Peace,
I would direct my prayers towards my heart, or rather mind. This is the best submission and hence "God's" spirit is in me. If I pray towards something externally then that is my idol.
Very interesting view.
You shall submit to Him, reverence Him, observe the Contact Prayers (Salat), and - whatever you do - do not ever fall into idol worship.
Thanks to everybody for your contributions. I am open to further explanations.
May God guide all of us.
Peace upon you
Here is an article which uses quranic verses to explain who was the teacher who accompagnied Moses http//www.quran-islam.org/articles/teacher_of_moses_%28P1175%29.html. It provides revelant answers to some of the questions asked by Hizbullah.
I have found it very intersting. Please, read it.
May God guide all of us.
Peace.
It seems that there are many others problems with the traditionnal understanding of Qibla (Prayer direction). The followings are from http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-masjid-al-haram-Quran.html. Thanks to Wakas for the link.
NB AQ = Al Qur'an
AMAL = Al MaSJiD Al Haram
The following is a list of the problems regarding this traditional explanation
It is entirely an interpretation based on external sources (i.e. traditions). The terms "kaabah", "mecca", "AMAH", "turn your wajh/face/consideration", "masjid" etc are NEVER discussed elsewhere in AQ involving a specific physical direction, nor is an example given of anyone performing salat in a particular direction. Some cite 4102 but please see part 1 of this series for its analysis.
The word "qiblah", and its root (QBL), cannot be shown to clearly mean "prayer direction" in any AQ occurrence.
All traditional commentators translate the only other occurrence of the specifc noun "qiblah" (apart from these verses) in 1087 as "oratories / places of worship" not "prayer direction". The likely reason is that to do so would make little sense as 1087 says "...and make your houses a qiblah...". Further, they turn it into a plural here, whilst elsewhere it is singular.
In addition to 2142, the following verses also clearly imply turning to a specific direction is irrelevant, e.g. 2115 says "for God is the east and the west so wherever you turn so there is God's wajh/presence/consideration...", 2177 "...it is not righteousness that you turn your wujuh/faces/considerations towards/qibala the east and the west...". Note the similar words used "turn/walla", "wherever/ayna", "wajh/face/consideration", and these messages (the only ones of their kind) are only found in chapter 2, and the only times verb form 2 of "turn" is used in chapter 2 are 2115, 2142-150, 2177. Some commentators explain this away by saying there was no prayer direction initially, and later this was abrogated, and so on. However, note that in terms of sequence, this same message is given prior to AND after the "change of qiblah" verses. Interestingly, some traditional commentators accept that any direction is not special, and the only thing that makes it special is God having imposed it, no other reason.
The verses do not say turn in the direction of the "Kaabah", but AMAH. One may ask then, what does one do once inside AMAH or next to it.
The verses do not say turn your wajh DURING salat, this is an inserted interpretation. In fact, it explicitly says "wherever you are" / "wherever thou start or come forth", implying no limitation, and if so, this would make it impossible to face one direction all the time.
Technically, it is impossible to face an object on a spheroid (i.e. earth) if you are a long distance away from it. One actually faces a random point in space, and even if one were to draw a line on the earth's surface in a direction towards the intended object being even one degree off can result in being many miles away from the object. Thus, it is actually near impossible to do, unless in close proximity to the object, so if one wishes to take this interpretation, one must accept facing one direction is symbolic only.
Note how 2141 clearly implies the past is the past, but according to the traditional understanding the verses which follow are about resuming the qiblah of Abraham et al. Seems a mixed message.
The reason given for the apparent change in qiblah is "not will be for the people against you debate", and "that I may complete My favour upon you and so that you may be guided". The traditional commentators try to explain these away using traditions, see Al Jalalayn (altafsir.com), ibn Kathir (qtafsir.com), Asad (quranix.net). Interestingly, traditional Islamic history shows that their relations with the Jewish tribes of Medina only worsened after this point - potentially contradicting the reasoning offered in AQ.
2145 says "...nor will they follow each other's qiblah..." - a much missed point is the fact that the traditional understanding of "qiblah" as "prayer direction" requires the people of the book to have a minimum of TWO different "qiblah" or "prayer directions" in order to make sense logically, i.e. Jews pray one direction, Christians pray another. I did not find a commentator who explained this away. It is possible they did not realise this. However, there is apparently some evidence to suggest early Christians prayed facing east, and Jews faced Jerusalem, thus satisfying the two-minimum criteria. To me the context of this suggests people can have many qiblah, even their own individual qiblah, i.e. more than two.
If these verses were revealed in Medina, as alleged, then the direction of Jerusalem from there is clearly north-west, not west. Further, there may be some evidence Christians prayed to the east, but Jews do not pray to the west, thus the use of "east" and "west" in 2142 are unlikely meant to be taken as discussing prayer directions, as some claim. Most traditional commentators do not claim this however.
If facing the cuboid called "Kaabah" pleased the messenger, as implied in 2144, then it should be noted it was full of idols at the time, as even accepted in traditional sources. They allege that since it was the first house dedicated to worship, built by Abraham, this was more important than the fact it was filled with idols and a pagan symbol, hence "pleased".
IF the cuboid called "Kaabah" was also the qiblah of Abraham, as agreed upon by traditionalists, then it should be noted prophets Moses and Jesus (who came after Abraham) were NEVER recorded, in any source, as visiting it nor facing it during prayer. This would be extremely unusual. Thus, the explanation sometimes given is that Jerusalem was the legitimate qiblah for Moses/Jesus, and then the original qiblah (i.e. cuboid called Kaabah) was restored with the final revelation, i.e. Quran. This requires us to believe for some reason God changed it, then restored it, and now seemingly assigns blame to the people of the book for not accepting this change. Can we really blame them for not changing, as this explanation is tantamount to God being the source of confusion, which is unacceptable in my view. Further, it is implied in 2146 that some of the people of the kitab/book know that this change is the truth, implying somewhere in their own scriptures this qiblah is mentioned or that their qiblah will be superseded by a future messenger etc - if so, where is this information? Perhaps further research needs to be done in this area.
AMAH as a building likely did not exist at the time, as admitted by traditional sources, and refers to the area/site (see Encyclopaedia of Quran, volume 3, p77). How this was delineated is anyone's guess. Please note some commentators regard AMAH as Mecca in some verses, e.g. 928.
As is clear from the last part of 2144, the only requirement for knowing the true "qiblah" is to be given the decree/scripture from our Lord. There is no requirement to have a compass or to consult a geographical map to know the true "qiblah" from our Lord.
IF the Jerusalem qiblah was appointed by God, then this indirectly implies the messenger was dissatisfied with such a qiblah when 2144 says "...We see thy face/consideration shifting in the sky..." and "...that will please thee...", i.e. was the messenger dissatisfied with a command from God?
The use of masculine suffix pronoun "hu/it" in these verses is somewhat problematic (see bold blue in the above translation), as IF "it" refers to AMAH as a physical building then it seems odd (e.g. they recognise it/AMAH as they recognise their sons). Tafsir Al Jalalayn states the "it" in 2146 refers to Muhammad, Ibn Kathir says it could be Muhammad or Kaabah but unfortunately for him the latter is a feminine noun so it cannot be that. Perhaps Ibn Kathir meant AMAH. Some translators imply the "it" refers to the qiblah but again, this is a feminine noun (see the use of feminine "ha/it" in 2143 for confirmation of this). For me, the variance is telling. It should be strongly noted that in AQ Abraham is never said to have built AMAH, nor is it explicitly mentioned in his presence, thus for the people of the writ/decree to link this to Abraham and recognise AMAH as the truth is somewhat difficult.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to state with certainty what the masculine pronoun "hu" refers to, but in my humble opinion, the flow and logic of the verses suggest it=AMAH, especially considering the usage of "it is the truth from your Lord" in 2144, 2147 and 2149.
1 2145 would imply that if the messenger were to follow their qiblah after these revelations then he would be a wrongdoer and following their desires, yet he was apparently following it previously. Is there a precedent for this in AQ, i.e. doing X is allowed then a future revelation clearly changes doing X to desires/wrongdoing? Not to my knowledge.
The expression "turn + wajh", is used in 679 and rendered as "I shall turn my face to the One who created the heavens and the earth..." but explained as "making his religion and works sincere" (e.g. Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas), likely because this was prior to the alleged building of the cuboid called "Kaaba", thus to render it as a physical direction when such a place did not exist would be problematic for Traditionalists, yet they take this same phrase to mean physical directional command here. Also see "wajh" in 'Verbal Idioms of Quran' by Mustansir Mir. This shows that this phrase does have a link to mindset/sincerity/intention/approach/etc even in traditional sources. The phrase is also used in 2822 (albeit "turn" is verb form 5 not 2) and likely denotes an actual physical turning of one's face, but uses the Arabic word "tilq'aa" for "towards" not "shatra (in the direction)" like these verses. Perhaps "til'qaa" is more appropriate for a physical turning towards, also see 747. It is somewhat peculiar "shatra" is used in 2144-150, rather than the more common "ila/to" for example, IF it did mean a physical face turning towards/to something.
As a side note, also recall how in part 2 it was shown the phrase "aqim wajh" had no link to a physical face or directional command.
IF it was a reference to turning towards another direction in prayer, then to me, it seems odd that in 2142 it states the foolish (al sufahau) will ask "what has turned them from..." when this seems like a reasonable question to ask. Think about it, if you were there as an observer, and a group prayed towards X then Y for about 18 months (as the traditional story goes) then back to X again, wouldn't you also ask "why"? If so, you are of the foolish ones according to the traditional understanding.
Clearly the traditional position has issues, thus is there an alternative understanding that fits better?
Please, can somebody help me.
May God guide all fo us.
Peace be upon all of you
Thanks for your interesting postings
I still have some questions which bother me. This is my view. Please correct me if I am wrong.
On whether the practice indeed resemble idol worship ? my assessment is it does not matter. (?) If we get too much carried away by what others think and how does it look - we can never come to a consensus of what is the right thing to do. What matters is - our intension and a correct understanding of why we are doing what.
?Masjid Al-Haram? is prescribed as the Qibla for those who have been given the Qur?an so that mankind may not have an argument over the faithful.
The Qibla has been assigned ? so that mankind may not have an argument over the faithful?. But if the word ?Qibla? means ?prayer direction? mankind may have argument against us since God is everywhere. And we will just be like worshippers of the Ka'aba.
While praying inside the mentioned qibla (be it one?s home or a specific masjid) the idea of ?direction towards qibla? no longer applies. At that point any direction would suffice. Just like - at south pole all directions are towards north! It is not a ?show stopper? to accept the idea of a Qibla.
If so, The command in ( "Maintain your homes in Egypt for the time being, turn your homes into synagogues, and maintain the Contact Prayers (Salat). Give good news to the believers." is no longer relevant for Moses and his brother as far as they live in Egypt. Just like it would be irrelevant to tell to the people of south pole to do their sala prayer towards north.
Qur?an adopts a language that avoids strict prescription of any fixed form of ritual. It keeps the language related to rituals flexible and open to individual interpretation and understanding.
Maybe. But if some practice may be misinterpreted by people Qur?an make it clear that one commit no sin to do it (, ). Since Idol worshiping is the biggest sin, in my personnal opinion all pratices of God that resemble a "Idol worship" should be clear enough. Note that a lot verses treat on qibla (, and ) but none of them tell us "explicitly" to do the salat prayer toward a particular direction.
Note, if you ask the question ?Are there some relevant practical reasons why a physician should wear a white apron on duty?? you will probably get similar responses as above.
I think a physician should wear white apron on duty for hygiene reasons. Thus, they could easily see dirtiness on it.
May God guide us.
Peace be upon you.
I am posting this message because there are some questions that has been on my mind for a long time. Please would you mind help me to answer these questions?
Is there any Qur?anic definition of the word Qibla?
Does God explicitly tell us via the Quran to face to the Masjid Al-Haram WHILE DOING THE SALA PAYER?
The only link that I have found between Qibla and contact prayer in the Quran was in the verse We inspired Moses and his brother. "Maintain your homes in Egypt for the time being, turn your homes into synagogues (Qibla), and maintain the Contact Prayers (Salat). Give good news to the believers."
If Qibla means focal point that one should face during the contact prayer, how can one person turn his own home into such a focal point when praying inside his home? And how should they do their congregational prayer, when we suppose that each person has to face his own home ?
The image that Muslims convey through the world is the one of a big crowd around the Ka?ba bowing and prostrating in the direction of this house. Is it not a typical image of idol worshipping? Why should God recommend a practice that would allow people to have argument against us?
Are there some relevant practical reasons why one should always do his sala prayer facing a particular direction?
Thank you for your forthcoming answer, God willing.