To Enquirer : Between Text and Interpretation
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Enquirer, in order to have a meaningful dialog with you which you are very capable of, I've noticed that we need to overcome the eponymous hurdle.
So tell us
Since al-quraan is not an entity and people are using it for their views, can they ever get beyond 'their opinion of what it says' ? If not, how are they to have a dialog with you?
-
Here's what you said to WakasAnd your views on quran are YOUR opinions on what allah is saying,not infallible....
Ok, how would you then appropriate or use al-quraan without this gap? Since you are involved in discussing al-quraan, you must therefore need to overlook this 'interpretative gap' ? -
Peace mquran.I think i understand roughly what you are asking...But can you please clarify a little more,so i can respond fully...Thank you...
-
Sure. For example, Layth believes that the majority of people are disbelievers and those who believe do with association. You didn't find this too acceptable and so asserted that it was his interpretation. How would you go about checking that is or isnt his interpretation but what the actual text says?
-
Just to add on to mquran's point, enquirer.
The very act of reading is an interpretive process. Like the discrete quanta of the universe that are affected by the very act of observation, a text too, in a sense, requires an observer (reader, in this case).
So to throw one's hands up in the air and proclaim, "bah, that's your interpretation" when discussing a text, is short-sighted and ill-conceived. To be sure, texts invite various interpretations and the Qur'an is no stranger to this. There are, however, certain methodologies (Qur'anically-sanctioned ones) that aid in interpretation.
I guess the point is it seems like if you could have it your way, discussion of the Qur'an would simply entail copy-pastes of the Arabic verses of the Qur'an with no commentary or thought whatsoever.
-
Peace mquran. Thanks for clarifying. I would say those interpretations have to correspond to observable,objective and rational reality for me to agree with them...I appreciate that this can be somewhat subjective at times...If someone were to quote a verse/interpretation that was 'objectively' verifiable,then i would agree with that interpretation. (As i do with some on this forum when they do this.) I think many issues that people discuss are subjective,and personal context/circumstance dependant...Hope this answers your excellent question...
Peace all. ps;cavemandoctor; I think copy/pastes of 'dubious' interpretations are half the problem my friend...My point is many interpretations are opinions,and subjective....WE would get consensus on some topics if we recognised which topics had subjective leeway,and which topics were more objective...i think more thought needs to go into interpretation,with cross-references to reality....Otherwise it is then just about 'faith' and 'opinions'..... I have no problem with peoples' subjective opinions,as long as they dont think their opinions are universally applicable without any 'objective' real,research to give weight to their universality... -
Peace mquran. Thanks for clarifying. I would say those interpretations have to correspond to observable,objective and rational reality for me to agree with them...I appreciate that this can be somewhat subjective at times...If someone were to quote a verse/interpretation that was 'objectively' verifiable,then i would agree with that interpretation. (As i do with some on this forum when they do this.) I think many issues that people discuss are subjective,and personal context/circumstance dependant...Hope this answers your excellent question...
It does answer my question, thank you. In the arena of al-quraan, how it works is, X will field his viewpoints with some verses and if Y disagrees, he will counter those viewpoints with other verses. I'll give you a demonstration
X we need to obey sunna since al-quraan says 'athi'u ar-rasool' !
Y we need to rely on quran alone because al-quraan is fully-detailed.
Upon verification, we can see that obey the rasool is explained by what the quran voices the rasool's sayings, not an external source. X is therefore wrong.
In this way, if you find Layth to be wrong, you fielded 5/69 and 2/62. These two verses need to be analysed in order to see if your refutation was valid.
I agree with you that agreement cannot be objectively seen, i.e. I cannot make you see, but al-quraan can be made to yield the objective facts.