Stoning the three pillars during Haj|
-
This is where I disagree with you brother Wakas,Quote
If I may ask you a question, Quran clearly states Abraham fulfilled the vision, thus according to you, what exactly did Abraham fulfil/complete?The word "Saddakta" does not mean fulfilled/completed? it simply means "believed the dream to be true". For me this means Abraham assumed( like some are assuming ) that it was from GOD.
Anyway I agree with the view of brother Joseph in that link"There is no implicit word/sentence to indicate that GOD ordered the act in Qoran".
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
peace,
I assumed you had carefully read the links I provided. My mistake.
In case you missed it, let me make it clear it is a FACT that a common classical Arabic meaning of the verb in question is
Lay one down upon one's kin, neck, cheek or breast
I did read the links, and that meaning of the verb is coherent with the act of sacrifice and my understanding. I don't understand why you are trying to bring up this verb when it rather supports my argument. You'd have to really twist your mind to not see that to lay one down on their neck, cheek or breast is essentially, to lay one down into a submissive position. To facilitate execution.
Like in these imageshttp//media.gettyimages.com/photos/laying-down-picture-id469342439?s=170667a
http//christopherson.net/genealogy/photo/einarson/IMG_WEB_0089_Beheading.jpg -
This was posted previously but there was a forum data loss, hence re-posting
peace GL,
I disagree with yourself and brother Joseph, unless he meant "explicit" not "implicit". There is certainly "implicit" evidence. Let's summarise (refute if able)
Your position is that Abraham AND his son both incorrectly thought it was from God.
Abraham AND his son thought God wanted to kill an innocent person.
Abraham's son automatically assumes it is a command/amr. Is there a verse in Quran wherein shaytan/iblis commands another? (as some think it was a vision by shaytan/iblis/etc)
Nowhere does Quran state/imply they interpreted the vision incorrectly.
Nowhere does Quran mention shaytan/iblis/etc in this story of Abraham.
Quran uses the future particle "sa" for Abraham's son AFTER Abraham would have killed him, stating he will be of the patient ones if God wills. Tell us how does one can be patient after they are killed? And what the son's patience has to do with this story?
When Quran says they both "submitted" you interpolate (in intention, i.e. were about to do the act).
When Quran says "INDEED WE LIKE THUS reward the good-doers" we cant take it as an exemplar because no-one can replicate the lesson in this story, i.e. do something in a dream because you THINK it is from God and you will be rewarded (even if it goes against Quran's principles), i.e. the fact that one THINKS it's from God trumps whatever Quran says.
Quran EXPLICITLY states Abraham settled SOME of his progeny in an area, showing there was a separation. Also Abraham/isac/ishmael are NEVER mentioned together in one place.
Quran's other examples of visions are symbolic and not literal, but in this case you take it literally, i.e. there is no interpretation whatsoever.
Fail to explain why the ransom/exchange of a GREAT sacrifice. What's so great about the goat/camel/whatever that was exchanged/ransomed in your version?
Quran uses LI-ljabini which most commonly means "to/for" not "upon" his forhead.
Quran uses "and we left upon him for the later generations" - explain?
EVERYWHERE in Quran wherein the word "trial/balao" is used, it is from God, but your position is its an exception in the story of Abraham, i.e. not from God.
The last point by itself is enough to refute any claim of no implicit evidence.
peace HPT,
Please re-read. It says "lay one down upon one's kin" not "lay another/someone down....".
-
Peace Wakas,
Why dont we have a more direct look at the source? Let us take a look at Lane's Lexicon. Look at the top of the third column on page 310, that is where the definitions for this trilateral root ensue until first column of page 311
http//ejtaal.net/aa/img/ll/3/ll-0347.pnghttp//ejtaal.net/aa/img/ll/3/ll-0348.png
Which meaning are you trying to give to watallahu?? It's pretty straight forward it entails some form of prostration or laying down.
All the definitions here in LL support the conventional understanding.What does watallahu mean to you EXACTLY? I am not understanding your point, I want to see what you are imagining?
-
peace HPT,
Lane's Lexicon is one source only, not "the source" as you implied. In Dictionary of Quran by Manan Omar (which uses Al-Mufradaat fi Ghariib al-Qur'aan, Lisaan al-Arab, Taaj al-Aruus min Jawaahir al-Qaamuus, as well as the Arabic English Lexicon by E.W Lane.) it states "lay one down upon one's kin".
My translation of the part in question is as follows
JaBiN = side/temple of the forehead, forehead, brow.
"then when both submitted, and he (Abraham) laid himself down upon his kin to/upon his temple/forehead"
or
"then when both submitted, and he (Abraham) brought him to his temple/forehead"Bear in mind Abraham was most likely taller than his son, thus Abraham would have been lowering himself upon/to his son, due to the height difference.
Coincidentally, this is often done when embracing a loved one, upon greeting and when saying goodbye.
Since you like visuals, any of these is fine
https//encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbnANd9GcTfku8oJjWoPMGhZoObwF13-XLqWIUfYKxyeyh13XxgkEPfedQmJQ
http//i.imgur.com/QQtt3nyl.jpg
https//image.ibb.co/jcAtev/download.jpg
https//image.ibb.co/bEaema/download.jpg
-
peace HPT,
Lane's Lexicon is one source only, not "the source" as you implied. In Dictionary of Quran by Manan Omar (which uses Al-Mufradaat fi Ghariib al-Qur'aan, Lisaan al-Arab, Taaj al-Aruus min Jawaahir al-Qaamuus, as well as the Arabic English Lexicon by E.W Lane.) it states "lay one down upon one's kin".
My translation of the part in question is as follows
JaBiN = side/temple of the forehead, forehead, brow.
"then when both submitted, and he (Abraham) laid himself down upon his kin to/upon his temple/forehead"
or
"then when both submitted, and he (Abraham) brought him to his temple/forehead"Bear in mind Abraham was most likely taller than his son, thus Abraham would have been lowering himself upon/to his son, due to the height difference.
Coincidentally, this is often done when embracing a loved one, upon greeting and when saying goodbye.
Since you like visuals, any of these is fine
https//encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbnANd9GcTfku8oJjWoPMGhZoObwF13-XLqWIUfYKxyeyh13XxgkEPfedQmJQ
http//i.imgur.com/QQtt3nyl.jpg
https//image.ibb.co/jcAtev/download.jpg
https//image.ibb.co/bEaema/download.jpg
Peace Wakas
I like the visuals, they were truly helpful. Now, I get what you are saying.
However this complicates things further for me.In fairness with all honesty you need way more imagination to arrive at your interpretation from the said verses than any other interpretation. You have to make assumptions about the height of two individuals you have never seen(due to "....lay UPON one's kin..".
I did not imply that it is the source, I simply thought that is where you got that specific definition from. However it is not present in LL. Or at least i have not found it.
So, exactly which lexicon do you get the definition "to lay one down upon one's kin" from?
Could you please share it and perhaps post it as well or the link that I may come to know what you know.That being said I still think that it is a stretch to take the definition " to lay one down upon one's kin" as you have implied in your interpretation and visual.
Ah I see the issue now!
You are making a classic mistake in English grammar!You are confusing the verbs lay and lie.
One can lay things(one) down, but one cannot lay himself/herself down.
You lay someone or something down but not yourself.One can lie himself or herself down but one cannot lie things(one) down.
You can lie yourself down but not lie something or someone down.Click here for more information
Therefore, in the context you are trying to use it the verb lay is the wrong verb.
It is possible the translator of the lexicon or lexicons you are referencing have made a classic grammatical error. That is why it would be nice to see exactly where this definition is from.However if lay was the intended the verb which I suspect it is then it resonates true with the interpretation of Ibrahim laying down his son and not himself.
Peace
-
It will be from one of the lexicons mentioned previously, except Lanes. DofQ does not specify which one was used to obtain a particular meaning. I have asked someone to look into it.
Re lay V lie
It's possible the compiler (Manan Omar) interpreted the lexicon incorrectly, but his use of "one" seems to indicate he meant oneself.In any case, I'm not sure if it will make much difference but it would be interesting to find out.
-
Bro uq got back to me with the following
-
T-L-L carries the meanings
a) to throw someone down on their face or to wrestle them to the ground,
b) to draw something to one's self. -
DH-B- carries the meanings
a) to split something,
b) to slit someone's/something's throat,
c) to strangle someone/something.
I couldn't find the specific meaning for T-L-L that you mentioned (i.e. lay one down upon one's kin). I also couldn't find a non-literal meaning for DH-B- apart from the meanings I have listed above. There could be some rhetorical function that allows the words above to be used non-literally but that would have to be justified through context and through the determination of the intended meaning of the author.
-
