Quran is Clear Versus Allegorical in Verse 3:7

Wakas

peace t11,

I should have also said saying something is a strawman logical fallacy does not make it so.

You claim I am having difficulty comprehending simple Enlish sentences. Ergo, it's not clear to me, yet clear to you. What was that you were saying about "clear" not being subjective?

In any case, you still dont get it. Let me try one final time

I disagree with this statement

If no one except allah knows their interpretation then they are impossible to be interpreted BY HUMANS.

I agree with this statement
If no one except allah knows their original/correct interpretation then it is impossible for a human to know with certainty they have the correct interpretation of those verses, they can still interpret them however

truthseeker11

Peace Wakas,

I should have also said saying something is a strawman logical fallacy does not make it so.

Twice you ignored my actual position and substituted a distorted version of that position. That is Strawman fallacy. The evidence is in the posts and all readers are advised to check.

Perhaps you don't know what Strawman fallacy is so let me educate you

http//www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

Now if you did not know what Strawman fallacy is then maybe your statement can be ignored. But of you already know what it is then it is inexcusable.

You claim I am having difficulty comprehending simple Enlish sentences. Ergo, it's not clear to me, yet clear to you. What was that you were saying about "clear" not being subjective?

I never claimed my simple English statements were clear like the quran says about its signs
Another illogical inference by you, congratulations on yet another fallacy.

In any case, you still don't get it

Looks like you still don't get it

I disagree with this statement
I agree with this statement
If no one except allah knows their original/correct interpretation then it is impossible for a human to know with certainty they have the correct interpretation of those verses, they can still interpret them however

The translation of tawil can be "interpretation", or "original/correct interpretation". I chose to use "interpretation" and I was using the same exact "interpretation" for humans also. So what I was saying was "no one knows the tawil of mutashabihat so humans cannot know tawil of those ayaat".

Since that sailed above your head, I will use your translation, so you can comprehend and hopefully this time it will be even easier for you

GLARING CONTRADICTION AND DISCREPANCIES ON MANY LEVELS.

Clear revelations (numerous signs) versus signs no one except allah can correctly interpret (which indicates impossible for humans to correctly interpret those signs).
A book of guidance for forethoughtful (21-2) that contains signs no one except allah can correctly interpret (which indicates impossible for the forethoughtful to correctly interpret those signs).
Use mind/reason (numerous signs) ------> how can you use mind/reason on signs no one except allah can correctly interpret (which indicates impossible for humans to correctly interpret those signs)?
How will the signs in the horizons and within ourselves verify the truth of signs no one except allah can correctly interpret (which indicates impossible for humans to correctly interpret those signs)? (4153)

Peace

Timotheus

@ reel thank you for bring up such an important topic handshake

Yes

3/7 Those who have perversity in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to
create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning.

What does this test (daraba) tell a man to do?

daraba hmm beat the wife or separate/ create distance, cool off period/ talk/ sympathize.
Such is the test of Allah! hail

39/18 is a direct connection to 3/7

39/18 Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and
those are people of understanding. yes

peace

Peace,

I see He was blessed you with understanding. SubhanAllah

"Those who have perversity in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to
create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning."

It is a important topic, one which is a great manifest example of the above in itself.

alhamdullilah

Peace

hawk99

Peace Samira1234

Thank you for replying to my post.

I see nothing wrong with your translations, therefore I can conclude you do not understand my point.
I am convinced that you truly believe what you have learned from your atheist teacher to be true,
we have no conflict. Allah creates all kind of people from prophets to devils and all in between.

As for the Quran you seem to be one of those who have been led astray by it

I will divert from My revelations those who are arrogant on earth, without justification.
Consequently, when they see every kind of proof they will not believe. And when they see the
path of guidance they will not adopt it as their path, but when they see the path of straying they
will adopt it as their path. This is the consequence of their rejecting our proofs, and being totally
heedless thereof.

The mirror effect
The inherently violent person will "see" the Quran as a warriors manual, the confused
person will be confused by it, the non-believer will see it as nonsense, the humble
person will be made content by it. The person in search of salvation can find wisdom
and salvation in its ayats. The tyrant will use it to further his agenda, the believer will
fall prostrate.

God bless you

peace

Zulf

bravo

1CELOSTNOWFOUND

Peace All,

I would like to ask a question for some clarity before participating further.

Can one ayat be "tashaabaha"?

Imraan

Timotheus

Peace All,

I would like to ask a question for some clarity before participating further.

Can one ayat be "tashaabaha"?

Imraan

Peace. Yes. much of the quran, if not much of semetic language itself is.

How does a child learn what 'big' is?

By comparing it to something 'small'

what is sh - b - h?

= Shiin-Ba-ha = to be like, to resemble/assimilate/liken/imitate, to compare one thing with another due to an attribute connecting them or is common to them can be real or ideal - real "this dollar is like this dollar" ideal "John is like the lion/ass (i.e. strength/stupidity)", appear like another thing, ambiguous/dubious/obscure, comparison/similitude/parable/simile, co similar, resemble (in quality or attributes), conformable.

A huge problem with peoples understanding of the Quran, The Torah etc, is that semetic language is Concrete. concepts are expressed by things that people could see, hear, touch, feel, smell, etc. Things. The semetic people were largely farmers, nomads, etc, hence so many of the roots are derived from basic ideas related to their daily lives.

We derive much of our thinking, and view on life, from the greeks, they were abstract thinkers. concepts were expressed by ideas, thoughts, feelings, etc. The greeks were Mathmeticians, scientists, philosophors, etc.

Many People do not see this, and project there abstract thinking onto concrete things

for example 'mercy'

this is an abstract idea. we understand it because we are abstract thinkers.

how would a semetic person understand this concept? with a concrete thing.

r -h -m from this root comes mercy. the root meaning is womb, how do we get womb?

r

The word resh is usually assumed to have come from a pictogram of a head, ultimately reflecting Proto-Semitic *ra(i)?-. The word's East Semitic cognate, r?-, was one possible phonetic reading of the Sumerian cuneiform sign for "head" (SAG , B184ellst.png) in Akkadian.

H

The letter shape ultimately goes back to a hieroglyph for "courtyard",
Possibly named asir in the Middle Bronze Age alphabets. The Modern Hebrew word for courtyard is Hatzer (&#1512. While the name goes rather back to ayt, the name reconstructed for a letter derived from a hieroglyph for "thread",
In Arabic "thread" is xajt or xet.

m

Mem is believed to derive from the Egyptian hieroglyphic symbol for water,
which had been simplified by the Phoenicians and named after their word for water, mem (Phoenician mem.png), ultimately coming from Proto-Semitic *ma-/*may-.

=

Im not an expert, by any means, but in my understanding

resh (ra in arabic) = head/first/foremost/top

het (Ha in arabic) = thread/courtyard/fenced area

Meem = water

first+courtyard/fenced area+water = first enclosed place in water = womb

womb = surrounds, protects, nourishes etc = mercy

Of course theres alot of deriving, and i dont know the letter heth very well, but either or the two definitions i could find being courtyard/fenced area (an enclousure) or thread (umbilical cord?) fit with the root meaning.

maybe i will pick an easier example

rabb = rbb = rb = resh(head/first/foremost) + bayt(a house) = 'head/first of the house' = Lord, master, provider, sustainer etc.

see theese are all concrete ideas. they are not abstract, to represent an idea like mercy, God uses the example, or similitude of a Womb, Blood relations.. i.e close, surrounding, nuturing, caring etc.

this is how he teaches people who do not understand abstract ideas like 'mercy' by relating it to concrete things like the womb, blood family.

God compares Heaven to Hell, guidance to straying, His awesome power to the powerlessness of idols.

'...Say "Is the blind and the seer the same? Or do the darkness and the light equate?...' -1316

1675 God puts forth the example of a slave who is owned and cannot achieve anything, against one whom We have provided a good provision which he spends of it secretly and openly. Are they the same? Praise be to God, but most of them do not know.

1676 And God puts forth the example of two men, one of them is mute and he cannot achieve anything, and he is a burden to his guardian. Wherever he points him, he does not come with any good. Is he the same as one who orders good and he is upon a straight path?

359 The example of Jesus with God is similar to that of Adam; He created him from dust, then He said to him "Be" and he was.

1424 Did you not note how God puts forth the example that a good word is like a good tree, whose root is firm and whose branches are in the sky.
1425 It bears its fruit every so often with the permission of its Lord; and God puts forth the examples for the people, perhaps they will remember.
1426 And the example of a bad word is like a tree which has been uprooted from the surface of the earth, it has nowhere to settle.

2171 And the example of those who disbelieve is like one who repeats what he has heard of calls and cries; deaf, dumb, and blind, they do not comprehend.

7176 And if We had wished, We could have raised him with it, but he stuck to the earth and he followed his desire. His example is like the dog, if you scold him he pants, and if you leave him he pants; such is the example of the people who deny Our revelations. So narrate the stories, perhaps they will think

2265 And the example of those who spend their money seeking the grace of God, and to save their souls, is like the example of a garden that is on a high ground and is subjected to a heavy rain, and because of that it produces double its crop. And if no heavy rain comes, then it still gives enough. And God is Seer of what you do.

1124 The example of the two groups is like the blind and deaf, and the seer and hearer. Are they the same when compared? Do you not take heed?

938 O you who believe, what is wrong with you when you are told "Mobilize in the cause of God," you become heavy on the earth. Have you become content with this worldly life over the Hereafter? The enjoyment of this worldly life compared to the Hereafter is nothing.

1326 God gives the provisions for whom He wishes, and He is Capable. And they were happy with the worldly life, but the worldly life compared to the Hereafter is nothing except a brief enjoyment

625 The example of those who were given the Torah, but then failed to uphold it, is like the donkey that is carrying a cargo of books. Miserable indeed is the example of the people who denied the revelations of God. And God does not guide the wicked people.

226 God does not shy away from putting forth the example of a mosquito, or anything above it. As for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for the rejecters, they say "What does God intend with this example?" He strays many by it, and He guides many by it; but He only strays by it the wicked.

2943 Such are the examples We put forth for the people, but none comprehend except the knowledgeable.

The Quran, The Torah, The Psalms, The Gospel, Ourselves, The Universe, they are all full of examples, similes etc.

Wakas

peace t11,

...I will use your translation, so you can comprehend and hopefully this time it will be even easier for you

GLARING CONTRADICTION AND DISCREPANCIES ON MANY LEVELS.

Clear revelations (numerous signs) versus signs no one except allah can correctly interpret (which indicates impossible for humans to correctly interpret those signs).
.
.
.
.

You twisted it again, thus failed to get it...... again.

I will re-quote myself

If no one except allah knows their original/correct interpretation then it is impossible for a human to know with certainty they have the correct interpretation of those verses, they can still interpret them however

A human may get the correct interpretation but they will not know with certainty they have, only God knows.

truthseeker11

Peace Wakas,

Looks like you failed to get it again ........ Yet again

4 posts and 4 logical fallacies. SMH

A human may get the correct interpretation but they will not know with certainty they have, only God knows.

If your premise is that you may get correct interpretation of mutashabihat while not knowing with certainty that you have, then the burden is on you to prove that premise as true before using it as an argument. Just saying so does not make it true. You will also have to prove what you got was the correct interpretation in order to use that statement as an argument.

THIS IS EXAMPLE OF LOGICAL FALLACY OF UNWARRANTED PRESUMPTION

Let me put it another way (since you are repeatedly not "getting" it)

My premise "it is impossible for humans to correctly interpret mutashabihat signs."

IF your premise is "it is possible for humans to correctly interpret mutashabihat signs", which would be the counter position, then the burden is on you to prove that premise as true. You will also have to prove that the interpretation of mutashabihat was correct.

Good luck

My humble advice, please learn about logical fallacies (if you don't know) before you post again. Just trying to help you

If you do know about logical fallacies then this is inexcusable.

Peace

truthseeker11

Peace Wakas,

Since you might need some lessons in logic (not implying that you do, because that would be a logical fallacy), I have a very simple lesson for you.

Suppose you write a 100 page article trying to come up with the true meaning of a particular sign or signs from the quran, and one of your FUNDAMENTAL premises is the following (there are many other fundamental premises too)

A. The sign/signs in the current text of the quran is/are the same as in the original text of the quran down to each and every letter.

(because you are going to use each and every word and letter of that sign or those signs to come up with your unique meaning, to discover the meaning that was intended in the original text of the quran sent down to the messenger - like your famous "fa" implications)

The problem is unless you can prove that fundamental premise A to be true in your thesis, you will be committing a LOGICAL FALLACY OF UNWARRANTED PRESUMPTION.

In order to avoid that logical fallacy, you will have to prove premise A to be true (not just belief or circular reasoning), before you can proceed any further, otherwise your entire article will come crashing down, and ALL your conclusions will become invalid because the fundamental premise will be an unproven assumption. Any peer review journal will be able to easily refute your article on that basis and automatically reject your article.

It will be child's play to refute your article, if your article was based on that one unproven premise A

Hopefully you learned something (if you didn't know already).

From here on, if you are going to reply to any of my discussions about any sign from the Truth (al-haqq - 226), or post any of your links, you better be able to avoid this logical fallacy of unwarranted presumption and come up with proof of fundamental premises to proceed any further (bring forth your proof if you are truthful).

Even the current text of the quran encourages this methodology (4153).

And remember, the burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, not on the one making a negative claim. Like if you say Mecca existed at time of Muhammad, and I say it did not, the burden of proof will be on you to prove it (just hypothetical example, not that you said it).

Peace

Wakas

peace t11,

Unfortunately your replies have gone from bad to wrose, thus there is no point in discussing this further. Readers are welcome to read both sides and make up their own mind.

In summary
ts11 makes a claim about 37, then claims contradiction
I point out 37 does not say that and "clear" is subjective.
ts11 responds by asking me to prove my objection, when he hasn't even proved his argument

you made the claim first, the burden of proof is upon you
what is and what is not "unwarranted" is subjective
we already proved by our discussion "clear" is subjective (feel free to deny)
in your claims you completely removed one critical part of 37 which is "only God knows". Readers will note ts11 completely ignores this part in his claims of contradiction.
your counter-argument is particularly funny considering you claim "unwarranted presumption" then immediately state your premise, so I could flip what you said on you.

Simplified you have misinterpreted what 37 is saying
(I know, it's ironic, considering the subject)

Peace out.

truthseeker11

Peace Wakas, all,

Unfortunately your replies have gone from worse to pathetic.

You committed 4 logical fallacies in as many posts (not counting the logical fallacies of false analogy and unwarranted presumption in your 434 article which makes your conclusion completely invalid. I feel bad for you, all your hard work down the drain).

Readers are encouraged to go see the evidence as exposed in my posts in the thread on that article.

"clear" is subjective.

You saying that clear is subjective does not make it so. Especially when a sign calls it "clear".

Do you mean to say the verses that say "clear revelations" imply that they can be unclear (since it is subjective)? If so then that is nonsensical.

You have not given any evidence that when the quran says "clear revelations", the "clear" in those verses is subjective.

ts11 responds by asking me to prove my objection, when he hasn't even proved his argument

37 stating only allah knows correct interpretation of mutashabihat and numerous signs stating "clear revelations" is the proof.

Proving a negative is extremely difficult. You are free to dispute it.

what is and what is not "unwarranted" is subjective

Readers please note. Wakas cannot come up with proof of his unwarranted presumption so he makes this lame excuse.

we already proved by our discussion "clear" is subjective (feel free to deny)

Readers can go and see that he did not prove anything. He committed a logical fallacy of Strawman in that post. Readers can see that I never claimed my sentences to be "clear".

in your claims you completely removed one critical part of 37 which is "only God knows". Readers will note ts11 completely ignores this part in his claims of contradiction.

The contradiction is as follows

Only allah knows the correct interpretation of mutashabihat (37) so it is impossible for humans to correctly interpret those ayaat, versus numerous signs stating "clear revelations". Because as soon as the humans will correctly interpret, they will know the correct interpretation.

Ya3lamu means has knowledge. Even if someone correctly interprets without knowing with certainty, he/she will know the correct interpretation (i.e. will ya3lamu/have knowledge) thereby falsifying 37. This is indisputable.

When a sign says "clear revelations", then the "clear" cannot be subjective, otherwise it becomes pointless for the sign to make that claim. Additionally, it will imply that the author could not make the signs "clear" for all humans who are the intended audience.

THERE, I GAVE THE PROOF FOR MY ARGUMENT.

your counter-argument is particularly funny considering you claim "unwarranted presumption" then immediately state your premise, so I could flip what you said on you.

Readers can see that Wakas made an unwarranted presumption and then used that as an argument which is a logical fallacy. When asked to prove that unwarranted presumption, he failed to do so as can clearly be seen.

#####################

Wakas, I will give you a final chance to redeem yourself

Your premise is as follows

A human may get the correct interpretation but they will not know with certainty they have, only God knows.

Kindly prove this premise.

Let me make it extremely simple for you to understand

All you have to do is bring ONE example of a human getting correct interpretation of mutashabih sign, but not knowing with certainty they have.

The verse indisputably has to be a mutashabih sign, and the interpretation has to be correct in order for that example to be valid.

THERE, IT IS AN OPEN CHALLENGE TO YOU.

Until you bring one such example, the discussion with you on this subject is over.

BRING FORTH YOUR EXAMPLE IF YOU ARE TRUTHFUL.

Also, one simple question

Is 37 as found in the current text of the quran, exactly the same as found in the original text of the quran sent to the messenger (down to each letter)?

A simple yes or no will suffice

Peace

Mazhar

Wakas and Truthseeker

Let us start it again.

Firstly define "Allegorical" appearing in the caption of thread as to what exactly this figure of speech is.

Only one point at a time will be of benefit to all visitors of the thread.

Timotheus

Wakas and Truthseeker

Let us start it again.

Firstly define "Allegorical" appearing in the caption of thread as to what exactly this figure of speech is.

Only one point at a time will be of benefit to all visitors of the thread.

Peace,

I have posted some information about the definition of the arabic root of the original word that 'allegorical' is in reference to. Sadly, as seemingly on many topics i post with what i see as clear evidence, or at least a signpost in the right direction, the conjectors still continue their vain argument.. i feel like i am invisible on this forum LOL.. not that its about me.. but maybe its just clear proof that is invisible to certain people..

Peace

Mazhar

Did I say anything about Arabic Root?

Did you understand my question? If yes please give what you understand by this figure of speech.

hanslan

Salam all

Clarity is not a standard achievement. What is clear to you may be vague to me. As the Lord is the one who explains the Quran, our commitment is just to uphold what is clear to us, and what is vague be left aside until clarity comes.

We can discuss, we can argue and we can share our knowledge but clarity will not be common among us. Thus the Quran just states the fact that there are two kind of verses, one that is clear and the other is not, the level of clarity differs from one another.

Thus the Quran is a personal guidance to us all with the Lord providing it, and who is the best teacher?. What else is there to argue?

reel

@ reel thank you for bring up such an important topic handshake

Yes

3/7 Those who have perversity in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to
create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning.

What does this test (daraba) tell a man to do?

daraba hmm beat the wife or separate/ create distance, cool off period/ talk/ sympathize.
Such is the test of Allah! hail

39/18 is a direct connection to 3/7

39/18 Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and
those are people of understanding. yes

peace

Thanks to you to bro for the input. Do you mean to say mutashbihtun verses are those that can be interpreted in different ways?

Sectarians' version of daraba contradicts verse 419. In short, it violates Quran.

Do not take my word for it. Ask others if the two statements above are equivalent or not.

nope Not equivalent

GLARING CONTRADICTION AND DISCREPANCIES ON MANY LEVELS.

Clear revelations (numerous signs) versus signs no one except allah can interpret which indicates humans cannot interpret those signs.
A book of guidance for forethoughtful (21-2) that contains signs no one except allah can interpret which indicates the forethoughtful cannot interpret those signs.

21-2 talks about those who do not doubt the unseen spoken about in the Quran does exist.
23 Those who believe in the unseen, and establish the prayer, and out of what We have provided them they spend.

Use mind/reason (numerous versus) ------> how can you use mind/reason on signs no one except allah can interpret which indicates humans cannot interpret those signs?

We always can't. As I said earlier, there are verses about the future like judgement day. Can we use mind/reason to actually interpret what it is? It is there. Quran does give its description. But none, but Allah has knowledge of what it actually is despite the fact that our bad and good sides will be judged that day. It is hard for many to believe this.

How will the signs in the horizons and within ourselves verify the truth of signs no one except allah can interpret which indicates humans cannot interpret those signs? (4153)

I don't see how 4153 has any link to the discussion here.

But don't feel upset. Lets approach it calmly.