Lesson from Yousuf's story Ch 12

jkhan

Ok. I'm gonna summarise our discussion and reply to your post at the same time

I said whatever happens, happens because that is what God fully Wants/Wills. I used 8129 to back this up.

You said that I am claiming that no one can will anything. This is not what I am saying. I am saying we can will things, but whatever we will, was what God Willed for us to will in advance. If I choose to eat a cake, I certainly chose to eat the cake, but God Wanted me to choose to eat the cake before I even chose to eat the cake. I am not taking my choosing out of the equation. You mistakenly think that I'm saying nothing is willed by us. No, I am only saying nothing is willed by us independently of the Will of God. Whatever we will, is also Willed by God. This is literally what 8129 is saying.

Think of it this way, God Knows everything that could happen with regards to all free-willed beings. God then chooses the best occurrence and sets things in motion. My choosing to eat a cake on Sunday at 10 pm, was Known in advance by God. God also Knew that if things happened a little differently, I would have chosen something differently on Sunday at 10 pm. God Calculates and Measures everything in advance. Nothing happens independently of God's Knowledge or Will. Do not forget, God Creates and Sets in motion in an Omniscient manner. This literally amounts to saying everything is as God Wants/Wills it to be.

2050 He (Moses) said, "Our Lord is the One who gave everything its creation, then guided."

You say I didn't answer 8128-29. Ask yourself, are you truly sincere to the Truth in this discussion? If yes, then which part of "you cannot will anything is 8129 unclear on? If I will/choose to eat a cake, that's me willing something. Can I will something or anything without God also Willing it? Do you not see that if you reject, you would be contradicting the Quran? What is more important is that you would be contradicting pure reason. How is God Omnipotent or Perfect if something happens independently of Its Will or without God fully Wanting it to happen?

In addition to the above, I am not yet clear on whether you take the Will of God and the Knowledge of God and the Guidance of God to mean the same thing or not. They are clearly different things. Guidance is guidance, knowledge is knowledge, will is will.

Do you not see that if Existence has even an atom's weight of evil in it, then by definition, our Lord/Existence, God, is imperfect? Do you not see that if x rapes y, then this must be because it was perfection for this to happen all things considered. Provided that y suffered against her will and against her best interest, y got punished because y was evil, and x further determines his soul as being evil and perfect for Hell (provided that x acted on evil intent). Two birds, one stone.

665 Say, "He is able to send retribution from above you or from below your feet, or He will make you belong to opposing factions, then He will let you taste the might of each other." See how We cite the signs, perhaps they may comprehend.

Perhaps x chose to join an opposing faction, perhaps x was born into an opposing faction. Whatever it was, God Willed x to belong to an opposing faction. Perhaps x's faction wanted to dominate an opposing faction with evil intent, seeking to kill the opposing faction's children and rape their women and enslave their men. Where the opposing faction is lacking in sincerity to God, this become a hypothetical possibility. Where the opposing faction is sufficiently sincere to God, this become hypothetically impossible. Perhaps x's faction wanted to preach Islam and saw the opposing faction's rulers as raping women and killing children, so x's faction attacks the opposing faction with good intent.

Whatever happens, however it happens (willingly on x's part or unwillingly on x's part) happens because God Wants/Wills it to happen. All of it

...If any good befalls them, they say, "This is from God," and if any bad befalls them, they say, "This is from you!" Say, "All is from God;" what is wrong with these people, they barely understand anything said! (47

Do you agree now that you cannot will anything except if it is also Willed by God?

Brother Nimnimak...peace

I understand that you elaborate within what you understood... It is very clear to me that you debate with what you understood and your intention is not to mock our understanding or to passtime...yiur intention is pure.. That anyone can receive from what you have written.. that's why I persist with you in debate ... But unfortunately your explanation doesnt impress me to ponder that what your understanding is right and go on line with context of Quran.. .. Coz in my view, you got the 8127-29 ...as well 477-80 out of context...
If you can highlight 478 why not highlight 479... Brother don't deviate from the context of the verses.. One with another is much Interconnected... 479...

People blame the Messenger saying that Evil fallen coz of Messenger... How come messenger be responsible when evil falls if he has not done any evil to them.. Life is from God in which good and evil befalls us.. Don't deviate from the context.. We don't know what actually they experienced at that time to say and blame the messenger... Don't confine your vista of thought to one angle..
Why God says in 479 that if good befalls it is from Allah and if evil befalls it is from self.
so it is very clear we are responsible for our evil.. Aren't we? Previous verse they put the complaint on Messenger.. God spoke against it.. Freed the messenger from the blame..
Context is very significant here in verse 477-80 like in verses 8127-29...

Suppose if the verses are within the context of battle... Then these people perhaps would have gained booty.. So they would have claimed it is from Allah when that GOOD happened to them..
And at the same time.. In between battle they would have lost the lives of their companions or their uppehand gone from their grip.. so they would have said when that Evil befallen it is coz of the Messenger since He is the leader... So God rightly said everything is from Allah.. Here THEIR WILL is not relevant but what God HELPED and why god didn't help is imperative .. Thats good and bad.. In fact that is from God.. They can't win coz they willed.. They can't lose coz they willed.. But only God can make them win or lose..so God rightly said everything from God

But in the verse 479 God explains the ultimate truth.. If good befalls coz of God help, mercy etc.. If evil befalls coz of our self... That's General... Like the example of rapist and the victim.. Victim may be innocent but evil of rapist is the reason.. God is not responsible for both victim and rapist..
If not taken with the context of the verse, both 478 and 479 obviously contradict..

Try to understand the Will of God and knowledge/all-knowing of God in various angle..

When God asked " Am I not your Lord? It was all our will to say Yes.. And it was not compulsion or God's willingness for us to say Yes.. But we agreed Lord is God.. But it is in His RECORD, that's will.. Willingness is when God involve with mercy, help guidance destruction, loss victory.. Etc..

So.. I don't agree with you.. I wrote this since you asked as a question whether I agree now.. You don't bring anything convincing to agree with you..

Let me add this point as well to this thread... Note the difference in 479 where God used WHATEVER while in 478 God used within the context as WHEN

Noon_waalqalami

I don't see how you can avoid concluding that we all ate from the tree

سلم salam/peace علىك alayka/upon you (sing.)

236 فازلهما so made them slip dual الشىطن the devil ...
فاخرجهما so evicts them dual مما from what كانا were dual

719 وىادم and O Adam اسكن settles انت thou وزوجك and spouse your الجنه the garden
فكلا so eat dual من from حىث anyplace شىتما like you dual
ولا and not تقربا thou approach dual هذه this الشجره the tree
فتكونا so being dual من from/of الظلمىن the wrongdoers

720 فوسوس so whisper لهما for them dual الشىطن the devil
لىبدى to make apparent/manifest لهما to them dual
ما what وورى concealed عنهما about them dual
من of سوتهما shame theirs dual
وقال and said ما not نهكما prohibit you dual
ربكما lord yours dual عن about هذه this الشجره the tree
الا except ان that تكونا thou become dual ملكىن controllers two
او or تكونا thou become dual من from الخلدىن the eternally living

721 وقاسمهما and swore them dual
انى indeed I لكما for you dual لمن surely among الناصحىن the sincere advisers

722 فدلهما so guile them dual بغرور in/by deception
فلما so to what (when) ذاقا taste dual الشجره the tree
بدت apparent لهما for them dual سوتهما shame theirs dual
وطفقا and began dual ىخصفن fasten dual علىهما upon them dual من from ورق leaf الجنه the garden
وناداهما and call them dual ربهما lord theirs dual
الم did not انهكما I prohibit dual عن about تلكما those what الشجره the tree
واقل and I say لكما for you dual ان indeed الشىطن the devil لكما for you dual عدو enemy مبىن clear

723 قلا said dual ربنا lord ours ظلمنا wrong we of انفسنا souls ours

20116 واذ wa-idh/and when (i.e. past event) قلنا said we of للملىكه to the controllers …

20117 فقلنا so said we of ىادم O Adam ان indeed هذا this عدو enemy لك to you ولزوجك and to spouse your
فلا so not ىخرجنكما evicted be you dual من from الجنه the garden فتشقى so thou agonize

20121 فاكلا so ate dual منها from it …

you got the 8127-29 ...as well 477-80 out of context...

peace, yes cross reference and context …

474 ... ىقتل fighted فى in سبىل pathway الله the god...
477 ... فلما so to what (when) كتب written/decree علىهم upon them القتال the battle
تولوا turn they of الا except قلىلا little of منهم from/among them...

478 اىنما wherever of تكونوا thou be ye of ىدرككم overtaken you (pl.) الموت the death
ولو and in case كنتم be you فى in بروج constructs (towers) مشىده lofty
وان and if تصبهم it afflict them حسنه best/goodness
ىقولوا speaketh they of هذه this من from عند near/with الله the god
وان and if تصبهم it afflict them سىىه evil/calamity
ىقولوا speaketh they of هذه this من from عندك near/with you (i.e. the messenger)
قل say كل each (goodness or calamity theirs) من from عند near/with الله the god
فمال so what is هولا those القوم the folk لا not ىكادون neared being ىفقهون understanding حدىثا narration of

479 ما what اصابك hits/befalls you (sing.) من of حسنه best/goodness فمن so from الله the god
وما and what اصابك hits you (sing.) من from سىىه evil/calamity فمن so from نفسك soul your (sing.)
وارسلنك and sent we you (sing.) للناس to the people رسولا messenger of
وكفى and enough بالله in the god شهىدا witness of

https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/4/vers/78?handschrift=73

https//i.postimg.cc/MKYcSg44/ch4v74-80.jpg

ade_cool

Salam nimnimak_11,

I think you must understand how to approach the book, before you can hope to correctly understand it.

How one approaches the book depends on his conviction.

• Some people are just being exposed to the book. So for these people they definitely will not approach the book as from God.

And if you are in doubt as to what We have sent down to Our servant, then bring a chapter like this, and call upon your witnesses other than God if you are truthful.

And if they are sincerely seeking the truth, they will eventually realize that the book is from God.

• Some people are convinced that the book is from God. They study the book properly seeking guidance from God.

• Some people claim to believe in the book but never actually read the book by themselves. These people are unaware that what they believe actually against the teaching what they claim to believe (unfortunately, some people took advantage of that situation by writing Kitab saying it is from God to gain something)

And among them (Bani Israel - whom God gave the Book) are ummi who do not know the Book except by hearsay, and they only conjecture.
So woe to those who write the Book with their hands then say “This is from God,” so that they can purchase with it a cheap price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they gained.

• Some people hate what God sent down.

• Some people have believed that the book is from God. But overtime they grow arrogant in that when they don't understand the verses, they start saying the book turned out to be the work of mortal.

And recite to them the news of the person whom Our revelations were given to him, but he removed himself from them, and thus the devil followed him, and he became of those who went astray.

He thought and he analyzed.
So woe to him for how he thought.
Then woe to him for how he thought.
Then he looked.
Then he frowned and became bad tempered.
Then he turned away and was arrogant.
So he said “This is nothing except the magic of old.”
“This is nothing except the saying of a mortal.”

The most obvious approach is that any interpretation you take from it, is in line with pure reason. After that, any interpretation you make must be in line with your genuine and sincere sense of good. The Quran is like life. At times, its appearance is such that it does not look as though it is from God (just as what we see in our lives does not look as though Existence Is Perfect). But I think there is enough there for anyone with sincerity to truth and humility, to try and get closer to God. To increase in reverence. To increase in goodness. Also, I think Arabic is an ideal language for this book. The root of words like Ha-qaf-qaf (which semantically highlight truth, justice, reality and other things) are so ideal in conveying the nature of God/Existence that I don't think any other language has grouped or organised or connected labels to semantics in such an ideal way with regards to making the right connections to understanding God and Its Perfection.

As things about it start to come together and make sense, you start to genuinely appreciate the book more and more. Not just for what it is in itself, but how perfectly appropriate and adequate it is for us in our current state. Just like this worldly life.

Thanks for you sharing your thought! I agree that sincerity is key here.

Wassalam

ade_cool

Salam Anoushirvan,

Salam,

I wrote above

This might be slightly off-topic.

Let's begin with Arabic as my Syrian teacher explained.

When you read a sentence in Arabic, there is often an ambiguity on the words because in general the diacritical signs are not marked.
So how do you know which word is the correct one when you read ?

Well, you need to have first an idea of the context where the word is used and then the context removes ambiguity and you can finish reading the sentence.
The context can be internal to the structure of the sentence, I mean grammatical, it represents the signifier.
The context can be external to the structure of the sentence, it represents the signified.

Native Arabic people do it unconsciously but non-native Arabic people must do it explicitly at least at the beginning.

OK

Now for Qur'an a similar idea applies.
Sure, you can read the text as long as you want. And I did that for several years in the frame of traditional Islam.

I have then discovered in 2015 that other readings of Qur'an than the ones proposed by traditional Islam could be possible thanks to Free-minds.org, its articles and its forum.

And that was the problem a lot of readings and interpretations sounded plausible though the text claims it is "clear" and "obvious" in various verses.

But how could one claim that Qur'an is "clear" and "obvious" if so many readings and interpretations are possible ?

Because it is concealed? So that only purified ones can understand?

It is an honorable Quran.
In a concealed Book.
None can grasp it, except those purified.

Because it is so heavy?

Or a little more, and arrange the Quran in its arrangement.
We will place upon you a saying which is heavy.

That so much amount of ink will be needed to elaborate His Kalimah?

And if all the trees on the earth were made into pens, and the ocean were supplied by seven more oceans, the words of God would not run out. God is Noble, Wise.

We can even read interpretations that are only possible because of scientific discoveries made in the 20th CE (by non-Muslims by the way).
But science is not bound by any Qur'anic agenda, and does not hesitate to discard theories that were previously well accepted, so maybe we should wait for a couple centuries more the time Qur'an becomes much clearer, no ?

Yup, this is a privilege that we have in this era with the advance of science and technology ...but people in the past also had their own privilege that we don't have ...

This complaint often comes again and again in the topics on this forum and elsewhere.

This is a contradiction. Sometimes I read here or there that more or less any reading should be valid. But this sounds just a workaround position to avoid admitting there is indeed a problem.

So reading doesn't mean you will understand, and as I did before, you can read during years, even all your life, without ever understanding the text and its purpose if you don't possess the right key.

The reason is the either lack of context or erroneous context about Qur'an and why it was written that would remove ambiguities.

At least in traditional Islam, there are the so-called asbab an-nuzul that attempt to frame tafsirs, even though the asbab an-nuzul are completely fictitious.
Yet interpreting Qur'an within the frame of the asbab an-nuzul leaves the door open to many possibilities like zahir vs. batin in Sufism.

But in my opinion the situation seems even worse for Qur'an alone interpretations.
Wishing to get rid of hadiths, asbab an-nuzul and tafsirs of traditional Islam for the sake of interpreting Qur'an is nice.

But this process, although necessary in first step, has gone too far into believing that interpretation of Qur'an is to be sought in Qur'an alone itself.
This is weird and leads to a lot of circular reasoning that I often read here and there.

Everyone has different background and is guided differently.

Somebody with expertise in geology might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in archaeology might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in quantum physics might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in astronomy might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with jews background might be able to better relate verses regarding Moses.
Somebody with christian background might be able to better relate verses regarding Jesus.

It leads to pure non-sense, similar to what we hear in traditional Islam, that the true "tawrat" of Moses or the true 'injeel" of Jesus have been irremediably corrupted by Jews and Christian and thus, not available anymore. While, on the contrary, there is no proof that the Bible we know today has been corrupted since the 7th CE.

I am not sure if I understand regarding "this leads to pure non-sense".

While Qur'an invokes a lot of times Biblical figures, Abraham, Moses, and here Joseph, etc, it is hardly that the assertions of Qur'an about them are compared to the Jewish and Christian traditions, as if Qur'an mentioned biblical figures by coincidence and without any reference to the Jewish tradition.

It sounds as if the stance attributed to Umar ibn Khattab “As for the books you mention, if there is in it what complies with the Book of God, then it is already there and is not needed and if what is in these books contradict the Book of God there is no need for it. And you can then proceed in destroying them.” were still to be applied.

This is simply severing the text from its native roots.
Probably, people believing in Qur'an alone interpretation consciously cut Qur'an from its roots because, since they believe the text is directly authored by God Himself, it must eternally valid in any situation, whether in the past, in present, or in future, and therefore it must not be tied to any historical context.

Surely when a text has no root, you can plant it anywhere, then unfold it and plant it elsewhere again, right ?

I am sorry I don't get what you are trying to say here ...can you elaborate please?

Wassalam,

Anoushirvan

Salam ade_cool,

Because it is concealed? So that only purified ones can understand?

It is an honorable Quran.
In a concealed Book.
None can grasp it, except those purified.

Because it is so heavy?

Or a little more, and arrange the Quran in its arrangement.
We will place upon you a saying which is heavy.

That so much amount of ink will be needed to elaborate His Kalimah?

And if all the trees on the earth were made into pens, and the ocean were supplied by seven more oceans, the words of God would not run out. God is Noble, Wise.

Maybe.

But

2185 The month of Ramadhan, in which the Qur'an was sent down as a guide to the people and a clarification of the guidance and the criterion. Those of you who witness the month shall fast therein; and whoever is ill or traveling, then the same count from different days. God wants to bring you ease and not to bring you hardship; and so that you may complete the count, and magnify God for what He has guided you to, and that you may be thankful.

6105 It is thus that We dispatch the signs and that they may say "You have studied," and We will make it clear for a people who know.

Etc.

According to https//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=byn#(21859), you have 35 times the occurrence of bayyanu (بَيَّنُ) / to make clear, or 71 times the occurrence of bayyinat (بَيِّنَة) / clear signs, or 119 times the occurrence of the word mubīn (مُّبِين) / clear.

So the lexical field of clarity is overwhelming in Qur'an compared to the other few verses you have exhibited.

So either the few verses you have exhibited have a different meaning than the one you have in mind. Or they were written by someone else.

And regarding verse 31.27, please also note that you don't need a full ocean of ink to write the entire Qur'an but only a small bottle one.

Yup, this is a privilege that we have in this era with the advance of science and technology ...but people in the past also had their own privilege that we don't have ...

Everyone has different background and is guided differently.

Somebody with expertise in geology might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in archaeology might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in quantum physics might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with expertise in astronomy might be able to better understand verses that touch the subject.
Somebody with jews background might be able to better relate verses regarding Moses.
Somebody with christian background might be able to better relate verses regarding Jesus.

This is called concordism, i.e. trying to match ancient Scriptures with recent scientific discoveries.

Concordism happens when religion is losing ground to science and reason.

Jews and Christians did it a lot in 19th and 20th centuries. Some continue to do it in a lesser extent but most of them have acknowledged that it leads to nowhere and is just bad hermeneutics.

Muslims have started to do it with Qur'an in the 70s and beyond, probably to imitate evangelical Christians.
And by "Muslims", I include Qur'an-alone people and alike, since for that matter, they share the same mindset.

Buddhists and Hindus do concordism also.

It should be noted that when the Muslim civilization was at its apogee, never did ancient Muslims feel the need to read Qur'an in a concordist way as modern Muslims do. On the contrary, they felt that science or philosophy were going nowhere and that divine truth and knowledge were only in Qur'an.

I am not sure if I understand regarding "this leads to pure non-sense".

I said

It leads to pure non-sense, similar to what we hear in traditional Islam, that the true "tawrat" of Moses or the true 'injeel" of Jesus have been irremediably corrupted by Jews and Christian and thus, not available anymore. While, on the contrary, there is no proof that the Bible we know today has been corrupted since the 7th CE.

Well, I mean topics like these

https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610829.0
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609253.0
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609757.0
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609226.0

All these imply some sort of answers like the Torah or Gospels we have are corrupted from their original versions.

In Genesis chapter 37, Joseph narrates his dreams to his brothers, while in Qur'an verse 12.5, his father asks him to not tell the dream to his brother.
Still, in Genesis chapter 37, Jacob does not understand the dream of Joseph. But in Qur'an, he does.

Then, why is their a divergence between Pentateuch and Qur'an there ?
Aren't both supposed to come from God ?

If the story of Joseph in Qur'an comes from God but the one narrated in Pentateuch does not come from God, then where does the story of Joseph in Pentateuch actually come from ?
I mean, why was the original "true" story of Joseph, supposed to be identical to the one narrated in Qur'an, not preserved since centuries or millennia before Qur'an by Jews or Christians ?

Or why is that the canonical Gospels say that Jesus was crucified and Qur'an says Issa ben Mariam was not ?

To these, if you have a different answer than usual Muslim argument "Jews and Christians or scribes have corrupted their Scriptures given originally by God, and Qur'an has come to correct the false Bible", then I would be interested to know it.

I am sorry I don't get what you are trying to say here ...can you elaborate please?

I said

While Qur'an invokes a lot of times Biblical figures, Abraham, Moses, and here Joseph, etc, it is hardly that the assertions of Qur'an about them are compared to the Jewish and Christian traditions, as if Qur'an mentioned biblical figures by coincidence and without any reference to the Jewish tradition.

It sounds as if the stance attributed to Umar ibn Khattab “As for the books you mention, if there is in it what complies with the Book of God, then it is already there and is not needed and if what is in these books contradict the Book of God there is no need for it. And you can then proceed in destroying them.” were still to be applied.

This is simply severing the text from its native roots.
Probably, people believing in Qur'an alone interpretation consciously cut Qur'an from its roots because, since they believe the text is directly authored by God Himself, it must eternally valid in any situation, whether in the past, in present, or in future, and therefore it must not be tied to any historical context.

Surely when a text has no root, you can plant it anywhere, then unfold it and plant it elsewhere again, right ?

The root cause of the problems in understanding Qur'an that I exposed above arises from the this specific belief that Qur'an should be a text to speak of God, to reveal who is God, to call (especially polytheists) to pure monotheism and to correct mistakes made by previous monotheist people Jews and/or Christians.

This kind of (erroneous) belief has the clear advantage that you don't need any historical context for Qur'an whatever is God, it is supposed to be the same in the past, in the present, in the future.
If He called to pure monotheism in the 7th CE, then He will do the same in the 21st CE, and since He did that with this "most perfect" Scripture we call "Qur'an", there is no reason for another Scripture in the 21st CE that would add nothing more than Qur'an, right ?

And by the way we don't really need science anyway, right ?
Because either science confirms Qur'an and then it's fine but fairly useless by itself unless it is apologetic.
Or it refutes Qur'an but then science is deluded, not Qur'an.

This is why Muslim belief, including Qur'an-alone belief and alike (God-alone and so on), has to make Qur'an void from historical context.
Or, alternatively, a context that reflects this belief. The asbab an-nuzul were clearly made, forged I would say, to reflect this belief that Qur'an was purposely made for calling to pure monotheism.

But the truth is that Qur'an was never written to call to pure monotheism, this is an erroneous reading.
Qur'an only calls to pure monotheism in a polemical way with its 7th CE adversaries.
It was customary for authors on those times to call their opponents idolaters, and Qur'an is not an exception in this view.

But it is a mistake and a misreading to read that what is at stake in Qur'an is monotheism.

What is at stake are the terms and conditions of salvation.
It is only because according to Jewish and Christian beliefs and Scriptures idolaters (whatever they meant by that) are doomed to damnation that ancient authors, including Qur'an, called their opponent "idolaters" or alike, even though those shared the same Scriptures.

Qur'an says the same as me by the way, read verse 2.113
2113 And the Jews say "The Nazarenes have no basis," and the Nazarenes say "The Jews have no basis," while they are both reciting the Book! Similarly, those who do not know have said the same thing. God will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection in what they dispute.

So in order to understand Qur'an, you need to understand first what is "salvation" in the preceding Scriptures, how Jews or Christian understood it, how they reflected upon it, and so on.

Salvation in the Scriptures and in the Jewish/Christian/Gnostic belief is much more than believing in God-alone according to Muslim understanding of Qur'an, and includes concepts like the Messiah, the signs of the coming of the Messiah, the end of times, the world to come, the height of the ordeal or trial, the destruction and restoration of the Jerusalem Temple, the entry of the pagan nations into the Alliance with God, etc.

You don't plainly understand Qur'an until you properly understand salvation in the previous Scriptures and Qur'an.

nimnimak_11

Brother don't deviate from the context of the verses

Why God says in 479 that if good befalls it is from Allah and if evil befalls it is from self.

Peace brother

If I suffer harm, then God Harmed me because none can will anything except if God also Wills. This is objectively good if and only if I deserve to be harmed because it's good/perfection for evil people to suffer. God Harms/Punishes evil people and Rewards good people. Thus, do you see that all is from God?. All of this is good/perfect because all people are getting what they deserve. Do you agree so far?

By definition, x cannot be evil without choosing to be evil. x cannot be evil without choosing to reject God (the wholly innocent of evil) in favour of that which is not wholly innocent of evil (money, himself, his family, statues, status amongst people as opposed to status with God etc.). This decision making or commitment that x makes, is from himself. The choice is x's. This is evil on x's part. If God did not punish x for this, then God would be doing unjustly. So, God Punishes x because it's a good thing to punish x. x is punished because he is evil. x being evil is from himself. His suffering is because he chose to be evil. He served committed to other than God. God did perfectly (wholly innocent of evil). x did imperfectly (with evil intent or lack of passion/appreciation for God). The evil was from x, the good was from God. Any event that happens, or anything that befalls anyone, is from God. What x chooses, x chooses. x is responsible. If x is evil, then this is from himself. It is not from God. His suffering and punishment is from God. Do you see now that the woman that is raped, is being punished by God? Do you see that her being raped is perfection/good and this good is from God (because all is from God and none can will anything except if God also Wills). But, her being worthy of being raped, is from herself. The rapist being worthy of going to Hell (if he deserves it), is from himself.

Tell me how else you can interpret the 'all' in 478 and the 'anything' in 8129 without being contradictory if you are able.

so it is very clear we are responsible for our evil.. Aren't we?

Of course!

Victim may be innocent but evil of rapist is the reason.. God is not responsible for both victim and rapist..

God is responsible for God/Existence Being Perfect because God Is Perfect. If the victim did not deserve to be harmed, then God should not have Willed for the rapist to rape her. The rapist cannot will anything except if God also Wills (unless of course you completely reject 8129 as well as reject God/Existence Being Perfect...which is what you seem to be doing).

God could have Willed the rapist to be distracted or suffer amnesia before his evil desires or the disease in his heart (which is probably a product of eating from the tree) kicked in. God could have crippled the rapist before he had the chance to harm the woman, thereby punishing the rapist's evil and not punishing the woman. Amnesia does not cure the disease. Amnesia does not lead to being purified by God.

How can you possibly view God as Perfect if you believe that God allows injustice (innocent people to suffer or evil people to be rewarded all things considered)? So then, the woman who is raped, or the child who gets cancer, or the man who is oppressed, did they deserve what happened to them or not? Is God/Existence truly Perfect or not? What do you want to serve? What is more worthy of worship? A perfect existence or an imperfect one? Pretend/impure/imperfect perfection or true perfection? Surely it is in your best interest to serve the One True God.

Do not treat the word 'all' as not being 'all' when the Quran uses the word 'all' in 478 (all is from God)
Do not treat the word 'anything' as not being 'anything' when the Quran uses the word 'anything in 8129 (you cannot will anything except if God also Wills...)

You are trying to force your interpretation at the cost of being contradictory. Be open minded to reason and closed minded to contradictions and perhaps God Will Guide you.

nimnimak_11