Quran and Jahiliyya Poetry 1
-
Hi again !
What's up?I assume you've all read the previous post about the poet Umru Al-Qays and his usage of the word in his famous .
If you care to read more about this subject, I have taken the time to post another example.
If you ask the typical Muslim about the meaning of the word or ( in the plural form ) , he or she will most certainly tell you that it means performing ablution ( ) with sand ( or some other material sometimes ) when water is not available. Hence the word has actually come to mean the act of ablution itself, with material other than water. ( Or, in some cases, with nothing )
I have even heard it myself . The elderly, who can't walk because of stiff joints , sometimes perform what they call "Tayammom" ( they would rub their feet with their hands while sitting on a couch , before performing their prayers - eventhough there is plenty of water available )
Conforming with the theory that the best way to determine the meaning of a certain word in the Quran is through the Quran itself , and to resort to Jahiliyya poetry - whenever possible - as a secondary tool to help us in our search, we will find that the word actually means "to seek out " or "to pick out "something.
The word actually appears three times in the Quran ( please correct me if I'm mistaken , but I could not find a fourth ).
The more common verses - from whence the erronuous interpretation of the word came - are as follows
This same meaning appears again in
But there is another verse where the word appears, that many people don't notice
It's possible to deduce a meaning for the word that is common to both these verses.
The verse can be translated as such
"....If you are ill, or traveling, or any of you has just had an excretion, or had intimate contact with women, and could not find water, then seek out some soft sand and wipe your faces and hands with it, for God is pardoner and forgiver.
Likewise, verse can be translated as such
" Oh you who believe, you shall give to charity from the good things that you earn and from what we have bestowed to you from the earth ; and do not seek out ( or pick out ) the bad therein to give away, when you yourselves would not accept it unless your eyes be closed ; for God is rich and praiseworthy".
Do you find this interpretation logical?
There is no such thing as "Tayammom" being equal to "ablution". It is linguistically wrong.Still not convinced?
Ok maybe this will clear it up for youBelow are two verses from the poem of a Jahiliyya poet. ( It may be Tarafa, but I'm not quite sure. I will try to find out who wrote it so I won't be accused of making it up ).
/
/The verses describe a young maiden amidst a scene of bloodshed and corpses after a battle between two rival clans. When she saw death all around her, and the sand under her feet was bloody, she sought the oasis that was in the territory of the Darej clan , and it was like a blessing or gift from God that cleansed her and quenched her thirst.
Does the word mean ablution here? I doubt it.
- Note the use of the word here ( it also appears in the Quran as ) in as some kind of gift from God ( spoils of war obtained without fighting or effort ).
Your feedback is welcome.
-
Peace Enigma,
Jahiliya poetry has been proven to be largely a post-quranic fabrication by many researchers, including Taha Hussein. Also physical archeological evidence proves that Jahiliya poetry is a post quranic fabrication. Therefore, one should use the great reading to understand Jahiliya poetry and not the other way around. Also, like Hadiths, one should be careful if the meaning in Jahiliya poetry doesn't fit with the meaning in the great reading.
Please see the following article
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/science/language.htm
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace Ayman...
I respect you opinion, but about this passage here I have something to say
(From the article you posted a link to)
"In summary, so-called Jahiliya poetry has been proven to be a product of Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties' entertainers and political propagandists, the same social forces that produced Hadiths. The natural law of supply and demand and the storytellers spreading their tales from town to town explains the widespread dissemination of such fabrications without the need for a systematic conspiracy."
So it claims that the Jahiliyya poetry was not in fact a product of pre-Quranic era, but actually a hoax by entertainers of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties.
If this is indeed true, how can we explain the HUGE difference in style between this so called Jahiliyya poetry, and the actual poetry considered to be a product of the Abbasid era for example. The difference is so obvious anyone who compares the two can notice it.
Do you accept the fact that poets such as Al-Mutanabbi, Abu Nawwas, Abu Tammam existed in the Abbasid era? Or were they also fictitious characters?
Assuming Al-Mutanabbi was real for example, how come his style is so different from that of the fictional Tarafa? The differences run deep. They are differences in language, structure of verses, poetic style, even subject matter. How could they all come from the same age?
-
Salaams Enigma,
Hi again !
What's up?I assume you've all read the previous post about the poet Umru Al-Qays and his usage of the word in his famous .
If you care to read more about this subject, I have taken the time to post another example.
If you ask the typical Muslim about the meaning of the word or ( in the plural form ) , he or she will most certainly tell you that it means performing ablution ( ) with sand ( or some other material sometimes ) when water is not available. Hence the word has actually come to mean the act of ablution itself, with material other than water. ( Or, in some cases, with nothing )
I have even heard it myself . The elderly, who can't walk because of stiff joints , sometimes perform what they call "Tayammom" ( they would rub their feet with their hands while sitting on a couch , before performing their prayers - eventhough there is plenty of water available )
Conforming with the theory that the best way to determine the meaning of a certain word in the Quran is through the Quran itself , and to resort to Jahiliyya poetry - whenever possible - as a secondary tool to help us in our search, we will find that the word actually means "to seek out " or "to pick out "something.
The word actually appears three times in the Quran ( please correct me if I'm mistaken , but I could not find a fourth ).
The more common verses - from whence the erronuous interpretation of the word came - are as follows
This same meaning appears again in
But there is another verse where the word appears, that many people don't notice
It's possible to deduce a meaning for the word that is common to both these verses.
The verse can be translated as such
"....If you are ill, or traveling, or any of you has just had an excretion, or had intimate contact with women, and could not find water, then seek out some soft sand and wipe your faces and hands with it, for God is pardoner and forgiver.
Likewise, verse can be translated as such
" Oh you who believe, you shall give to charity from the good things that you earn and from what we have bestowed to you from the earth ; and do not seek out ( or pick out ) the bad therein to give away, when you yourselves would not accept it unless your eyes be closed ; for God is rich and praiseworthy".
Do you find this interpretation logical?
There is no such thing as "Tayammom" being equal to "ablution". It is linguistically wrong.Still not convinced?
Ok maybe this will clear it up for youBelow are two verses from the poem of a Jahiliyya poet. ( It may be Tarafa, but I'm not quite sure. I will try to find out who wrote it so I won't be accused of making it up ).
/
/The verses describe a young maiden amidst a scene of bloodshed and corpses after a battle between two rival clans. When she saw death all around her, and the sand under her feet was bloody, she sought the oasis that was in the territory of the Darej clan , and it was like a blessing or gift from God that cleansed her and quenched her thirst.
Does the word mean ablution here? I doubt it.
- Note the use of the word here ( it also appears in the Quran as ) in as some kind of gift from God ( spoils of war obtained without fighting or effort ).
Your feedback is welcome.
Very interesting!
That is what I found on the Internet regarding the poet of two verses
. .
.
( اYou suggest that Tayammama-Yatayammama means sought-seek. How about the following possibilities
immerse, submerge, baptize, bathe, bury, dip, douse, drench, drown, duck, merge, plunge, saturate, sink, soak, submerse.That maiden was really in need of a good bath. So she submerged herself in that spring.
But when the Ayah saysWhat is the postion of the Ba'a in ?
Also Imsa7oo what Biwojohikum?What do you think?
-
Peace Enigma,
Thank you for your questions.
So it claims that the Jahiliyya poetry was not in fact a product of pre-Quranic era, but actually a hoax by entertainers of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties.
If this is indeed true, how can we explain the HUGE difference in style between this so called Jahiliyya poetry, and the actual poetry considered to be a product of the Abbasid era for example. The difference is so obvious anyone who compares the two can notice it.
No, it is not a hoax no more than the stories of Achilles, Hercules, etc. and Greek odes are hoaxes. It is a form of art. It is the art of story telling mixed with poetry. The poems are intertwined with the story and advance the melodramatic plot line.
Also, this is not my claim. Many others have stated that, including EYE WITNESSES from the Abbasid era itself. For example, the Abbasid era writer Ibn Sallam al-Jumahi in his book Tabaqat Al-Shu3ara casts doubts on many Jahiliya poems and describes their wholesale fabrication that was going on at the time. Many linguists and researchers such as Taha Hussein and David Margoliouth have analyzed in details the language and other aspects of Jahiliya poetry and concluded that the poems we know of as pre-Islamic were in fact from a later Islamic period.
The only arguments by the traditionalists against Taha Hussein and other researcher's thesis is that a wide spread conspiracy was necessary. I merely proved that a widespread conspiracy was not necessary and I tied it all with archeological evidence.
Do you accept the fact that poets such as Al-Mutanabbi, Abu Nawwas, Abu Tammam existed in the Abbasid era? Or were they also fictitious characters?
Yes, unlike the legendary pre-quranic poets who have very interesting live stories that the poems are weaved into, post-quranic poets existed.
To believe that 3antar Ibn Shaddad who can defeat single handedly hundreds of men really existed is like believing that Achilles really existed. To believe that Qays and Layla really existed is like believing that Romeo and Juliet really existed.
Assuming Al-Mutanabbi was real for example, how come his style is so different from that of the fictional Tarafa? The differences run deep. They are differences in language, structure of verses, poetic style, even subject matter. How could they all come from the same age?
The difference is exactly the same type of difference one would expect between contemporary artful poetry and pretentious contemporary fiction.
The language is not very different. Many Jahiliya poems seem to be deliberately inserting some difficult Arabic words to give the impression of archaism. This would be the same situation if you watch a TV series about early Islam. They show the actors speaking in very formal Classical Arabic. However, when you read early Islamic manuscripts and even formal business letters, you don't see such style of formal Classical Arabic used.
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/PERF558.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/jerus.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/enlp3.html
In terms of style, one example you notice right away the extensive use of "wa" and you don't see this in the Islamic TV series.
Similarly, if you examine pre-quranic inscriptions, you will not see the styles used in Jahiliya poetry. In fact, you will see that inscriptions in Southern and Central Arabia use Southern Arabian dialects, which are totally different than the Arabic that we are all familiar with. They don't even use the "al" definite article as quranic Northern Arabic dialect and Jahiliya poems do. Given that most alleged Jahiliya poets such Imru' Alqays were supposed to be Southern Arabs, this raises serious doubts about their poems.
As for structure and poetic style, while the Abbasid era poems have personality and focus more on meaning, the fictional poems of the storytellers focus mostly on rhyme. You can practically take most Jahiliya poems and insert verses in between or rearrange the order of the verses and as long as you follow the rhyme, you will not lose anything. Hence, it is not surprising that Jahiliya poetry is amongst the least tasteful and most pretentious Arabic poetry.
This difference in style and the very narrow focus on rhyme is exactly what one would expect as pieces of the same Jahiliya poem could have been fabricated by several storytellers possibly across generations and the only thing tying the poem together is the rhyme.
As for the subject matter, Jahiliya poems are almost always part of a very interesting story involving the legendary poet. On the other hand, the lives of Abbasid era poets are by comparison normal and border on mundane and their poems are not weaved into their live story in the same way as Jahiliya poets.
My focus in the article was on physical archeological evidence that shows that Jahiliya poems are nothing more than a later-day component of fictional stories and legends. If you are interested in literary criticism of Jahiliya poems and literary evidence that they are largely post-quranic, then I advise you to read Taha Hussein's excellent book Fi Al-Adab Al-Jahili.
I hope this helps.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Ok Ayman, very interesting debate here... lol To be continued wink
As for Taj, I will certainly try to anwser your question concerning the possible meanings you pointed out.
Before I begin, let me ask you a simple question.
Let's say a certain word appears in the Quran 3 times. Which of the two following approaches would be more convenient in your opinion
-
to come up with 3 different meanings for the word depending on the context of the verse in which it appears
-
to actually find a meaning that fits all three ( a common meaning that works for all three verses )
In my opinion, the second is more logical.
you stated the possibility that might mean immerse, submerge, baptize , bathe, etc....
I ask you How would those meanings fit in verse 2267 ???If we go along those possibilities, the verse would then be translated as such
" Oh you who believe, you shall give to charity from the good things that you earn and from what we have bestowed to you from the earth ; and do not immerse / submerge / bathe in / baptize the bad therein to give away, when you yourselves would not accept it unless your eyes be closed ; for God is rich and praiseworthy". ?????
LOL but that's meaningless!!.
I understand the temptation to give the word a different meaning each time...but if we can find a common meaning that fits all the verses , then don't you think it's the correct one???Consider this ( I found this example on the usage of the word in a dictionary )
- meaning He sought / or picked out a particular enemy with his spear ( from a group of others presumably ).
Now considering your question about Imsahoo what??? biwoujouhikom?
Here is the answer
Read verse 56 carefully you will notice".... Tayammamou Tayyiban, Famsahoo biwujoohikom wa aydiyakom MINHU.... " meaning the ( the soft clean sand )
Hence If you do not find water, go seek out a place of soft sand ( ) and wipe your faces and hands with it. ( the sand ) obviously.
Peace.
-
-
Peace Enigma,
Let's say a certain word appears in the Quran 3 times. Which of the two following approaches would be more convenient in your opinion
-
to come up with 3 different meanings for the word depending on the context of the verse in which it appears
-
to actually find a meaning that fits all three ( a common meaning that works for all three verses )
I would take (a) without disregarding (b). Or, I would take (b) without disregarding (a).
Here is what Al Wasee6 says about "Tayamama"
"
Thanks for drawing our attention to this word.
-