Bakka/Mecca
-
I can understand it gives emphasis on locations in some occasions as to refresh the minds of the Children of Israel such as their exodus out of Mesr or that Sinai is mentioned. But that is almost it. When not necessary Quran rather keeps geographical details at minimum.
And cities/towns are not mentioned by name as far as I can recall except Mekkateh which is doubtfully a named city in there.
Peace
-
And cities/towns are not mentioned by name as far as I can recall except Mekkateh which is doubtfully a named city in there.
Peace
There is no doubt in it. Every word in Quran has meanings of justifications, significances and implications of innumerable dimensions in accordance with the life of man at any given time from the inception of man to the end of the world.
Our lives are shaped up better and better by the moment due to our belief in and appreciation of the Intangible Truth; and the abstract mind is the real ' Bayt / sacred place ' wherein is our comfort and residence; and whereupon descends the command and the guidance from Allah, the God of the worlds. Quran absolutely does not speak of any tangible thing as HOLY for all materials will perish but what is with Allah.
-
I would say it does not refer to any location at all. Quran refrains from giving location names, probably for solid reasons.
Peace bro,
I agree with you on this 100% and agree with @Armanaziz on some of his points.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
Harmony be with you drfazl,
If you ask me, bayat means assembly, the group of people at any given time who are of a certain affinity. Which affinity is explained by the narration. They have affinity with Allah and the realm. It is like an assimilation. Abraham was the first one who established such an assembly of like-minded people.
And if you are going to be like Elah you have to be like Allah and choose the spiritual realm over the flesh. It would be against the message of Qur'an if it was fixated on physical items and features. Those who have understood would happily leave their bodies at any given time.
And a place is only as "holy" as its inhabitants at any given time, and since only Allah is unconditionally holy, only the one who assimilates and is like Allah is holy. It has its prerequisites.
But holding a physical entity like a building to be an image of Allah is in direct violation of everything the prophets ever stood for in their proclamation to mankind. Even worse to slowly "dance" around it as in ancient Pagan rituals instead of entering it and using it as a temple at least to grow spiritually through reflection and meditation and informative meetings by an enlightened person who teaches spirituality. I could feel a better surge of spirituality in my bedchamber.
Throughout the millennia, people have always diminished the 'Guidelines' and put physical rituals in the spotlight rather than absorbing the spiritual lessons of this simple list of 10 "commandments" originally written on stone tablets
- Serve only Allah (be to thereby be) in benevolence, forgiveness
- Have no image of anything in Heaven nor Earth to represent Allah
- No vain talk (do not conjecture)
- Keep a sabbath every cycle (week) where you do not work for personal gain and instead reflect, meditate and be charitable; anything that only keeps your mind on Allah
- Treat thy neighbor as thyself (but also thy enemy if you can as according to Jesus)
- Do not murder
- Do not steal
- Do not carry false testimony, i.e. do not lie (counts every lie)
- Do not commit adultery
- Do not be jealous
Here you have the ancient spiritual guidelines, often inaccurately referred to as commandments, but is more a spiritual advice for the best well-being of your soul. Hint Try to uphold 'no jealousy' as a law. People constantly struggle to add things to this ancient list, such as fleshly rituals and Pagan-inspired practices.
Have faith
-
Quote from Man of Faith on Yesterday at 012243 PM
I would say it does not refer to any location at all. Quran refrains from giving location names, probably for solid reasons.
Peace bro,
I agree with you on this 100% and agree with @Armanaziz on some of his points.
Red It appears I was wrong on this. Qur'an does mention a few locations by name, even if they are in a clear minority. Still I argue that no towns/cities are mentioned, nor is any reference to a building given.
Despite I was wrong on no names of locations, the emphasis is avoiding any particular focus on names whatsoever. And it is disputable whether all the suggestions by hicham9 are truly names of locations.
Have faith
-
Red It appears I was wrong on this. Qur'an does mention a few locations by name, even if they are in a clear minority. Still I argue that no towns/cities are mentioned, nor is any reference to a building given.
Despite I was wrong on no names of locations, the emphasis is avoiding any particular focus on names whatsoever. And it is disputable whether all the suggestions by hicham9 are truly names of locations.
Have faith
Peace bro,
Sorry, I disagree with you now.
Please take a look at 1860 specially the words this is how the locations are mentioned in alQuraan. Thanks to @Bender who pointed this out.
Such locations remain for ever until the end of this world. Names of cities/places change always, so Allah never use them to make us confuse.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
Arman,
Re 1) Aalameena (plural) = beings/creations. Unlikely to mean "universes".
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9596520.msg51053#msg51053
Re 2) Whilst I understand the point you are making, it may not be as solid as you think. There are verses which discuss balad/haram being secure. This is discussed in the article I linked to.Salam Wakas.
Quoting the verse for ease of reference.
396 Indeed, the first house laid down for mankind is surely the one at Becca ? blessed and guidance for the universe (Aalameena).
397 There are clear signs in it ? Abraham?s standpoint ? and whoever enters it happens to be secured. And to Allah upon mankind is the hajj* (literally debate / deep consideration) of the house - whoever is able - a path to it; and whoever represses (faith) ? then Allah is affluent of the universe.
(My personal translation; cross checking recommended.)
- Even if you understand ?Aalameena? to be beings/creations/mankind (note the English word ?universe? also can be used to convey similar ideas) ? it is absurd to imagine a physical house can be guidance for ?Aalameena?. Many people in various corner of the world would have never heard of Mekkah or Jerusalem ? and even if they hear of it ? they are nothing but alien places of alien culture to them. Does it really make sense that they owe God a ?pilgrimage? to any of these sights if they know the path to reach there? Besides there have been times in history when both these sites have been center of pagan rituals / ideology.
Compared to that ? the spiritual ?safehouse? that Abraham constructed (i.e. surrender to the Master of Universe and refrain from associating partners with Him) ? is a guidance for all time and all nations. Any conscious soul (be he a Japanese / South American / Australian aborigine or even non-human) can take guidance from this safe-house, even if they haven?t heard of Torah or Gospel or Abraham or Qur?an or Islam. Any conscious soul who finds a path to this understanding (i.e. stumbles upon this proposition in their lifetime) owes to God that they would debate and thoroughly consider (hajj) this idea ? before they reject it in favor of a contradictory idea (e.g. atheism). But even if the entire universe chooses to repress (faith) then Allah is affluent of the universe. Do you see how the verse completely fits in and becomes wonderfully meaningful?
The question remains why is it called the ?House at Bakkah?. The only Bakkah we are sure aware of is the Bakkah is Psalm. The people of the book have traditionally understood Bakkah as a spiritual oasis on the path of the difficult journey of life (refer to Jewish / Christian interpretation of the relevant Bible verse). So, it makes perfect sense that author of Qur?an would indicate the ?spiritual? nature of this house by referring it as ?the house at Bakkah?. There are other instances of Qur'an metaphorically referring to biblical places (e.g. Garden of Eden at 972).
- Frankly, your linked article is too long to go through to figure out exactly which point you are referring. However, I believe you are referring to 2126. Abraham may have requested for a safe land for his descendants ? but I believe this verse too is metaphorical, and you can find my understanding here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606927.msg357937#msg357937
?Whoever enters the house happens to be safe? ? is a very strong claim. If we accept the House to be a physical house ? logically the security needs to be of physical nature as well. But we have seen during the Grand Mosque Seizure during November and December 1979 the ?House at Mekkah? did not give security to Al-Qahtani. Nor did it give security to those who attempted seizure of Mecca in 683 and 692. How about the Jaheliat idols and their worshippers at Kabba? Did the house give them security in any form? The Temple mount at Jerusalem also has seen many deadly seizure, capture and recapture throughout history.
Compared to that - the ?spiritual safe-house? created by Abraham guarantees spiritual security to whoever ?enters? it by protecting him/her from the provocation of perverted ideas and ideologies.
For me the signs that the ?House at Bakkah? is a spiritual house / shelter ? are obvious as broad daylight. But whoever is not happy with this explanation can feel free to go for the ?wild goose chase? to find physical location of Bakkah. My Master guides whomever He wills to a straight route.
May Allah guide us all.
Regards,
Arman -
Peace bro,
Sorry, I disagree with you now.
Please take a look at 1860 specially the words this is how the locations are mentioned in alQuraan. Thanks to @Bender who pointed this out.
Such locations remain for ever until the end of this world. Names of cities/places change always, so Allah never use them to make us confuse.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhanis not a location name and the location is anonymous even if descriptive. Allah uses such because locations are not important for its spiritual message.
And, Masjed Haram does not refer to any building whatsoever...
Have faith
-
peace Arman,
Thanks for clarifying you haven't read the article I linked to, as that explains much of your reply, i.e. preaching to the choir.
- Frankly, your linked article is too long to go through to figure out exactly which point you are referring. However, I believe you are referring to 2126. Abraham may have requested for a safe land for his descendants ? but I believe this verse too is metaphorical
2126 is only one verse, and it's actually not that difficult to find what verses I am referring to, e.g. ctrl+F then simply type in "balad" or "haram" and it will take you to the verses, however I pretty much discuss them in one section.
In any case, the point you seem to make is that no physical structure is a guarantor of security, regardless of Quran context. This viewpoint may force one to re-interpret any Quran verses which discuss any physical structure, be it land/town/balad or haram/sanctuary etc as being secure or when you are safe etc in another way, e.g. metaphorical. This is fine, but can it be made to work (Quranically)? Let's see.
You said I believe you are referring to 2126. Abraham may have requested for a safe land for his descendants ? but I believe this verse too is metaphorical
Dictionary definition of metaphorical
http//dictionary.reference.com/browse/metaphorical
a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblanceHere is what you actually said about 2126 in the link you provided (underlined highlights mine)
In this verse, Abraham is praying for the inhabitants of the land where the house is located. In spiritual sense, he is seeking protection to Allah to all those who would be accepting the safe heaven that he created and live around it. God, however, clarifies that even living within the vicinity of the house there will be people who would repress their faithIt is clear to me from the underlined parts that you are taking some parts literally. So, let's clarify
In your view, can a land be secure? (even if only for a while)
Yes/No/other -
In your view, can a land be secure? (even if only for a while)
Yes/No/otherSalam Wakas
Can a land be secure? (even if only for a while)
Yes.So, it is OK to accept "whoever enters it happens to be secured" can the "characteristics" of a physical house?
No, because these words imply it to be a permanent characteristic. Such permanent characteristics can only apply for a metaphorical house.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
Hello guys,
I have a question. What is your opinion on not letting people who set up partners to God into Mecca city or near Masjid al-Haram, because they are considered as najas (translated as impure)? Seeing this verse
928 O you who believe, the polytheists are impure, so let them not approach the Restricted Temple after this year of theirs; and if you fear poverty, then God will enrich you from His blessings if He wills. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.
I am not sure how others translated specific words, so any opinions would be welcome.
Peace,
Samira
-
peace Arman,
Thanks for acknowledging a physical land can be secure sometimes.
No, because these words imply it to be a permanent characteristic. Such permanent characteristics...
Only "imply"? Can you clarify the evidence you have for it being permanent, considering the verb dakhala in 397 is in the perfect tense, e.g.
wa man dakhala hu kana
and whoever enters/entered (perfect) it is/was (kana)It seems to me, Quran could have used the imperfect if it meant an ongoing/incomplete action, e.g.
2108 and whoever exchanges (imperfect)...
2121 and whoever disbelieves (imperfect) in it...
2130 and whoever turns away (imperfect) from...I'm no expert in Arabic grammar, hence asking if you have further evidence other than it seems to "imply" permanence. "Imply" doesn't sound like solid ground to me. You may find this discussion interesting (if you read it)
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604116.0 -
Salam Brother Wakas.
I am also not an Arabic grammar expert. My humble understanding is Arabic Perfect Verbs (like "Kana" imply continuity (both past and present and even future is implied). Here is a quick checklist on how famous translators have translated the phrase ?wa man dakhalahu kana ameenan?
Sahih International whoever enters it shall be safe
Pickthall whosoever entereth it is safe.
Yusuf Ali whoever enters it attains security;
Shakir whoever enters it shall be secure
Muhammad Sarwar Whoever seeks refuge therein will be protected by the laws of amnesty.
Mohsin Khan whosoever enters it, he attains security
Arberry whosoever enters it is in security.Other than Muhammad Sarwar ? who appear to be interpreting, rather than translating ? the others seem to read this statement as a ?permanent characteristic? of the house in question.
I have seen from the article you linked that you too are convinced Bakkah or the ?house at Bakkah? is not a physical house. The only point that I am adding to what the article says is ?Bakkah? is also known as ?a spiritual oasis in one?s journey towards his destiny? to the people of Bible and I feel Qur?an is mentioning Bakkah to refer to that.
That being the case, I am confused why you are debating on points which we both seem to agree. I am convinced ?wa man dakhalahu kana ameenan? cannot be the property of a physical house ? if you think this is not a solid enough argument, then be it ? you are fully entitled to have your opinion. If your sole objective of debating is to get the pleasure of winning ? then I?ll give you a pass ? ?You win, I lose. My arguments are weaker than yours?. Hope this makes you happy.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
is not a location name and the location is anonymous even if descriptive. Allah uses such because locations are not important for its spiritual message.
And, Masjed Haram does not refer to any building whatsoever...
Have faith
Peace,
That is what I was trying to say that only locations are mentioned in alQuraan not the names. And I believe even though the locations mentioned in alQuraan are seemed anonymous to us right now can be found.
Yes I agree that alMasjid alHaraam does not refer to physical structure.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
I am also not an Arabic grammar expert. My humble understanding is Arabic Perfect Verbs (like "Kana" imply continuity (both past and present and even future is implied).
Salaam brother,
Can you please translate 1850 for me? Specially the word Kaana in it. Thanks.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
peace Arman,
Thanks for the list of translations but I don't give them much weight, as I prefer to know the theoretical possibilities, then determine what is strongest. As far as I know, it could also be taken as past tense, and you did not provide evidence to the contrary.
?Bakkah? is also known as ?a spiritual oasis in one?s journey towards his destiny? to the people of Bible
Interesting. Do you have a reference?
I am confused why you are debating on points which we both seem to agree.
No need to be confused. We disagree on some points, and I highlighted them in my first response to you. You then brought up some other points (e.g. permanent/future tense) which were also discussed. Personally, if I post a view that may be inaccurate or not as solid as I think, I'd like to be told about it. We are all students of Quran here, learning as we go.
-
Salamun alaikum.
Interesting. Do you have a reference?
Yes, I provided the reference in my first post in this thread
http//biblehub.com/psalms/84-6.htm
No need to be confused. We disagree on some points, and I highlighted them in my first response to you. You then brought up some other points (e.g. permanent/future tense) which were also discussed. Personally, if I post a view that may be inaccurate or not as solid as I think, I'd like to be told about it. We are all students of Quran here, learning as we go.
My point was... "wa man dakhalahu kana ameenan" implies a permanent characteristic of the house.
You are arguing ... it "may not" imply a permanent characteristic, right?Hypothetically, if I accept the proposition that "wa man dakhalahu kana ameenan" imples "and someone who entered the house was secured" ... does it really fit in the context of the verse? Any house in the world can provide temporary security to someone in some point of time in the past - what makes that point worthy of mentioning as an attribute of the "House at Bakkah"? I was confused with your arguments because you are bringing a grammatical argument that the phrase may mean something - whereas you yourself are convinced that the phrase does not really mean that.
But again, if the sole point of this debate is that I cannot "prove" kana implies permanent characteristic, and it is theoretically possible to read it as a verb in past tense - then I have already declared you winner in that argument.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
peace Arman,
You are arguing ... it "may not" imply a permanent characteristic, right?
Exactly.
Hypothetically, if I accept the proposition that "wa man dakhalahu kana ameenan" imples "and someone who entered the house was secured" ... does it really fit in the context of the verse? Any house in the world can provide temporary security to someone in some point of time in the past - what makes that point worthy of mentioning as an attribute of the "House at Bakkah"?
As you know I don't translate it as "house", but anyways, to me it may be worthy of mentioning because it tells us that God's guidance implemented at a locality provides security for all, and also perhaps make us reflect upon what brings about this security, e.g. open, fair, just, true, peaceful etc. A secure environment is no small thing.
