Peace
I want to exam the quote whee its said "The fruit he made i pairs" (13:3)
Cause I seen it claimed that this is a contradiction.
I know that there are male and female trees. But I don't think its all of them, or? Maybe the quote refraining specific to the fruits trees?
Do you have any knowledge concerning this issue please share it.
I?m also pretty sure that there are some post her. Just I cant find them.
Thanks
May God direct us.
I did some research now myself.
I found out that every fruit need female flower to produce fruit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_reproductive_morphology#Dioecious
Sometimes the fruit can be produced without the male as: parthenocarpy (literally meaning virgin fruit) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenocarpy
The plant do so sometimes because it can have some use of producing without seeds. The seedless fruits are easier to produce and some animal prefer them so the seeded ones are not the one there are being eated.
But the plant therefor don't do so with all the fruits
There are many different occurrences of the gender/sexes. Like they can change, an be both. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_reproductive_morphology#Dioecious
So all in all I think we can conclude that the fruit always comes as male and female. Just in many variations and combinations.
I thank God that his word is proven truth.
Please correct me if I?m wrong
Peace.
Salaam,
The word used in the aayaat given is الثَّمَرَاتِ which also includes grains, cereals, spices, etc. along with fruits. It means any fruit that a tree or plant bears.
The proper word for fruits like mango, apple, grapes, etc. the word used is فَوَاكِهُ as in 23:19 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=23&verse=19).
This is how I understand, I might be wrong completely.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace of God mmkhan
Thank you.
That make sence in some way.
But what about the context, when we know that on the fruittree, there are male and female parts?
Could you please help me with the word pairs? Could the explanation be in this word?
How is the fruit made in pairs?
May god guide us.
Mmkhan,
Perhaps we could say that the word you first suggested means something like "crops", i.e. plant grown naturally or agriculturally for food and is a group name for all vegetation that can be consumed or grow seeds enveloped in a package which can be eaten (apple, banana, orange etc).
We need to realize Arabic words are very descriptive in what they like to say, very literally so.
For example, vegetables are often containing the letter for example: ث (like).
Salaam
It looks to me, it talks about action and reaction,
The fruits are in pairs, ie. action and reaction. That verse looks to be talking about nature and its creation by God.
Gods peace amin
But doesn?t that make it all pretty complicated. Like there is some hidden meaning?
I think that the messeage shouldn?t be that distinct, or?
Maybe its because I dont get the meaning then....
Peace
13:3 And it is He who spread the earth and placed therein firmly set mountains and rivers; and
from all of the fruits He made therein two mates; He causes the night to cover the day. Indeed in
that are signs for a people who give thought.
The verse speaks of pollination or the continuance of the fruit species.
Some monoecious fruit tree flowers are often referred to as "perfect" flowers, meaning both the
female and male parts are contained in the same flower. Others monoecious fruit trees have
separate male and female flowers but on the same tree.
Some types of fruit trees require two trees to insure a fruit crop -- but not all do. Flowering plants,
including fruit trees, require pollination before fruit is produced. When pollen, the male contribution,
finds its way to the female structure, fertilization occurs and a fruit is born. Whether or not two trees
are needed depends on whether the plant produces both male and female flowers or only one of the two.
http://homeguides.sfgate.com/need-two-same-kind-trees-produce-fruit-89155.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollination
The Quran is amazing!
God bless
:peace:
Fruit comes with both sexes. That's what is meant.
Peace hawk99
QuoteFlowering plants,
including fruit trees, require pollination before fruit is produced
Not all. Please see my second post in this treath.
Peace progressive1993
QuoteFruit comes with both sexes. That's what is meant.
But there aint such thing. Or?
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 07, 2015, 02:40:55 PM
Peace hawk99
Not all. Please see my second post in this treath.
Peace NielsJacob, I agree not all, as I was only referring to your question regarding the
verse and its implications/meaning and not trying to decipher the exceptions or variances.
God bless you
:peace:
Peace all,
Fruits NEVER come in both sexes. Some plants or flowers, however, come in both sexes.
The quran actually claims that all fruits come in pairs (13:3, "al-thamaraat" includes all fruits), with the intended meaning that there is male and female fruit, not just for a couple of plants, but every fruit is either male or female, and from each fruit there exists the male and the female kind. This is obviously false and creates a contradiction right away. There are no male and female apples, male and female strawberries, etc. Fruits do not have a gender. In its literal understanding, this statement of the quran is not a scientific miracle, it is a total scientific failure.
However, this statement is so wrong, that one can hardly imagine that it really talks about fruits as such. Maybe we have to allow for poetic license and al-quran simply used the literary device of synecdoche, speaking pars pro toto, and by saying "fruit" really meant "the plant that bears the fruit". Even if that is the case, there still appears to be a contradiction with real world evidence.
Some plants have perfect flowers. "Perfect" in a botanical sense means that each flower has both male (stamens) and female (carpel) parts in the same structure. A "perfect" flower may be described as "bisexual" or "hermaphroditic". Lilies, roses, and apple flowers are perfect.
It is obvious that perfect flowers don't occur in pairs which contradicts and falsifies 13:3. Calling such flowers "pairs" would be same as calling hermaphrodite earthworms "pairs".
This does seem to be a serious contradiction in al-quran with real world evidence, unless "zawjayn" is interpreted as "pair of gametes". Is that interpretation possible, staying within Arabic linguistics?
May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 07, 2015, 12:51:59 PM
Gods peace amin
But doesn?t that make it all pretty complicated. Like there is some hidden meaning?
I think that the messeage shouldn?t be that distinct, or?
Maybe its because I dont get the meaning then....
Salam NielsJacob,
Verse: 13/3
And it is He who spread the earth and placed therein firmly set mountains and rivers; and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates; He causes the night to cover the day. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.
The sign I see is about God, that some of the things cannot be changed or they are created by God, like the setup of the earth with mountains and rivers, the fruits that are made in two pairs and the night that will cover/follow the day.
so my idea of fruits = action and reaction could fit in here directly.
but the "fruits" when taken literally needs better explanation.
Peace all,
I think the proper translation/interpretation of 13:3 would be as follows:
13:3 ....... and from/"min" all the fruits It made in it/"fiha" pairs (of gametes) ..........
This resolves the contradiction.
May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.
I find that it is an intriguing formulation from the Qur'an. "sawjain ethnain" is weird. If I analyse it logically it would mean: two (one and one) members of two different couples (or pairs): zawjain ethnain.
"And from among all the "thamaraat" (he-it-she) put in it (the earth) zawjain ethnain.
Salaam
More clearly, a zawy does not have to be a question of sex, it can be just a pair. If it was a question of sex it could have spoken of male and female. So it is not said that it is a vuestion of sex, therefore it can be or not.
Salaam
Peace,
by Kathy Imbriani
Some types of fruit trees require two trees to insure a fruit crop -- but not all do. Flowering
plants, including fruit trees, require pollination before fruit is produced. When pollen, the male
contribution, finds its way to the female structure, fertilization occurs and a fruit is born. Whether
or not two trees are needed depends on whether the plant produces both male and female
flowers or only one of the two.
Housing for One or Two
In the plant world there are two kinds of flowering plants: monoecious and dioecious. A
monoecious plant has male and female flowers. This allows pollination with only one tree.
A dioecious plant has either male or female flowers. A good way to remember this: "mono"
means one in Latin and "ecious" means "house." Conversely, "di" means two in Latin.
Fruit Trees with One House
Some monoecious fruit tree flowers are often referred to as "perfect" flowers, meaning both
the female and male parts are contained in the same flower. Others monoecious fruit trees
have separate male and female flowers but on the same tree. Two examples of monoecious
fruit trees are most peaches, (Prunus spp.), hardy in U.S. Department of Agriculture plant
hardiness zones 5 through 8, and apricots (Prunus armeniaca), hardy in USDA zones 5 through 7.
Fruit Trees with Two Houses
Fruit trees that are dioecious require a male and a female tree in close proximity to produce
fruit, usually less than 100 feet, but the closer they are the more apt pollinating insects will
visit both. Some dioecious fruit trees include persimmon (Diospyros spp.), hardy in USDA
zones 5 through 11, and pistachio (Pistacia vera) -- Chinese pistachio (Pistacia chinensis)
thrives in USDA zones 6 through 9.
The terms "male" and "female," though used to describe trees, fit as awkwardly as
someone else's shoes. Although the flowers of trees need to be fertilized with pollen
to produce fruit, the geography of plant sexuality is less rigid than that traditionally
described in humans.
Complex Sex
Tree sexual reproduction is much more nuanced, however. Some trees have flowers
that contain both male and female parts, and some flowers have sexual parts that
don't function or that function only occasionally. Likewise, some trees change sex
from season to season while others change once or twice during their lifetime. In
short, tree gender is a complex and ever-evolving phenomenon that biologists
continue to study.
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02107/prune1_2107335b.jpg)
(http://homeguides.sfgate.com/DM-Resize/photos.demandstudios.com/getty/article/142/28/87513892_XS.jpg?w=360&h=360&keep_ratio=1)
God bless
:peace:
Peace hawk99
QuoteAlthough the flowers of trees need to be fertilized with pollen
to produce fruit,
It could be true in the case of fruit trees, but not always in general fruit production.
(I posted before)Sometimes the fruit can be produced without the male as: parthenocarpy (literally meaning virgin fruit) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenocarpy
The plant do so sometimes because it can have some use of producing without seeds. The seedless fruits are easier to produce and some animal prefer them so the seeded ones are not the one there are being eated.
But the plant therefor don't do so with all the fruits
Sometimes the production can be without pollen. Its used often in the production of cucumbers where then no bees are needed.
Anyway the fruitree always have male and female parts. This could be the pairs referring to in 13:3
Peace
What about this simple explanation:
There are no such thing as single fruit production.
On the tree there are always more than one fruit.
Not like for instant a carrot which isn?t a fruit and therefor appears alone.
If the production of fruit is limited to one its only due to human hand interference.
This explanation seems to simple but could be the case. (Please I need respond on this one)
God bless you..
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 08, 2015, 07:36:15 AM
Anyway the fruitree always have male and female parts. This could be the pairs referring to in 13:3
Agreed
Thank you NielsJacob for this very enlightening subject, I am enjoying it very much.
The implications of this subject are very broad and sets the stage for the examination
of "pairs" throughout creation.
51:49 And of all things We created two mates; perhaps you will remember.
36:36 Exalted is He who created all pairs - from what the earth grows and from
themselves and from that which they do not know.
God bless :peace:
Peace hawk99
QuoteThank you NielsJacob for this very enlightening subject, I am enjoying it very much.
:)
QuoteThe implications of this subject are very broad and sets the stage for the examination
of "pairs" throughout creation.
Yes you are right. It could be nice to exam it well.
I saw some at Answering-Christanity but I didn?t found their explanation complete.
Did you see my last post:
What about this simple explanation:
There are no such thing as single fruit production.
On the tree there are always more than one fruit.
Not like for instant a carrot which isn?t a fruit and therefor appears alone.
If the production of fruit is limited to one its only due to human hand interference.
This explanation seems to simple but could be the case. (Please I need respond on this one)
If this a fact it could be really amassing.
Have you seen a single fruit on any plant?
I now truing to see if thats the case. So for I haven?t found any fruit that are produced alone.
God bless you too.
Peace Niels Jacob,
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 08, 2015, 07:36:15 AM
Anyway the fruitree always have male and female parts. This could be the pairs referring to in 13:3
As huruf pointed out, the problem is 13:3 doesn't say "pair" referring to 2, but says "two pairs" referring to 4.
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 08, 2015, 08:08:37 AM
What about this simple explanation:
There are no such thing as single fruit production.
On the tree there are always more than one fruit.
Not like for instant a carrot which isn?t a fruit and therefor appears alone.
If the production of fruit is limited to one its only due to human hand interference.
This explanation seems to simple but could be the case. (Please I need respond on this one)
Same problem. 13:3 says "two pairs" meaning a total of 4. Are fruits always produced in fours?
Back to square one; this seems to be a serious contradiction in the quran.
May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.
No, I did not say four, I said one plus one each of them from a different pair. One from one pair or couple, another from another pair or couple. The ithnain is there to assert that it is just two we are considering, not four. Two members of a pair but not of th same pair but from different pairs.
It may sound unusual as a formulation but quite logical.
At least I do not see any reason that makes impossible that understanding. It is also a formulation which is used in legal and accounting parlance at least in Spanish.
Salaam
Peace Trurhseeker.
Where do you get "four" from.
In fact the verse insist that it is " Ithnain" Look:
وَهُوَ الَّذى مَدَّ الأَرضَ وَجَعَلَ فيها رَوٰسِىَ وَأَنهٰرًا وَمِن كُلِّ الثَّمَرٰتِ جَعَلَ فيها زَوجَينِ اثنَينِ يُغشِى الَّيلَ النَّهارَ إِنَّ فى ذٰلِكَ لَـٔايٰتٍ لِقَومٍ يَتَفَكَّرونَ
Does "Zoujain" " Ithnain" mean four to you?
To me it means in pairs of two-Males and females"!
GOD bless you.
Peace.
"
Zwgyn ʔṯnyn (زوجين اثنين) means: two mates [= 1 pair]
~ the (semitic) root zwg is related to: joining.
SLM
How do we acquire knowledge? Were creation not binary could we save anything in memory?
Peace all,
My mistake! I misunderstood what huruf said earlier.
Question: Why add "ithnain" to "zawjayn" when "zawjayn" itself means 2 mates?
It still doesn't make any sense. Do plants have "one plus one, each of them from a different pair"?
Why only "zawjayn" in 51:49 and not "zawjayn ithnain"?
Peace
According to the Qurān, everything is subject to the law of duality/dichotomy.
G-D is not a thing. Therefore only G-D is ONE.
زَوْجَيْنِ اثْنَيْنِ : It is adjectival phrase. Those who know the classification system of plants might enlighten us.
And rendered in all fruits a duality of pairing-families.
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 08, 2015, 02:41:18 PM
Yes you are right. It could be nice to exam it well.
Peace NielsJacob, Thanks for replying to my post.
Copied from Tutorvista.com
Pathenocarpy in botany and horticulture means the virgin fruits; it is naturally or
artificially induced fruit production without the fertilization of ovules. The fruit
produced by parthenocarpy is seedless. Another biological mechanism
stenospermocarpy also produces seedless fruits, but here the seeds are aborted
while they are still small. In nature, parthenocarpy or stenospermocarpy occurs
as a mutation. If these conditions affect the flower, the plant cannot be able to
reproduce sexually but it might propagate by vegetative reproduction.
Some plants require pollination or stimulation for parthenocarpy. This is known
as stimulative parthenocarpy. Plants which do not require pollination or other
stimulation to produce by parthenocarpy is known as vegetative parthenocarpy.
Moving plants from one part of the world to another, it may lack pollinators so
parthenocarpic varieties are easier for cultivation. Some parthenocarpic plants
are developed by genetical modifications.
Pairs throughout creation
I think knowing the significance of pairs as per Quran which are revealed
in ayats 51:49, 13:3 and 36:36, contain knowledge which will bring us to the understanding
that as far as human perception is concerned, is a creation of pairs, opposites, similar
and dissimilar, balance and relative scale which ranges from one extreme to another.
Therefore some questions have answers built into that very same question by just
acknowledging the opposite, relative scale etc.
God bless
:peace:
Quote from: NielsJacob on March 08, 2015, 02:41:18 PM
Peace hawk99
:)
Yes you are right. It could be nice to exam it well.
I saw some at Answering-Christanity but I didn?t found their explanation complete.
Did you see my last post:
What about this simple explanation:
There are no such thing as single fruit production.
On the tree there are always more than one fruit.
Not like for instant a carrot which isn?t a fruit and therefor appears alone.
If the production of fruit is limited to one its only due to human hand interference.
This explanation seems to simple but could be the case. (Please I need respond on this one)
If this a fact it could be really amassing.
Have you seen a single fruit on any plant?
I now truing to see if thats the case. So for I haven?t found any fruit that are produced alone.
God bless you too.
Salam Neil,
Thats a good explanation and fits well, shows the plurality or duality, indirectly showing that nothing created exists singular there's something to compare with. duality or diversity is part of creation and the source is the only singularity.
Peace all.
Quoteindirectly showing that nothing created exists singular there's something to compare with. duality or diversity is part of creation and the source is the only singularity.
Nice formulation
There ain?t such thing as single fruit production.
Its really exiting for me if this can be the explanation.
So far I havn?t found any such fruit.
The Pineapple appears to be a single fruit form the plant. But:
The pineapple ?fruit? is not really a fruit at all but is a mass of individual berries fused to the central stalk. This is why the ?fruit? has leaves on top. They are actually the continued growth of the stalk beyond where the berries are attached.http://faculty.ucc.edu/biology-ombrello/pow/pineapple.htm
But so far the claim stands:
He made the fruits in pairs. And we read it as it stand with no interpreation.
If you have any example of a singular fruit. Then of course the teori will fall to the ground.
May God led us...
Peace All.
In my research I found:
A Poppy/Opium has a single fruit/capsule
And then again we can read about capsule: In botany a capsule is a type of simple, dry fruit produced by many species of flowering plants
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsule_(botany)
But is the capsule a fruit in the way its mentioned in Al Quran?
I don't know Arabic so, someone could please help here..
God Bless
Peace
here I go again.
What about this translation. If we cant say there are more than one of every fruit:
He gave all plants their male and female parts (N J Dawood (draft))
13:3 And it is He who spread the earth and placed therein firmly set mountains and rivers; and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates; He causes the night to cover the day. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.
I have been told by the biologist that inside a fruit there is a male and female. I am looking for the research paper to know whether it is confirmed.
Does anyone know how seeds form in fruits?
I think you should reconsider what mates can include. Some examples from plant life:
The complexity of the morphology of flowers and its variation within populations has led to a rich terminology.
Androdioecious: having male flowers on some plants, bisexual ones on others.[6]
Androecious: having only male flowers (the male of a dioecious population); producing pollen but no seed.[16]
Androgynous: see bisexual.[6]
Androgynomonoecious: having male, female, and bisexual flowers on the same plant, also called trimonoecious.[16]
Andromonoecious: having both bisexual and male flowers on the same plant.[6]
Bisexual: each flower of each individual has both male and female structures, i.e. it combines both sexes in one structure.[6] Flowers of this kind are called perfect, having both stamens and carpels. Other terms used for this condition are androgynous, hermaphroditic, monoclinous and synoecious.
Dichogamous: having sexes developing at different times; producing pollen when the stigmas are not receptive,[6] either protandrous or protogynous. This promotes outcrossing by limiting self-pollination.[17] Some dichogamous plants have bisexual flowers, others have unisexual flowers.
Diclinous: see Unisexual.[6]
Dioecious: having either only male or only female flowers.[6] No individual plant of the population produces both pollen and ovules.[18] (From the Greek for "two households". See also the Wiktionary entry for dioecious.)
Gynodioecious: having hermaphrodite flowers and female flowers on separate plants.[19]
Gynoecious: having only female flowers (the female of a dioecious population); producing seed but not pollen.[citation needed]
Gynomonoecious: having both bisexual and female flowers on the same plant.[6]
Hermaphroditic: see bisexual.[6]
Imperfect: (of flowers) having some parts that are normally present not developed,[20] e.g. lacking stamens. See also Unisexual.
Monoclinous: see bisexual.[6]
Monoecious In the commoner narrow sense of the term, it refers to plants with unisexual flowers which occur on the same individual.[2] In the broad sense of the term, it also includes plants with bisexual flowers.[6] Individuals bearing separate flowers of both sexes at the same time are called simultaneously or synchronously monoecious.[citation needed] Individuals that bear flowers of one sex at one time are called consecutively monoecious.[citation needed] (From the Greek monos "single" + oikia "house". See also the Wiktionary entry for monoecious.)
Perfect: (of flowers) see bisexual.[6]
Polygamodioecious: mostly dioecious, but with either a few flowers of the opposite sex or a few bisexual flowers on the same plant.[2]
Polygamomonoecious: see polygamous.[6] Or, mostly monoecious, but also partly polygamous.[2]
Polygamous: having male, female, and bisexual flowers on the same plant.[6] Also called polygamomonoecious or trimonoecious.[21] Or, with bisexual and at least one of male and female flowers on the same plant.[2]
Protandrous: (of dichogamous plants) having male parts of flowers developed before female parts, e.g. having flowers that function first as male and then change to female or producing pollen before the stigmas of the same plant are receptive.[6] (Protoandrous is also used.)
Protogynous: (of dichogamous plants) having female parts of flowers developed before male parts, e.g. having flowers that function first as female and then change to male or producing pollen after the stigmas of the same plant are receptive.[6]
Subandroecious: having mostly male flowers, with a few female or bisexual flowers.[citation needed]
Subdioecious: having some individuals in otherwise dioecious populations with flowers that are not clearly male or female. The population produces normally male or female plants with unisexual flowers, but some plants may have bisexual flowers, some both male and female flowers, and others some combination thereof, such as female and bisexual flowers. The condition is thought to represent a transition between bisexuality and dioecy.[22][23]
Subgynoecious: having mostly female flowers, with a few male or bisexual flowers.[citation needed]
I am really sorry, I have been reading this post and I got so sad that people are making a problem about 13:3. I just have to discuss this here. Please forgive me for bringing back an old topic, but I NEED to address it because this thread had no closure!!
QuoteSame problem. 13:3 says "two pairs" meaning a total of 4. Are fruits always produced in fours?
Back to square one; this seems to be a serious contradiction in the quran.
Actually, it is not a contradiction, and in fact, it is a
major miracle--if you understand the science behind plant development.
Let's start with:
[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.
This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "
the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all
the pairs" of the Earth. i.e He created all the existing pairs, so what.
kol=all
In arabic you can say "kol alazwaj or "alazwaj kollaha" interchangeably.
[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...
In Arabic, (مِنْْ) "min" could mean "some of"
Definitions: from, some, some of .
Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "
Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "
a part of all things are made into pairs".
[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates
Same thing as above.
A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)
Believe it or not, this verse is a
significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin
also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)!
What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:
Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452 (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452)
This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs.
WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!
Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief by relating to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.
The word فيها , which was used in Quran 13:3 means "in"
In other words, we see a "double marriage", "double mating", "double pairing"--double fertilization IN fruits!
Here is a good resource talking about how double fertilization evolved specifically in "FLOWERING PLANTS" (Angiosperms)--fruit IS an organ of flowering plants--fruit is produced by flowering plants.
https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Book%3A_General_Biology_(Boundless)/32%3A_Plant_Reproductive_Development_and_Structure/32.2%3A_Pollination_and_Fertilization/32.2D%3A_Double_Fertilization_in_Plants (https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Book%3A_General_Biology_(Boundless)/32%3A_Plant_Reproductive_Development_and_Structure/32.2%3A_Pollination_and_Fertilization/32.2D%3A_Double_Fertilization_in_Plants)
Peace mclinkin94,
Welcome to the forum, thank you for your insights.
Per my last post, the Quran says that: Some fruits, Allah put in them double marriages (Zawj= pair, marriage). Hmm...double marriages inside fruits, double mating inside fruits--fruits have double mating within them...double fertilization within them...
QuoteWelcome to the forum, thank you for your insights.
Thank you, I hope it will be helpful.
Quote from: mclinkin94 on July 31, 2020, 11:33:49 PM
I am really sorry, I have been reading this post and I got so sad that people are making a problem about 13:3. I just have to discuss this here. Please forgive me for bringing back an old topic, but I NEED to address it because this thread had no closure!!
Actually, it is not a contradiction, and in fact, it is a major miracle--if you understand the science behind plant development.
Let's start with:
[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.
This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth. i.e He created all the existing pairs, so what.
kol=all
In arabic you can say "kol alazwaj or "alazwaj kollaha" interchangeably.
[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...
In Arabic, (مِنْْ) "min" could mean "some of"
Definitions: from, some, some of .
Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".
[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates
Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)
Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:
Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452 (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452)
This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!
Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief by relating to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.
Peace..
23:27 "So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned..
Would you pls explain the verse 23:27 connecting to your above explanation
Thank you..
QuotePeace..
23:27 "So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned..
Would you pls explain the verse 23:27 connecting to your above explanation
Thank you..
Yes, I will address this in two parts. First, this reflects the complexity and multiple meanings of the Arabic language and the Quran.
'Zawj' can mean "pairs" or "kinds" or "sorts". It is not clear which one is the case--it can mean either thing depending on the context of the Quran, and sometimes the context of the Quran doesn't give us the answer and remains ambiguous.
'Min kol' can mean "a part of every/each" or "a part from/of the set of all" (ie. a part from [all things]). In other words, it can mean a 'portion of each thing', or it can mean a 'portion of/from the set of all things' (ie. a portion of/from [all things]) For example, imagine the number set [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]--we will call this set "Set A". If I say "pick numbers from the whole Set A"--it is ambiguous. Does it mean pick some numbers from Set A, or pick all the numbers of Set A? The way I worded it allows for both translations and is thus ambiguous. This too is ambiguous and can mean either depending on the context of the Quran and sometimes the context does not reveal which is the case. The Quran tells us that it is sometimes deliberately ambiguous in 3:7.
Ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness--it allows support of 7th century dispositions while not contradicting ours. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Allah chose it to be revealed in Arabic, which is a rich language containing words with multiple meanings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the second part:
With the above said, I want to mention a nuance in those two verses (13:3 and 23:27)--specifically, Allah's word choice.
If you notice in both verses it says:
zawjayni ith'nayniIn Arabic, there are three types of nouns:
- Singular
- Dual
- Plural
(In English, there is only singular and plural)
Zawjani is a dual noun. Ith'nayni is also a dual noun.
https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN (https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN)
So
even if "Zawjani" is translated as "kinds" rather than "pairs", it is in
dual form--so it means "2 kinds" which means the same thing as a "pair". Thus the verses that say "zawjayni ith'nayni" would be saying "two kinds two". It is using the number 2 twice. 2 x 2.
Some English translators have picked up on this, for example: In translating 13:3, Yusof Ali writes "and fruit of every kind He made in pairs,
two and two". Other English translators have also written "two pairs"--see:
Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar, T.B.Irving, Abdul Hye, Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Syed Vickar Ahamed, Farook Malik, Dr. Kamal Omar, Maududi, Ali Bakhtiari Nejad, A.L. Bilal Muhammad, Sayyed Abbas Sadr-Ameli, Mir Aneesuddin etc. Allah could've just simply said "and fruits he made Zawjani" which would say "fruits made in pairs"--but Allah didn't say that. He added the redundant word "ith'nayni". It is clear from the science what Allah is referring to--double marriages, double mating, double fertilization IN fruit. Notice how the verse says "Fiha" which means In/inside. It is saying INSIDE the fruit there are double pairings of mates. Male and female gametes/cells are inside the fruit. It is not a contradiction at all--in fact, given the deliberate seemingly unnecessary redundancy of using "Ith'nayni" in 13:3, Allah is pointing to that redundancy INSIDE fruits. Literally double spouses; double fertilization.
Part of the miracle is that Allah used the word "inside" when referencing the double pairings in fruit. "inside" ("fiha" in Arabic) also seems to be an unnecessary thing to say if Allah was just saying 'fruits, he made them pairs'--rather, Allah instead put the word "inside", which directs our attention to something happening
inside fruits, rather than fruits having genders. The specificity of Allah's use of language in this verse is very telling.
As a side note, notice how the Quran does not rule out the existence of a multiplicity of double fertilization in fruits (eg. Fruits can have multiple seeds--each seed is doubly fertilized)--it just said inside fruits, there are double matings. It didn't say how many double matings are occurring, as thus, it does not explicitly rule them out. It's kind of like saying: "In plants, there is X"<---When I say this, I am not ruling out that plants also have Y--I just said they have X in them: that is a true statement.
Now, regarding 23:27, I think we should consider Allah's word choice--he is saying "2 pairs"--as in two sets of a mating pair (as in 4 animals). Likewise, If I tell you to give me 2 pairs of socks, I am asking for 4 socks.
Interestingly, in the bible, it says "seven pairs" rather than "two pairs" in Genesis 7:3. If you look at a mechanical word for word translation https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html (https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html) it says:
"From all of the clean beasts you will take for you seven seven males and females"--so 7 pairs of males and females.
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm (https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm) The Jews translate it as:
"Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate". So this could be a corruption in the bible. But note that the common understanding that they only took ONE male and female only of each animal is
not correct in either the Bible nor the Quran.
As a side note, the Quran does not conclusively lay out whether the flood was a local or global event, nor does it say if they took animals from all the Earth or just from all the animals that they use for subsistence (like the grazing animals--Quran just said take 2 pairs each and thus could be referring to what was around or proximal to Noah's settlement--it didn't say take 2 pairs of each living being on the planet) and thus this ambiguity allows for either understanding.
salam mclinkin94
i understand from the Quran that the flood was global
surah 71 verse 26
"and noah said: my Lord, do not leave on the earth from among the rejecters an inhabitant."
so from my understanding the flood was global (i may be wrong so please verify for yourself)
peace
Quote from: mclinkin94 on July 31, 2020, 11:33:49 PM
I am really sorry, I have been reading this post and I got so sad that people are making a problem about 13:3. I just have to discuss this here. Please forgive me for bringing back an old topic, but I NEED to address it because this thread had no closure!!
Salam mclinkin94,
There is nothing wrong about replying an old thread especially in this case you bring insights to others.
Like you said in "introduce yourself" section, "Don't leave any thoughts that support Islam unsaid!" :sun:
QuoteActually, it is not a contradiction, and in fact, it is a major miracle--if you understand the science behind plant development.
Let's start with:
[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.
This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth. i.e He created all the existing pairs, so what.
kol=all
In arabic you can say "kol alazwaj or "alazwaj kollaha" interchangeably.
[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...
In Arabic, (مِنْْ) "min" could mean "some of"
Definitions: from, some, some of .
Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".
[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates
Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)
Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:
Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452 (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452)
This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!
Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief by relating to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.
Thanks for the insights!
Wassalam,
Ade
Quote from: tutti_frutti on August 01, 2020, 11:15:55 PM
salam mclinkin94
i understand from the Quran that the flood was global
surah 71 verse 26
"and noah said: my Lord, do not leave on the earth from among the rejecters an inhabitant."
so from my understanding the flood was global (i may be wrong so please verify for yourself)
peace
Salam, tutti_frutti
The issue is the translation.
"ard" which they translated as "Earth" can also mean "Land". We know that Noah existed long before Abraham and long before the Jews. He may have existed shortly after Adam before humans really dispersed around the Earth.
I'm not saying the Quran definitively said the flood was local--I'm saying the Quran did not specify whether it was local or global and thus either could be the case.
Quote from: mclinkin94 on August 01, 2020, 10:34:59 PM
Yes, I will address this in two parts. First, this reflects the complexity and multiple meanings of the Arabic language and the Quran.
'Zawj' can mean "pairs" or "kinds" or "sorts". It is not clear which one is the case--it can mean either thing depending on the context of the Quran, and sometimes the context of the Quran doesn't give us the answer and remains ambiguous.
'Min kol' can mean "a part of every/each" or "a part from/of the set of all" (ie. a part from [all things]). In other words, it can mean a 'portion of each thing', or it can mean a 'portion of/from the set of all things' (ie. a portion of/from [all things]) For example, imagine the number set [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]--we will call this set "Set A". If I say "pick numbers from the whole Set A"--it is ambiguous. Does it mean pick some numbers from Set A, or pick all the numbers of Set A? The way I worded it allows for both translations and is thus ambiguous. This too is ambiguous and can mean either depending on the context of the Quran and sometimes the context does not reveal which is the case. The Quran tells us that it is sometimes deliberately ambiguous in 3:7.
Ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness--it allows support of 7th century dispositions while not contradicting ours. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Allah chose it to be revealed in Arabic, which is a rich language containing words with multiple meanings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the second part:
With the above said, I want to mention a nuance in those two verses (13:3 and 23:27)--specifically, Allah's word choice.
If you notice in both verses it says: zawjayni ith'nayni
In Arabic, there are three types of nouns:
- Singular
- Dual
- Plural
(In English, there is only singular and plural)
Zawjani is a dual noun. Ith'nayni is also a dual noun.
https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN (https://imgur.com/a/GWLDCyN)
So even if "Zawjani" is translated as "kinds" rather than "pairs", it is in dual form--so it means "2 kinds" which means the same thing as a "pair". Thus the verses that say "zawjayni ith'nayni" would be saying "two kinds two". It is using the number 2 twice. 2 x 2.
Some English translators have picked up on this, for example: In translating 13:3, Yusof Ali writes "and fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two". Other English translators have also written "two pairs"--see: Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar, T.B.Irving, Abdul Hye, Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Syed Vickar Ahamed, Farook Malik, Dr. Kamal Omar, Maududi, Ali Bakhtiari Nejad, A.L. Bilal Muhammad, Sayyed Abbas Sadr-Ameli, Mir Aneesuddin etc.
Allah could've just simply said "and fruits he made Zawjani" which would say "fruits made in pairs"--but Allah didn't say that. He added the redundant word "ith'nayni". It is clear from the science what Allah is referring to--double marriages, double mating, double fertilization IN fruit. Notice how the verse says "Fiha" which means In/inside. It is saying INSIDE the fruit there are double pairings of mates. Male and female gametes/cells are inside the fruit. It is not a contradiction at all--in fact, given the deliberate seemingly unnecessary redundancy of using "Ith'nayni" in 13:3, Allah is pointing to that redundancy INSIDE fruits. Literally double spouses; double fertilization.
Part of the miracle is that Allah used the word "inside" when referencing the double pairings in fruit. "inside" ("fiha" in Arabic) also seems to be an unnecessary thing to say if Allah was just saying 'fruits, he made them pairs'--rather, Allah instead put the word "inside", which directs our attention to something happening inside it, rather than fruits having genders. The specificity of Allah's use of language in this verse is very telling.
As a side note, notice how the Quran does not rule out the existence of a multiplicity of double fertilization in fruits (eg. Fruits can have multiple seeds--each seed is doubly fertilized)--it just said inside fruits, there are double matings. It didn't say how many double matings are occurring, as thus, it does not explicitly rule them out. It's kind of like saying: "In plants, there is X"<---When I say this, I am not ruling out that plants also have Y--I just said they have X in them: that is a true statement.
Now, regarding 23:27, I think we should consider Allah's word choice--he is saying "2 pairs"--as in two sets of a mating pair (as in 4 animals). Likewise, If I tell you to give me 2 pairs of socks, I am asking for 4 socks.
Interestingly, in the bible, it says "seven pairs" rather than "two pairs" in Genesis 7:3. If you look at a mechanical word for word translation https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html (https://www.mechanical-translation.org/mtt/G7.html) it says:
"From all of the clean beasts you will take for you seven seven males and females"--so 7 pairs of males and females.
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm (https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8170/jewish/Chapter-7.htm) The Jews translate it as: "Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate".
So this could be a corruption in the bible. But note that the common understanding that they only took ONE male and female only of each animal is not correct in either the Bible nor the Quran.
As a side note, the Quran does not conclusively lay out whether the flood was a local or global event, nor does it say if they took animals from all the Earth or just from all the animals that they use for subsistence (like the grazing animals--Quran just said take 2 pairs each and thus could be referring to what was around or proximal to Noah's settlement--it didn't say take 2 pairs of each living being on the planet) and thus this ambiguity allows for either understanding.
Peace brother..
I wish you stay in this forum actively In sha Allah.. I sense your knowledge and guidance within book and most of all, the way of clarification to a question by not deviating from the point of question..
God bless you..
By the way my undying Zawjain is gender (both male and female only)
53:45 "And that He creates the genders (Zawjain) - the male and female"
Zawj is just kind or pair or any gender regardless
Izthnain is just two numbers and nothing else regardless of gender..
In my case.. Ja'ala(made) and khalaqa (creates) should be noted carefully to understand certain relevant verses..
In the case of 'min kullu' to be called 'part of' as well, you need to give a big support from Quran whether it has meant anywhere and if so reason it why taken as 'part of' leaving 'all of'
I agree 23:27 quantity is 04 ..
salam mclinkin94
i agree with you that there could be a possibility that the people of noah pbuh were the only people that existed at that time, when mankind was one community
i think the people of noah pbuh were what we call neanderthals (as per below verse)
surah 7 verse 69 (i understand it is hud pbuh talking to the people he was sent to in the verse)
"are you surprised that a reminder has come to you from your Lord through a man from among you to warn you? ans remember that He made you successors after the people of noah, and He increased you in CREATION vastly. so remember the grace of God, that you may succeed."
scientist also say that some neanderthal genes are in all humans (here is an article: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/africa-neanderthal-dna-scn/index.html ) and i think they say it is because humans mated with neanderthals (as they have no other explanation :s )
i think if we all have some of such genes it is rather because all humans are descendants of the people of noah pbuh a.k.a. neanderthals
i also think that the first ship ever built was the ship of noah pbuh that The Lord created for noah pbuh and subsequently taught humans how to build ships
so my opinion, big possibility that people of noah pbuh were the only community of humans and that the flood was global
i might be wrong so please again verify for yourself :)
peace
QuoteLike you said in "introduce yourself" section, "Don't leave any thoughts that support Islam unsaid!"
:)
QuoteI wish you stay in this forum actively In sha Allah.. I sense your knowledge and guidance within book and most of all, the way of clarification to a question by not deviating from the point of question..
Thank you!
QuoteBy the way my undying Zawjain is gender (both male and female only)
53:45 "And that He creates the genders (Zawjain) - the male and female"
Zawj is just kind or pair or any gender regardless
Izthnain is just two numbers and nothing else regardless of gender..
In my case.. Ja'ala(made) and khalaqa (creates) should be noted carefully to understand certain relevant verses..
I don't think it is necessary. Zawjain can be the dual form of Zawj and it can be any pair. But, if what you say is true, then it strengthens the case of the miracle I mentioned.
Zawjain is still dual form, so it would be dual form of the sexes (as in, both sexes). So now the Quranic verse 13:3 is saying: "two sexes, two"--which is referring to the 2 sexual pairings that happen in double fertilization. If what you say is necessarily true, then that's even better!
QuoteIn the case of 'min kullu' to be called 'part of' as well, you need to give a big support from Quran whether it has meant anywhere and if so reason it why taken as 'part of' leaving 'all of'
'min kullu' is technically translated as 'from/of/part-of all'. As such, when understanding that technical morphology, we recognize that it could mean 'part of the whole of' or 'a piece from every'. It can mean one or the other--and what it means can vary between different verses as they can use that same phrase to mean different things.
But then, why use "from ALL" and not just "from them". Because it carries a greater rhetorical effect and signifies massive multitudes. "from ALL" has a greater rhetorical effect and better signifies the magnitude than "from them", yet at the same time, it does not necessarily mean "a part from every single thing", but it can also mean "a part of/from [the set of ALL things]" (just I described with the number set example in my previous post).
I agree that it would be great to have direct support from the Quran, but I don't think it is necessary. If a phrase could mean something else,
then it could mean something else--even if nothing else in the Quran helps us identify which is the case.
The Quran's ambiguity is a strength of the Quran, not a weakness. It allows for flexibility in translation and by using this Allah can support 7th century dispositions while still being vague enough not to contradict ours.
That being said, I still want to give examples of verses where "min kullu" does
not always mean 'a part from every single thing' and rather it can mean 'a part from [the set of ALL things]' (just as I described in the number set example in my previous post). These verses are not required to understand that "min kullu" can mean different things, but since you asked:
[Quran 18:84] Indeed, we established him on the Earth and gave him "min kulli" thing a means.
This verse doesn't mean that Dhul Qarnayn was omnipotent or that Allah allowed him to do absolutely anything. Could Dhul Qarnayn become prophet Muhammad? Could Dhul Qarnayn ask Allah to forgive mushrikeen of Shirk (something Allah will never do)? Did Allah give Dhul Qarnayn the power to disobey him without any punishment at all? Rather it means Allah gave him capabilities from a big part of [the set of everything].
[Quran 39:27] And We have certainly presented for the people in this Qur'an from every ("min kulli") example - that they might remember.
Does this verse mean that the Qur'an has all the examples Allah can provide? Or does it mean that Allah gave us many examples (pieces) of/from [the whole set of examples]? There are many examples within Allah's infinite knowledge and wisdom that he could've given us, yet the examples in the Quran are many, but finite. Allah demands that we ponder/reflect over the Quran--so we must arrive at this conclusion.
Either way, even if the Quran provided us with no help regarding this, it doesn't change the fact that "min kulli" could mean either "a part from every thing" or "a part from [all things]".
Quote from: tutti_frutti on August 02, 2020, 12:11:50 AM
salam mclinkin94
i agree with you that there could be a possibility that the people of noah pbuh were the only people that existed at that time, when mankind was one community
i think the people of noah pbuh were what we call neanderthals (as per below verse)
surah 7 verse 69 (i understand it is hud pbuh talking to the people he was sent to in the verse)
"are you surprised that a reminder has come to you from your Lord through a man from among you to warn you? ans remember that He made you successors after the people of noah, and He increased you in CREATION vastly. so remember the grace of God, that you may succeed."
scientist also say that some neanderthal genes are in all humans (here is an article: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/africa-neanderthal-dna-scn/index.html ) and i think they say it is because humans mated with neanderthals (as they have no other explanation :s )
i think if we all have some of such genes it is rather because all humans are descendants of the people of noah pbuh a.k.a. neanderthals
i also think that the first ship ever built was the ship of noah pbuh that The Lord created for noah pbuh and subsequently taught humans how to build ships
so my opinion, big possibility that people of noah pbuh were the only community of humans and that the flood was global
i might be wrong so please again verify for yourself :)
peace
Yes, I agree with the possibilities you mention. I also want to add it is also possible the people of Noah were the only community of humans and that the flood was local. I'm not saying happened as a local flood, but that it is
possible.
I also wanted to add:
Why didn't Allah say "fruits are created in pairs, male and female"? That would be a scientific error--there is no such thing as a male or female strawberry. But Allah avoided saying that and instead said "INSIDE" them, there is a double pairing. This specificity and carefulness of the Quran is very telling as to who the author of the Quran is.
Brother...
It's hard to get kullu means part... Kullu can only mean all or each.. When added min kullu it can only mean from all or from each...
I went through min kullu verses it clearly indicate within the context of all or each...
Even the couple of example you furnished cabnot be taken as part of.. Context of the verse or intention and subject is key...
If I say I gave from all I have to you...it does mean all.. Not leaving anything apart but what is the subject... What did I give.. Money... Money is what I gave all not any other thing...
Even 3:07 is talking Bout a particular word.. But it talks about verses (aya) so what you connect is not so adhering... Here only a word or two.. That also clear Arabic words kullu and min..
In my understanding 13:3 could mean that God created all zamara.. Then ja'ala made all of them genders Zawjain (genders male female).. I mean each zamara is both male and female.. Out of it two..
I don't how logical with science but that's what I get from the verse.. Science can change but verse won't..
So in the case of Zamarath quantity is two but when it comes to animal qty is 4..
That's my take..
Quote from: jkhan on August 02, 2020, 02:36:36 AM
Brother...
It's hard to get kullu means part... Kullu can only mean all or each.. When added min kullu it can only mean from all or from each...
No, I think you are restricting the verse to one interpretation, while ignoring the others.
The verse did not say "kullu zamara" (all fruits), which Allah could've said simply, but he chose to be very specific and Allah added "min" to that verse to say "min kullu zamara".
That means: "of [all the fruits]" or "some of [all the fruits]". The word "min" can mean 'of', 'from', 'some of', 'some from'.
So when you say, some from the set of all the fruits, you are saying something that carries a connotation of high magnitude while at the same time not necessarily saying "every single one".
Imagine the set of [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] and I tell you "pick some of the numbers from all the set" or "pick numbers from the whole set"--that doesn't necessarily mean pick every single number. Likewise "min kullu zamara" does not mean "every single fruit", it means "of every fruit" or "some of every fruit" or "some of all the fruits".
In English, I can say "of all the fruits, some of them are sweet" or "of all the fruits, are sweet ones". The same in Arabic. Allah used the word "min kullu" and not just "kullu".
QuoteI went through min kullu verses it clearly indicate within the context of all or each...
First, I think you took the wrong approach because you are thinking we need verses from the Quran to reduce the ambiguity. Sometimes, the Quran may not explain some of its ambiguities...and we are left with those ambiguities. And we already know that "min kullu" can mean those 2 different things. If they can mean those things, then they can mean those things :) That alone is sufficient.
QuoteEven the couple of example you furnished cabnot be taken as part of.. Context of the verse or intention and subject is key...
If I say I gave from all I have to you...it does mean all.. Not leaving anything apart but what is the subject... What did I give.. Money... Money is what I gave all not any other thing...
Sure, that Dhul Qarnayn verse is just one I picked randomly. I'm sure I can search for many, but why do such a thing after what I just explained above? Also why did you forget about Quran 39:27? This tells us specifically that "min Kullu" cannot always mean "every single one", but rather means "from the set of all ones". Again, Allah could have just said "we have given you "kullu" examples", but he didn't, he said "min kullu" indicating he only gave us examples from [the set of all examples].
But even then, the assumption that we need a Quranic verse to remove the ambiguity is non-sequitur. If something can be understood as X, Y or Z, then it can be understood as X, Y, or Z, even if the Quran did not specify which! Don't fall for this trap.
QuoteEven 3:07 is talking Bout a particular word.. But it talks about verses (aya) so what you connect is not so adhering... Here only a word or two.. That also clear Arabic words kullu and min..
No, it's far more complicated than that! There could be ambiguities within large verses. Some verses are super large and they have phrases in them that are ambiguous.
If I say "there are medical conditions which present with mild pain and others with severe pain", I am not excluding the fact there are medical conditions with moderate pain nor am I excluding medical conditions with alternating bouts of mild and severe pain. Such an exclusion is not stated in that statement--its only the
presumption of the reader that leads them to that conclusion. Likewise, if I tell you there are sentences in this article with big words and others with small words--that doesn't exclude sentences with both big words and small words. Likewise, if a professor tells you that in your essay there are sentences that are well written and others, poorly written--it doesn't mean there aren't sentences with both well written and poorly written components. Again, such an exclusion is only perceived through the
assumption of the reader. So again, this verse (3:7) does not exclude the existence of verses which have both ambiguous and unambiguous elements within it.
From: http://www.answeringislamicskeptics.com/approach-to-quran-understanding.html (http://www.answeringislamicskeptics.com/approach-to-quran-understanding.html)
QuoteIn my understanding 13:3 could mean that God created all zamara.. Then ja'ala made all of them genders Zawjain (genders male female).. I mean each zamara is both male and female.. Out of it two..
That's not what the verse said. Word for word here is what it said:
وَمِنْ كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ جَعَلَ فِيهَا زَوْجَيْنِ اثْنَيْنِ
"From All The Fruits, He Made
inside it two mates"
So inside the fruits are two mates. The fruits themselves are not two mates, but inside them are two mates. That is literally what this verse is saying. And we find out that indeed there are double matings inside the fruits (and these are in their seeds!).
And note, because "min" also means "some of", that verse above can be rendered word-for-word: "some of all the fruits, he made inside it two mates".
QuoteI don't how logical with science but that's what I get from the verse.. Science can change but verse won't..
If a verse is worded in such a very specific weird way that happens to true to the science--that is VERY significant. The verse above is worded very carefully, and this carefulness and specificity is a sign for us.
Why didn't Allah say "fruits are created in pairs, male and female"? That would be a scientific error--there is no such thing as a male or female strawberry. But Allah avoided saying that and instead said "INSIDE" them, there is a double pairing. This specificity and carefulness of the Quran is very telling as to who the author of the Quran is.
I do understand that science is changing, but this is not just science, it is an
observation. With respect to double fertilization, that is not something like cosmology or social science where there is a lot of guessing, modeling, experimenting and rudimentary analysis, this is not an experiment, it is an observation--you can literally see it under a microscope! You can literally observe it. It's not really science, it's just observation at this point. It's kind of like observing the heart pumping blood, sure it is a science, but it's really more of an observation.
QuoteSo in the case of Zamarath quantity is two but when it comes to animal qty is 4..
That's my take..
That is an inconsistent translation. It seems that you've just chosen to use the same exact phrase in different ways without justification.
Quote from: mclinkin94 on August 02, 2020, 03:35:14 AM
No, I think you are restricting the verse to one interpretation, while ignoring the others.
The verse did not say "kullu zamara" (all fruits), which Allah could've said simply, but he chose to be very specific and Allah added "min" to that verse to say "min kullu zamara".
That means: "of [all the fruits]" or "some of [all the fruits]". The word "min" can mean 'of', 'from', 'some of', 'some from'.
So when you say, some from the set of all the fruits, you are saying something that carries a connotation of high magnitude while at the same time not necessarily saying "every single one".
Imagine the set of [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] and I tell you "pick some of the numbers from all the set" or "pick numbers from the whole set"--that doesn't necessarily mean pick every single number. Likewise "min kullu zamara" does not mean "every single fruit", it means "of every fruit" or "some of every fruit" or "some of all the fruits".
In English, I can say "of all the fruits, some of them are sweet" or "of all the fruits, are sweet ones". The same in Arabic. Allah used the word "min kullu" and not just "kullu".
First, I think you took the wrong approach because you are thinking we need verses from the Quran to reduce the ambiguity. Sometimes, the Quran may not explain some of its ambiguities...and we are left with those ambiguities. And we already know that "min kullu" can mean those 2 different things. If they can mean those things, then they can mean those things :) That alone is sufficient.
Sure, that Dhul Qarnayn verse is just one I picked randomly. I'm sure I can search for many, but why do such a thing after what I just explained above? Also why did you forget about Quran 39:27? This tells us specifically that "min Kullu" cannot always mean "every single one", but rather means "from the set of all ones". Again, Allah could have just said "we have given you "kullu" examples", but he didn't, he said "min kullu" indicating he only gave us examples from [the set of all examples].
But even then, the assumption that we need a Quranic verse to remove the ambiguity is non-sequitur. If something can be understood as X, Y or Z, then it can be understood as X, Y, or Z, even if the Quran did not specify which! Don't fall for this trap.
No, it's far more complicated than that! There could be ambiguities within large verses. Some verses are super large and they have phrases in them that are ambiguous.
If I say "there are medical conditions which present with mild pain and others with severe pain", I am not excluding the fact there are medical conditions with moderate pain nor am I excluding medical conditions with alternating bouts of mild and severe pain. Such an exclusion is not stated in that statement--its only the presumption of the reader that leads them to that conclusion. Likewise, if I tell you there are sentences in this article with big words and others with small words--that doesn't exclude sentences with both big words and small words. Likewise, if a professor tells you that in your essay there are sentences that are well written and others, poorly written--it doesn't mean there aren't sentences with both well written and poorly written components. Again, such an exclusion is only perceived through the assumption of the reader. So again, this verse (3:7) does not exclude the existence of verses which have both ambiguous and unambiguous elements within it.
From: http://www.answeringislamicskeptics.com/approach-to-quran-understanding.html (http://www.answeringislamicskeptics.com/approach-to-quran-understanding.html)
That's not what the verse said. Word for word here is what it said:
وَمِنْ كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ جَعَلَ فِيهَا زَوْجَيْنِ اثْنَيْنِ
"From All The Fruits, He Made inside it two mates"
So inside the fruits are two mates. The fruits themselves are not two mates, but inside them are two mates. That is literally what this verse is saying. And we find out that indeed there are double matings inside the fruits (and these are in their seeds!).
And note, because "min" also means "some of", that verse above can be rendered word-for-word: "some of all the fruits, he made inside it two mates".
If a verse is worded in such a very specific weird way that happens to true to the science--that is VERY significant. The verse above is worded very carefully, and this carefulness and specificity is a sign for us.
Why didn't Allah say "fruits are created in pairs, male and female"? That would be a scientific error--there is no such thing as a male or female strawberry. But Allah avoided saying that and instead said "INSIDE" them, there is a double pairing. This specificity and carefulness of the Quran is very telling as to who the author of the Quran is.
I do understand that science is changing, but this is not just science, it is an observation. With respect to double fertilization, that is not something like cosmology or social science where there is a lot of guessing, modeling, experimenting and rudimentary analysis, this is not an experiment, it is an observation--you can literally see it under a microscope! You can literally observe it. It's not really science, it's just observation at this point. It's kind of like observing the heart pumping blood, sure it is a science, but it's really more of an observation.
That is an inconsistent translation. It seems that you've just chosen to use the same exact phrase in different ways without justification.
Brother peace..
I do anticipate that you have patience with my repeated concerns...
Note pls 3:07 is clearly stated verses are (Muthashabih) not words or phrases.. With words verses form.. But other verses are manifest it says.. So in manifest verses also words form it.. Nothing will make a verse muthashaabih coz of min or kullu.. Anyway it further says only those whose hearts perversity follows muthashaabih.. So do you consider this verse 13:3 a muthashabih? So why explain it if so? It seems like believers only believe it not trying to explain the verses of muthashaabih... Unless the verse 3:07 speak differently.. Is the verse 3:07 itself muthashaabih? Lol.. For me 13:3 is not muthashaabih.. Who will decide muthashaabih and manifest? That's an issue..
Okay.. Let's turn to 13:03... Why you take feeha as 'inside it' rather than in it...
What I say is each zhamarath in it is genders.. For example apple, in apple genders/zawjain (male and female) not male or female.. So every zhamarath in its own possesses the gender of male and female..
Note the below verse for our concerns ..
16:11 "He causes to grow for you thereby the crops, olives, palm trees, grapevines, and from all the fruits (min kullu zhamarath) . Indeed in that is a sign for a people who give thought.
Already some of the examples furnished in the verse and further says min kullu zhamarath.. Would you take it 'from some of'..
By the way zhamarath for me not mere fruits.. But all edible plants and produce of all plants (fruits, veg, nuts etc etc except animals and animal products )
Does every fruit has a seed? Just asking.. How do I know, while I don't have any knowledge of every fruit that exist on this earth?
Do you notice the difference in 14:37 where Ibrahim ask to provide from the zamarth ... He did really say some of the zamarath not all.. Clearly omitted kullu.. What if the verse included kullu.. Does it still mean some of the zamarath?
Quote from: jkhan on August 02, 2020, 07:45:14 AM
Brother peace..
I do anticipate that you have patience with my repeated concerns...
Absolutely! I hope that you find insight in my responses. Although, given some life obligations I may not always respond on time.
QuoteNote pls 3:07 is clearly stated verses are (Muthashabih) not words or phrases.. With words verses form.. But other verses are manifest it says.. So in manifest verses also words form it.. Nothing will make a verse muthashaabih coz of min or kullu.. Anyway it further says only those whose hearts perversity follows muthashaabih.. So do you consider this verse 13:3 a muthashabih? So why explain it if so? It seems like believers only believe it not trying to explain the verses of muthashaabih... Unless the verse 3:07 speak differently.. Is the verse 3:07 itself muthashaabih? Lol..
I would disagree with your understanding of Quran 3:7. This verse does not explicitly rule out ambiguities within some verses. Some verses can have both ambiguous and unambiguous elements. Quran 3:7 is not restricted to whole verses. As I said earlier: if a professor tells you some sentences are poorly written and others, well written---your professor is not excluding the existence of sentences with poorly written and well written phrases. Such an exclusion is only an assumption you make. The same is true in 3:7, you are assuming that it excludes ambiguity in verses, but the verse does not explicitly say this. Parts of verses can be muthashaabih and parts can be manifest. So yes, a part of a verse (including a part of 3:7) can be muthashaabih and another part (including a part of 3:7) can be manifest. It depends on the verse!
Now, I think you misunderstand "those who have perversity in their hearts follow what is muthashaabih". I want to address this here:
It is commonly claimed that the Quran is teaching us to not think about the ambiguous verses. However, when we closely examine 3:7, we do not see such an explicit command:
"...Then as for those in whose hearts (qulubihim) is perversity (zayghun), so they follow what is 'tashabaha' (obscure, unclear) of it seeking discord/disagreement (fitna) and seeking its interpretation (tawil)..."
This verse is saying to not pursue the ambiguities seeking discord and committing yourself to one interpretation when the verse is ambiguous. It is not saying "don't think about the ambiguities or try to understand it", it is saying, 'don't pursue the ambiguities with the intention of causing discord'. This is, in fact, what nonbelievers do--they take ambiguous verses and then they claim those verses definitively teach X, and then they show that X is a scientific error (or a contradiction with the Quran)--just as Allah warned us in 3:7! The non-believers time and time again (especially in Wiki-Islam and AnsweringIslam) take ambiguous verses as if they are unambiguous, and they restrict the interpretation of the ambiguous verse to one possible understanding, and then they claim the Quran is in error as a result--just as Allah warned us in 3:7!
As we see here, this verse is not commanding us to not recognize that a verse is ambiguous and recognize that it could be referring to different things--instead, it is commanding us to recognize the ambiguities within the Quran and not restrict the interpretation of those verses to only one thing when they are ambiguous and could mean either thing. So this verse doesn't mean don't pursue them, it means don't commit yourself to one interpretation of an ambiguous verse--it is telling you to recognize that verses can be ambiguous--to understand that there could be other meanings and not restrict it to only one.
QuoteFor me 13:3 is not muthashaabih.. Who will decide muthashaabih and manifest? That's an issue..
Exactly! Quran 3:7 doesn't tell you how to recognize mutashaabih vs manifest. You recognize it by reading a verse and recognizing that it could mean something else--that is is possible it is referring to something else. And since the verse does not specify which meaning is the case, then the verse is ambiguous as to what it is saying.
QuoteOkay.. Let's turn to 13:03... Why you take feeha as 'inside it' rather than in it...
What I say is each zhamarath in it is genders.. For example apple, in apple genders/zawjain (male and female) not male or female.. So every zhamarath in its own possesses the gender of male and female..
Yes, this is a good example of how this verse is "mutashaabih". You said "feeha" can be taken as "in it" and "inside it". Both are possible understandings. You just chose "in it" and ignored that it could mean "inside it". What you did was exactly what Quran 3:7 warned us about--you decided to restrict its meaning to only one interpretation and ignore the other. I am not saying this verse definitively says "inside it" rather than "in it"--I'm saying it could be either!
I say that this verse is a miracle because Allah made it ambiguous to both satisfy 7th century dualistic dispositions, yet the verse was worded in such a weird way that also allows for such an interpretation to support modern dispositions! Only Allah would know exactly when to be ambiguous and yet even within the ambiguity, the other valid interpretation of the verse allows the verse to be
perfectly agreeable with science (double fertilization). This verse was so perfectly written; it was so carefully written and it is a sign/evidence that it is from Allah. The only thing we can say to this is
Subhanallah!
If the verse simply said "and the fruits are made in pairs, male and female". It would not be agreeable with science and it would be a scientific error. Yet Allah knew this and was able to word it in such a brilliant and careful way. How did Muhammad know to do this and word it this way? He didn't! It was Allah--such an amazing sign from Allah.
QuoteNote the below verse for our concerns ..
16:11 "He causes to grow for you thereby the crops, olives, palm trees, grapevines, and from all the fruits (min kullu zhamarath) . Indeed in that is a sign for a people who give thought.
Already some of the examples furnished in the verse and further says min kullu zhamarath.. Would you take it 'from some of'..
Yes, I think it is possible that this verse you mentioned still means "some of/from all the fruits" and not just "all the fruits". If Allah wanted to say "all the fruits", he could've said "kullu zhamarath", but he put the word "min" in there to make it ambiguous as to whether he is saying "some of/from all the fruits" or "all the fruits". This allows for either understanding.
The universe is massive and there are many Earth like planets. Indeed there may be different kinds of fruit growing on those other planets. The Quran says there are many Earths too (See verse 65:12). Those other Earths can have different fruits not found in our Earth.
Additionally, the Quran says in Jannah (heaven/paradise) there are fruits. That doesn't mean the fruits in Jannah are exactly the same as the ones on Earth, or that Earth has all the fruits that Jannah has. That is inconclusive.
[Quran 55:52] In both of them are of every fruit, two pairs.
This verse's context is talking about heaven/paradise, not on Earth. And notice how this verse says the fruits in paradise are gendered. But when Allah was discussing the fruits on Earth, he was careful not to say this and instead said "inside them are 2 pairs". Again, I ask how did Muhammad know to conveniently say this? He didn't! It was Allah!
QuoteBy the way zhamarath for me not mere fruits.. But all edible plants and produce of all plants (fruits, veg, nuts etc etc except animals and animal products ). Does every fruit has a seed? Just asking.. How do I know, while I don't have any knowledge of every fruit that exist on this earth?
No, some fruits are seedless.
QuoteDo you notice the difference in 14:37 where Ibrahim ask to provide from the zamarth ... He did really say some of the zamarath not all.. Clearly omitted kullu.. What if the verse included kullu.. Does it still mean some of the zamarath?
I already mentioned in my previous post that:
"Zamarath" is different from "Kullu Zamarath" which is different from "min Kullu Zamarath".
When you just say "Zamarath", you are not asking for a lot. It carries a connotation of modest amount.
When you say "Kullu Zamarath", you are asking for ALL of them.
When you say "min Kullu Zamarath", you are asking for a lot. It carries a connotation of plentiful amounts. But it does not necessarily mean "every single Zamarath"--it can also mean "some from [all zamarath]". It allows for that ambiguity while carrying that connotation of greatness. This is an example of how Allah can appeal to 7th century dispositions without contradicting ours.
Peace brother..
I am really impressed with your responses..
I wonder how come one be an atheist while with this much knowledge... May Allah save you from all evils of you and Jin and Men...
Btw.. I leave the readers to decide what could possibly right in this regard..
I honestly feel you explained within the book...
Glad I debated with you...hope benefited to readers... I end my questions from here leaving to the rest..
I agree brother jkhan.
mclinkin94 has answered using "the best explanation/context from all the verses",taking care of the precise words used in each verse.
The only thing that I disagree with is the following, quote:
"The universe is massive and there are many Earth like planets. Indeed there may be different kinds of fruit growing on those other planets. The Quran says there are many Earths too (See verse 65:12). Those other Earths can have different fruits not found in our Earth".
Although many other planets have been observed/found to exist,like our earth ,there is no evidence they have life /plants in them. One can only speculate.In fact Qoran specifically tells us that the earth was an exception planet that took "four days/periods" to prepare it for living.
In the case of the verse about Abraham asking for" Min Al Thamarat". Not all fruits/Thamarats are edible, Abraham was asking for those that are beneficial/edible. Hence it won t be all the fruits" Min.Kulli Al Thamarat".Some fruits benefit animals birds but can be harmful to humans like some enedible berries
Really nice to see an examplary debate. Very useful.
GOD bless you both.
Peace.
Quote from: good logic on August 03, 2020, 08:15:07 AM
The Quran says there are many Earths too (See verse 65:12). Those other Earths can have different fruits not found in our Earth".
Salam,
for an understanding of verse [65:12] i suggest to read what Muhammad Asad said about (best explanations for me) :
Muhammad Asad (The Message Of Quran)
65:12 GOD is He who has created seven heavens and, like them, [the many aspects] of the earth...
http://quranix.org/65#12 (http://quranix.org/65#12)
peace
Peace Iyyaka.
You quoted me quoting from another post.i.e what you quoted was said by someone else.
Just wanted to let you know.
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Quote from: good logic on August 03, 2020, 08:15:07 AM
I agree brother jkhan.
mclinkin94 has answered using "the best explanation/context from all the verses",taking care of the precise words used in each verse.
The only thing that I disagree with is the following, quote:
"The universe is massive and there are many Earth like planets. Indeed there may be different kinds of fruit growing on those other planets. The Quran says there are many Earths too (See verse 65:12). Those other Earths can have different fruits not found in our Earth".
Although many other planets have been observed/found to exist,like our earth ,there is no evidence they have life /plants in them. One can only speculate.In fact Qoran specifically tells us that the earth was an exception planet that took "four days/periods" to prepare it for living.
In the case of the verse about Abraham asking for" Min Al Thamarat". Not all fruits/Thamarats are edible, Abraham was asking for those that are beneficial/edible. Hence it won t be all the fruits" Min.Kulli Al Thamarat".Some fruits benefit animals birds but can be harmful to humans like some enedible berries
Really nice to see an examplary debate. Very useful.
GOD bless you both.
Peace.
Thank you good logic.. From my understanding of the Quran I think he presented the right meaning for 13:3... I am satisfied on his explanation over my understanding...
Well.. 65:12 is totally different subject so that I didn't mention anything about it.. Since he is a word by word clarification... Hope he would get the meaning of earth and heavens right one day... As you all know I am not a believer in universe OR spinning earth... But I do only understand within Quran earth is massive and stationary and heavens are above it in layers and all heavens are visible and the nearest (Dunya) heaven is the extreme end of heaven well protected beyond that no entry... It is a ceiling it has doors... 65:12 never speaks of seven earth as of the current earth... 41:11-12 very clear God made only one Earth and out of smoky one heaven He turned it to seven layers and assignes each it's function... No seven earth...
Sorry... It is not a subject to speak about it.. God will true believers will understand God's real creation Earth and Heavens...
Peace...
Quote from: jkhan on August 03, 2020, 08:44:13 PM
Thank you good logic.. From my understanding of the Quran I think he presented the right meaning for 13:3... I am satisfied on his explanation over my understanding...
Well.. 65:12 is totally different subject so that I didn't mention anything about it.. Since he is a word by word clarification... Hope he would get the meaning of earth and heavens right one day... As you all know I am not a believer in universe OR spinning earth... But I do only understand within Quran earth is massive and stationary and heavens are above it in layers and all heavens are visible and the nearest (Dunya) heaven is the extreme end of heaven well protected beyond that no entry... It is a ceiling it has doors... 65:12 never speaks of seven earth as of the current earth... 41:11-12 very clear God made only one Earth and out of smoky one heaven He turned it to seven layers and assignes each it's function... No seven earth...
Sorry... It is not a subject to speak about it.. God will true believers will understand God's real creation Earth and Heavens...
Peace...
Hello everyone, I don't want to get too deep into these because they are not too relevant to 13:3, but I do want to break down 65:12 using a word for word translation:
[Quran 65:12] Allah- He-Who - created - seven - heavens -and of - the earth - like of them (mith'lahunna).
Now, I understand one translation had it in brackets that it means [the many aspects of the earth]. However, that interpretation is a metaphorical understanding of the verse. The verse does not have the word "the many aspects of the Earth", however it is possible that the metaphorical translation you prefer is correct over the literal translation. But you must recognize the possibility that the literal translation may also be true--that there are several planets like the Earth just as there are several heavens. I say this verse does not make it clear which is the case, but it is certainly possible there are other Earth like planets or even other universes.
Note, the word "seven" in the Quran is not necessarily '7', it can also mean "several". As an example, look at Quran 2:261--The parable of those who spend their substance in the way of God is that of a grain of corn: it grows
seven ears. This verse doesn't mean "seven" ears, rather it means "several ears". This is just a convention of the Arabic language where you use 7 to convey multitudes.
Note, also that 'ard' can also mean 'land', however, even if the Quran says many 'lands', that does not exclude lands in other planets as those planets also have lands. Ard also means Earth.
Now, you said something about Quran 41:11-12. I don't think anywhere in these verses does it say there is only one planet like Earth. When the Quran says "the Earth", we know exactly what it is talking about, it is talking about the one we are in right now. But this doesn't mean there aren't mith'lahunna (similar planets) of the Earth in the universe/multiverse--just that this verse is talking about our Earth (and it is not talking about other planets).
You also mentioned something about the Earth being fixed. There is no place in the Quran which
explicitly and
unambiguously says the Earth is fixed--but it is possible the Quran alludes to this to appeal to 7th century dispositions but note that the Quran does not explicitly say the Earth is fixed (perfectly agreeable with science). Also note Ard can also mean "land" as discussed above.
I don't want to get too deep into this in this thread because this is not relevant to the original discussion and doesn't really matter for our purposes here.
Quote from: mclinkin94 on August 04, 2020, 04:05:02 AM
Hello everyone, I don't want to get too deep into these because they are not too relevant to 13:3, but I do want to break down 65:12 using a word for word translation:
[Quran 65:12] Allah- He-Who - created - seven - heavens -and of - the earth - like of them (mith'lahunna).
Now, I understand one translation had it in brackets that it means [the many aspects of the earth]. However, that interpretation is a metaphorical understanding of the verse. The verse does not have the word "the many aspects of the Earth", however it is possible that the metaphorical translation you prefer is correct over the literal translation. But you must recognize the possibility that the literal translation may also be true--that there are several planets like the Earth just as there are several heavens. I say this verse does not make it clear which is the case, but it is certainly possible there are other Earth like planets or even other universes.
Note, the word "seven" in the Quran is not necessarily '7', it can also mean "several". As an example, look at Quran 2:261--The parable of those who spend their substance in the way of God is that of a grain of corn: it grows seven ears. This verse doesn't mean "seven" ears, rather it means "several ears". This is just a convention of the Arabic language where you use 7 to convey multitudes.
Note, also that 'ard' can also mean 'land', however, even if the Quran says many 'lands', that does not exclude lands in other planets as those planets also have lands. Ard also means Earth.
Now, you said something about Quran 41:11-12. I don't think anywhere in these verses does it say there is only one planet like Earth. When the Quran says "the Earth", we know exactly what it is talking about, it is talking about the one we are in right now. But this doesn't mean there aren't mith'lahunna (similar planets) of the Earth in the universe/multiverse--just that this verse is talking about our Earth (and it is not talking about other planets).
You also mentioned something about the Earth being fixed. There is no place in the Quran which explicitly and unambiguously says the Earth is fixed--but it is possible the Quran alludes to this to appeal to 7th century dispositions but note that the Quran does not explicitly say the Earth is fixed (perfectly agreeable with science). Also note Ard can also mean "land" as discussed above.
I don't want to get too deep into this in this thread because this is not relevant to the original discussion and doesn't really matter for our purposes here.
Peace brother..
Thanks for your concern...
As we all know this is not the ideal topic to discuss and debate a massive subject..
Pls.. Either open new thread if interested or post your questions
Below topic..
https://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610127.0