For now brother. I think we may be going off topic here. So I will make this my last comment on "SJD" here.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
I have not found any places with sujud in the narration where another alternative interpretation would cause issues in literal quality. Prostration, bowing and "standing" are just hype'd inferences and especially "standing" is quite awkward and unintelligent as a translation and shows that someone just tried hard to derive a meaning not there.
Nowhere in Quran as far as I am concerned sujud refers to physical prostration but rather a mental condition of respect, submission (to service) or dedication. It strongly connotes on humble, lowly (by 1828 Websters dictionary definition) and meek. They are often words used as collocations.
Perchance someone feeling sujud would prostrate themselves, but the word does not mean that. It can be an expression on sujud.
Also quite sure that prostration would be called bow down your head because prostration is really just an extended bow, a more deep bow so deep you need to kneel to be able to fall down deeper with your head.
Bow down your head in sujud.
Salaam
-
A further look at the traditionalist islamic understanding of Iblis uses the following argumentation. God created three intelligent species angels (malikah), jinn, and humans. They claim of those three only the last two (jinn and humans) are granted free will to choose. I find this argument pretty self-contradictory. Looking at the verses in surah 7, we find a narration that describes Iblis having free will and choosing a deviation from Gods set out path. How could Iblis do that if God never granted angels free will? Furthermore, God even accepts Iblis choice with the condition of a respite of judgment until the Last Day. Clearly we have proof here of an Angel making a choice out of free will on Gods conditions. The Quranic proof Angels are not permitted to make their own choice seems absent to me.
If we look at the dispute as starting with a disagreement over the hierarchy of those creations. It all starts with Iblis refusal to "sujud" to human motivating Angels are superior to human in quality/rank/status/properties. Iblis claims to be able to prove his claim by deviating us from the straight path. This is Iblis trial, on the Last Day he will be judged on how he succeeded in delivering that proof. Now, we as humans, can we make this judgment before the trial is over? It's still undecided what the judgment over Iblis will be on the Last Day, just like we dont know how God will judge over us on that same day. Is the yazidi interpretation therefor wrong to say Iblis is not evil? I dont think that's contradicting Quran. Although I think it's an equal mistake to praise Iblis. Whether Iblis is praiseworthy or condemnable will be revealed on the Last Day. Only on that Day the judgment will be rightful. I do not think this makes the Yazidi heretical. It could be understood as a form of idolatry, though I don't find hard evidence they are misunderstanding Iblis more than sectarians do.
-
peace gl,
For example if one comes to the conclusion that there is no "physical prostration" meaning in any verses , to me this contradicts how I understand the message.
Thanks for clarifying. Contradicting how YOU understand the message is different from stating it will cause a contradiction.
Contradiction is a strong word. Thus, perhaps you should bear this in mind before making such statements.
-
Peace runninglikezebras.
Here is another view,to add to the mix of "original sin"
http//submission.org/App7.html
May be you are aware of it anyway.
Thanks.
Peace Wakas.
Here is what I meant by contradiction!If one claims to follow a message that does not require them to do "X" yet they do ,that is a contradiction.
Likewise if it does require them to do "X" and they do not,is also a contradiction.
Misunderstanding or ignoring part of the message leads to " contradiction" in my opinion. I do not know what else to call it?
Of course anyone can fall into "contradiction" including myself. We all have to study and make sure.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
I'm aware of that article on submisson.org but thanks for reminding me. I'm not sure if I agree with the content though. I will examine that interpretation in further detail if God wills.
Peace.
-
Some research on the submission.org's http//submission.org/App7.html
It all began a few billion years ago when "a feud arose in the Heavenly Society" (3869). One of the high-ranking creatures, Satan, entertained supercilious thoughts that his God-given powers qualified him to be a god besides God. He thus challenged God's absolute authority. Not only was Satan's idea blasphemous, it was wrong - only God, and no one else, possesses the qualifications and ability to be a god. Consequent to Satan's blasphemy, a division occurred in the Heavenly Society, and all constituents of God's kingdom became classified into four categories...
Angels Creatures who upheld God's absolute authority.
Animals Creatures who rebelled but then accepted God's invitation to repent.
Jinns Creatures who agreed with Satan; that he is capable of being a "god."
Humans Creatures who did not make up their minds; they failed to make a firm stand with God's absolute authority.There is indeed a mentioning of a dispute among the Angels in this verse. 3869 even tells us what was the root of this dispute. The creation of Adam. In the interpretation of Rashad, the categorizing is a consequence, rather than the root of the dispute. Next to this, we can crosscheck if the descriptions attributed by Rashad withstand Quranic scrutinizing. First lets look at chronology of the dispute. In surah 7 we find the chronology of Iblis' rejection. Beyond doubt, Iblis reacted only after Gods command to "sujud" to Adam. This however does not absolutely prove there isn't an earlier, older dispute. Let's look at more indicators of chronology. 230 gives us just that. We find further evidence of Angels referring to the dispute. They question why Iblis is granted authority over this world as a vice-regent, knowing what his intentions are. God tells them He knows what they don't know. Logic dictates they couldn't be referring to these plans without Adam having been already created, as is pointed out in surah 7. Surah 7 tells us Iblis only lays out his plans and agrees on the terms with God after the refusal of "sujud" to Adam. Again, this still isn't absolute proof. The dispute could have a predating history we don't know of. Alas, Rashad is not showing us where this is to be found. The only strong evidence I can find in Quran is the dispute being younger than the creation of Adam. There is no reference to any pre-existing dispute that led to the dispute cause of Iblis refusal. If anyone knows what could hint towards the contrary, please let me know. Without quranic evidence, this chronology is already rather questionable. We find Adam existing before the categorizing. If man was already created then what was Adam in the timeframe starting with his creation up until Iblis appointment as vice-regent? Without soul? An empty vehicle/vessel? Did God ask Iblis to "sujud" before a soulless creation from clay? Let's see what Rashad tells us.
After putting the rebels to death, the souls of humans and jinns were placed in a special depository. God then created the appropriate bodies to house the souls of jinns and humans during the test period. The first jinn body was made from fire, and Satan was assigned to that body (1527).
The first part of this quote is again without any Quranic source reference. I dont know where this information comes from. It's impossible for me to check. 1527 tells us about the creation of jinn. Chronologically predating the creation of man. Adding this to our timeline, logic dictates jinn existed before men, thus before the jinn we already have the category of jinn next to human. There is even more information in this verse to complete our timeline. As God spoke to the Angels after the creation of Jinn and before Creation of Adam, the category Angels predates the dispute as well. If we have to believe Rashad and use the timeline Quran offers us it implies after the mysterious 'destruction of rebels' without quranic source reference, jinn and humans were soulless from the timeframe of their creation until the refusal of Iblis. In the meantime Iblis mysteriously gets transformed from Angel to jinn. I dont think I need to go on demonstrating why this is fiction.
In my next post I will look at the rest of Appendix 7, if God wills.
Peace.
-
Salam,
Can i join the the discussion with questionWhen did his Name changed into satan?
You would have to look further at the timeline and place the first chronological occurrence where Satan is interchanged for Iblis. In surah 7 this happens only after Iblis gets expelled. Pls doublecheck for yourself. Nothing I say should be taken as fact, I encourage you to look it up yourself. Please be so kind to let me know if I'm mistaking anywhere in this thread.
