Author Topic: 3 salawaat  (Read 12219 times)

loli

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 148
  • Karma +0/-0
3 salawaat
« Reply #50 on: September 17, 2004, 12:03:26 AM »
Peace all..
about the word as-salawati in 2:238, a translation in my local language gives the word as-salawat means "Doa for forgiveness" and not solaa(s).  
He gave the same intrepetation for 9:99 and 9:103 where "wa-salawati alrosooli"  is interpreted as " Doa for forgiveness from the messengger"

i know salawat have saveral meanings in the arab language, is "doa for forgiveness" such as:

1. "Salawatun" = blessing  from 2:157
2.  " Salawatun" = synagogeus- prayer place for the jews 22:40

so can we accept the salawat for "doa for forgiveness"?
23:97-98. And Say: ?My Lord, I seek refuge with you from the whispers of the devils.??And I seek refuge with you O Lord that they should come near.?

Layth

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2845
  • Karma +16/-4
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #51 on: September 17, 2004, 03:02:00 AM »
Peace wakas,

It took me a day or so longer than I expected :)

After some extensive study, and thanks to the help of a good friend, I am presenting the case for three Salats per day as follows:

1.   Dawn Salat (Fajr 24:58).
2.   Middle/Noon Salat (Wusta 2:238).
3.   Evening Salat (Isha 24:58).



?And you shall hold the Salat at {1,2} two edges during the day, and the {3} near part of the night. The good deeds take away the bad. This is a reminder to those who remember.? (Quran 11:114)

11:114 marks the beginning points for the three Salats. According to 20:130, we are told that the day has at least three edges (plural use ?atraaf?); 11:114 refers to only two of these edges (dual use ?tarafai?), which is determined to be the first edge ?dawn? and the second edge ?noon?. As for the third Salat time, it is made in reference to the early/near part of the night (which occurs just after the third edge of the day ?dusk?).

"You shall hold the Salat until the {2} dipping of the sun; until the {3} darkness of the night; and the {1} Quran at dawn, the Quran at dawn has been witnessed." (Quran 17:78)

17:78 marks the ending time for the three Salats with the usage of the Arabic ?li,ila? (until). The first end is given as the sun begins its decline/dipping which occurs after the noon ?edge.? The second end is give as the darkness of the night takes over which occurs after the ?near/early part of the night.? As for the dawn Salat, its end is defined by the word itself ?dawn/fajr? which occurs as night is turning into day and ends with the sun coming up over the horizon (known as morning/subuh).

Based on the above information, each Salat time will last between 10-15 minutes depending on the accuracy of judgment in one time period moving into another.

The full article can be read here: http://www.free-minds.org/article/quranic/salat.htm
`And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!` (The Quran 39:45)

idolfree1

  • Guest
3 salawaat
« Reply #52 on: September 17, 2004, 04:12:25 AM »
Peace be upon you Layth,

Noon time is not an edge, it only appears so in your picture because you used a triangle picture.

Quote

"You shall hold the Salat until the {2} dipping of the sun; until the {3} darkness of the night; and the {1} Quran at dawn, the Quran at dawn has been witnessed." (Quran 17:78)


We are told to maintain salaat FROM the dulook of the sun, UNTIL the darkness of night, why do you have UNTIL the dulook of the sun?

Layth

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2845
  • Karma +16/-4
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #53 on: September 17, 2004, 08:19:41 PM »
Peace Kyle,

Quote
Noon time is not an edge, it only appears so in your picture because you used a triangle picture.


Please refer to 20:130 which proves that the day indeed has more than two "edges".

Quote
"You shall hold the Salat until the {2} dipping of the sun; until the {3} darkness of the night; and the {1} Quran at dawn, the Quran at dawn has been witnessed." (Quran 17:78)  

We are told to maintain salaat FROM the dulook of the sun, UNTIL the darkness of night, why do you have UNTIL the dulook of the sun?


That is how I was looking at it as well until someone correctly pointed out that the "Li" is "until" and not "from". Thus, re-examining 17:78 inthis light it becomes "until dhulook; until darkness of night".

P.S. Brother Ayman. I have not neglected your post on Qibla, only that it is a very loooong post and I am trying my best to complete the responces.
`And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!` (The Quran 39:45)

Wakas

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 11307
  • Karma +14/-2
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #54 on: September 17, 2004, 10:43:07 PM »
peace Layth,

atraf = plural, indicating there are more than two edges/borders to the daytime. I have always found this verse difficult to grasp. I'll need to think about this some more.


Wakas
All information in my posts is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should seek knowledge and verify: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11. My articles

www.studyQuran.org

Layth

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2845
  • Karma +16/-4
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #55 on: September 18, 2004, 12:14:58 AM »
Peace Ayman,

Quote
2:143. Like this we made you a balanced nation, so that you will be witnesses over the people and the messenger will be on you a witness. And we didn't allow the target that you were on except to known who follows the messenger from who rolls back on his heels and it (i.e., the previous target) was big/important except for those who The God guided and The God would not waste your faith, indeed The God is compassionate and merciful to people.

Please notice that "kanat lakabirat" in 2:143 is feminine and hence it must be referring to the previous target ("al-qiblat alati kuntu 3layha"). So the sign is saying that the PREVIOUS TARGET is a big deal EXCEPT for those who The God guided. Do you agree? If so, let's continue together.


I agree that in 2:143 the reference of the ?big deal? is to the ?target they were upon,? but I disagree with your analysis for you have skipped a very important verse which shows that the target ?they were on? at this point and which is being referred to as a ?big deal? was the 2nd Qibla (not the 1st):

?The foolish from amongst the people will Say: ?What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on?? Say: ?To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path.? (Quran 2:142)

The prophet and his followers have already made the shift away from the ?original? Qibla, hence the people commenting ?what made them change??.

Thus when 2:143 is read in this light, it confirms that the Qibla they ?were on? and which was a ?test? is in fact the 2nd Qibla.

Quote
What was the previous target?

It was the existing target of the previous people of the book (the Jews). The target of the Jews was physical and it was the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. This can be deduced by asking Jews themselves, from the Talmud, and from the fact that the all-important target of Jews is to rebuild their Temple on THE TEMPLE MOUNT. In fact, the Temple Mount was named the Temple Mount for no reason other than that it is the location of the Jewish Temple, which they take as their "qibla". Since their Temple building was destroyed in 70AD, their physical target simply became the Temple Mount.

Thus, in summary, the previous target was a physical target and it was the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. This is EXACTLY the same physical target that you now want us to face.


1.   Your analysis misses 2:142 and thus confuses the sequence of Qibla change.
2.   The Jews have not faced the ?Temple Mount? since before our Prophet?s time. They face Jerusalem, I agree, but they are forbidden from the Temple area making your findings that we share the same Qibla to be incorrect.

Quote
Now we are told in no uncertain terms that this previous target (i.e. the Temple Mount in Jerusalem) is a big deal (i.e., it is important) EXCEPT for those who The God guided. Now, I hope that you can understand why I see the Temple Mount as insignificant and I will never see it as important.


You are free to your views, however these views are in error. The ?big deal? was for the Prophet to suddenly shift away from the historic Qibla of all the prophets and establish a ?new? Qibla. Those who believe in God understand that He is everywhere and thus were not phased by this change, while those who maintain tradition and conformity were clearly shaken.

Quote
You said it yourself: the "shift" from this target/focal point to another was done to distinguish people. So the next question is "distinguish what?"

Its purpose is to distinguish those who follow the messenger from those who roll back on their heels. Now let's put this to the test. Let's say you have a neighbor who happens to be a strict Talmudic Jew. You both decide to build your own Temples next to your homes. Naturally, the Talmudic Jew builds his Jewish Temple following Talmudic traditions and hence builds it such that the niche is supposed to be facing the Temple Mount. You build your Temple and as per your article, you orient the niche so that it is supposed to face the Temple Mount. Now, unless you have distinct non-Jewish decorations or a sign outside the Temple warning Talmudic Jews that this is not a Talmudic Temple, some Talmudic Jews will mistake your Temple for theirs. This is for the simple reason that your "qiblat" is EXACTLY the same as theirs. So how did your "qiblat" distinguish those who follow the messenger from those who roll back on their heels? Clearly it didn't.


Your whole scenario is built on a wrong premise in making the ?test? to be the 1st Qibla, when it was in-fact the 2nd that they were being tested through.

Quote
Let's add another element to the above scenario. Let's say that you live South of the town presently called Makkat. Now, your physical direction is EXACTLY the same as that of the Wahabis. In fact, you might as well buy one of their existing Mosques and convert it to a Temple (whatever that means) instead of going through the expense of building your own Temple.

How does your "qiblat" distinguish you from a Talmudic Jew or even from a Wahabi (if you are south of the town presently called Makkat)? Clearly, it doesn't.


It distinguishes me that I ?know? I am facing that which God commanded me to, rather than what you refer to as a ?general look? that may appear to be the same (like saying that the Jews also face Jerusalem, when in-fact the command is to face the Restricted Temple).

Quote
The "qiblat" of Talmudic Jews is EXACTLY the same "qiblat" that you are proposing. So if we follow your proposed "qiblat" then we would indeed be united with them in manifest error.


Disagree.

Jerusalem = Jerusalem
Restricted Temple = Restricted Temple
Jerusalem ≠ Restricted Temple

Quote
Thank you for the good advice brother. I took your advice and carefully read not only 10:87 as you suggested but also the whole context from 10:75 to 10:93. Here is what becomes clear:

1. There is no indication that the command in 10:87 is after the exodus from Egypt. In fact, as you correctly pointed out, the exodus comes afterwards in 10:90. Hence, Moussa and his brother were still in Egypt when they made their houses a "qiblat".
2. The command doesn't say that one should take a "qiblat" during "salat" exclusively.
3. Since 10:87 talks about "biyut", which means houses, then the "qiblat"/target/destination in 10:87 is a physical one.
4. Since "biyut" is plural, this renders your understanding of "qiblat" as a specific physical direction invalid, because it would mean a random direction.
5. "Facing the direction of danger" would actually be the opposite of what The God ordered them to do, since he clearly ordered Moses to go in the opposite direction (leave Egypt).


Disagree.

1.   The exodus does not ?begin? with the crossing of the sea, but begins with Moses and his people ?leaving? their town 10:85 (logical).
2.   Qibla and Salat in 10:87 show a clear correlation.  
3.   Yes, Qibla is a physical destination.
4.   They are on the move away from Pharaoh and their town, thus their ?houses? become one direction and not several direction (you have also contradicted yourself by the previous statement that 10:87 is a ?physical? direction).
5.   They are performing Salat, which under normal circumstances is done in a standing and stationery position. Hence the extra precaution of facing towards the direction where Pharaoh would be coming from becomes clear.


Quote
Actually, your understanding creates a dilemma. If you interpret "qibla" as a physical direction, then 10:87 becomes meaningless because "biyut" is plural and hence the direction becomes random (i.e., no direction). Egypt is a big place and one house could be to the north while another could be to the south, etc.


All houses in a town would be in the same direction if you have left the town.

Quote
My understanding is without any dilemmas because 2:144 and 10:87 are reconciled with simply the clear dictionary meaning of "target/destination", which is consistent and is exactly the same.

In 10:87 because "biyut" is physical, it is a physical "destination", in other words The God is telling Moses to setup houses for his people and make these houses a destination for them. This was the first step before the exodus, which comes shortly afterwards in 10:90. This is logical because when the command to leave Egypt will come shortly afterwards, you want to be prepared by having people gathered in known places and you wouldn't want to unintentionally leave people behind. Hence, you setup communal houses as a destination where people gather.


As I pointed out in my previous post, I see the root cause for your interpretations to be the refusal to see Masjid Haram as a ?physical? place. I.e. where you see ?homes? to be physical, you accepted that Qibla is ?physical?, but because of your view against Masjid Haram being physical, you try to force Qibla to be non-physical.

Also, I have mentioned that the ?exodus? would begin with the moment they leave their towns (and not simply when they cross the sea).

Finally, I have noted that in the beginning of your post, you opted to go for the ?Qibla is physical? understanding to explain to me how the ?test? was to face the same direction as the Jews?According to what you have just claimed above about Qibla being non-physical (except you said about ?homes?) your views seem to be clearly inconsistent.

Quote
In 2:144, "al-masjid al-haram" is not about the wall and roof of a physical building. It is about the following purposes that are impossible to be accomplished by a physical building:

1. It is a criterion of determining those who The God guided. I am sure that hypocrites will have no qualms about pointing their faces to the Temple Mount or any place on earth if it serves their purposes. As we saw, Talmudic Jews routinely point their faces to the Temple Mount. The undisputable fact is that a physical building, no matter where it is located, cannot guide anyone or make it known who is guided and who is not.


This is covered early on in the post to show that the ?test? was not facing the Masjid Al-Haram, but to face away from it.

Quote
2. It is the truth from our Lord. There is nothing inherently true or false about a building or any other physical building. It is the ideas that we have about an object or a concept that can be true or false.


It is the ?same? system as was taught to all the prophets beginning with Abraham?hence it is ?truth?.

Quote
3. Wherever we are (and not only during "salat") we should set up our direction towards "al-masjid al-haram".


I am surprised you still insist on not differentiating between ?wherever? and ?whenever?.

If the Qibla is related to Salat (as per 10:87), then when the Qibla is required to be faced is only when the Salat is being held (3 times/day). Hence ?wherever? you are you would face the Qibla, and not ?whenever? you are.

Quote
4. Once a structure is under the horizon, it is physically impossible to be facing it. You are in TRUTH facing random regions in outer space. Moreover, because the earth is rotating, you are actually facing different regions in outer space every second of your "salat".


This ?laser? technique can only be viable if our Salat somehow does not serve its purpose unless we are ?lock-on? to specific GPS coordinates! Salat, if done properly, works no matter where you face (because God is everywhere). Hence a Qibla provides unity in purpose as well as direction (we are all one nation) and is not a magic trigger for anything to happen.

Quote
Hence, in 2:144 "qiblat"/target/destination is non-physical because a physical interpretation leads to nonsense in the same exact way that a physical interpretation of the straight path leads to nonsense (as you know very well).


You are again forcing different meanings to Qibla (one time you say it is physical 2:143, then spiritual 2:144, then physical 10:87). Masjid Haram can be a ?physical? destination because it would offer all the aspects of unity associated with the ?truth? (your god is One god?).  

Quote
Like in 2:144, in 10:105 and other places, we are asked to FACE "al-din".

10:105. And that persist your FACE to the "deen"/obligation monotheistic and do not be from those who set up partners.

30:30. So persist your FACE to the "deen"/obligation monotheistic, The God's natural system that He originated people on, there is no substitute to The God's creation but most people do not know.

30:43. So persist your FACE to the worthy "deen"/obligation before a day made inevitable by The God comes. On that day they will be splintered.

Isn't "al-din" also described as "al-7aq"/THE TRUTH? Those commands and their similar wording is not unintentional, there is no difference between FACING "al-din" and FACING "al-masjid al-haram".


None of the verses you mention speak of Qibla (which by your admission was a ?physical? destination in at least two places).

Quote

Patience brother, I don't disregard anything in the great reading. Let's try to think about the signs in those verses. I have no problem with understanding "al-bayt al-haram" as a physical building. However, as I demonstrated above and will demonstrate again, there are many logical problems that make it impossible to understand "al-masjid al-haram" as a physical building. Let me address your points one by one:

1. 9:19

As you indicated, 9:19 talks about maintaining or more accurately managing "al-masjid al-haram". In Egypt, there is Al-Masjid Al-Azhar. Sheikh Tantawi is the manager of Al-Azkar. Does this mean that he manages the walls and roof of the physical building ("bayt") of Al-Azhar? When we hear of Al-Azhar issuing a Fatwa, does this mean that the walls and the roof of the building of Al-Azhar issued the Fatwa? Clearly not! A "masjid" is not a physical building but is an institution of submission/obedience and this meaning survives even today, despite all the corruptions of sectarians. Hence, it is a system of authority, exactly like government. On the other hand, "al-bayt al-haram" can be the physical building of that institution.


Not only does 9:19 use the word ?Amara? which is to renovate/build/construct/maintain, but it also uses the very physical description of ?watering the pilgrims?. Thus, to make 9:19 non-physical you would also need to make the ?watering of the pilgrims? to be metaphoric or symbolic!

Quote
2. 9:28

Again, as in the case of 9:19, if one understands "al-masjid al-haram" as an institution then there is no problem. For example, unless you are from the Saudi Royal family, you are not allowed to be a person with real authority (a minister) in the institution of Saudi government. In fact you will not even be allowed to come close to being a minister. However, you can probably walk into the physical building of the ministry of foreign affairs.

On the other hand, when we test your understanding of 9:28, it really doesn't make sense. For example, you and I consider ourselves to be from "alathina amanu" so the command in 9:28 is directed at us. Thus, it is our responsibility that those who have setup partners do not come near positions of authority in the institution that others like us turn to for the TRUTH. For example, you wouldn't let someone like PrinceZED even come near to being a moderator. However, I am sure that you would have no problem inviting him into the physical building of your "Temple" to hear The God's message. This is also consistent with "al-bayt al-haram" being for ALL people.


That the Masjid Al-Haram functions as both a temple and a place for authority is perfectly sensible. In your example of Al-Azhar you made such reference to it being a physical place, but also a place of fatwa and authority.

Quote
3. 2:191

The SAME expression used in 2:191 is used in 60:9 to talk about "din".

60:9. The God only forbids you from taking as protectors those who fought you in the obligation/"deen" and evicted you from your homes and they openly tried to evict you and whoever takes them as protectors, those are the unjust.

Is "din" a physical building because there can be fighting IN IT?


The wording is not even close. 2:191 says ?those who fight you AT/NEAR the Masjid Alharam?, while 60:9 says ?those who fight you IN the system?. If anything this adds more support to 2:191.

Quote
4. 48:27

The sign in 110:1-2 talks about the same victory in 48:27. The SAME expression used in 48:27 is used to talk about "din".

110:1-2. When The God's victory and the breakthrough come. And you saw the people enter The God's obligation in throngs.

Is "din" a physical building because people (heads shaven or otherwise) can ENTER IT?

What we notice is that the same EXACT terms (facing it, fighting in it, entering it) used for "al-masjid al-haram" are used for "din". It is not then surprising that both "din" and "al-masjid al-haram" are described as the TRUTH.


That the Masjid Al-Haram is also the ?truth? is in no doubt (2:144). As for your comparison between 48:27, and 110:1-2, you have conveniently skipped over the clear ?physical? aspect to 48:27 of having their heads ?shaved?.

Quote
What you are saying is that it refers to the shift (i.e. the general actions of 2:144 and not anything specific in them). Firstly, this is not a valid understanding because the same expression is repeated in 2:149 and 2:145-149 doesn't mention anything about the shift. Moreover, here are some verses where the same EXACT expression occurs:


Didn?t you say that the ?shift? was physical according to 2:143? Now it is no longer physical?!

Quote
In 2:26 does "inahu al-7aq" refer to the "mathal" or to generally what the verse is saying? Surely, the sign in the verse is generally saying the truth, like ALL the book does. However, clearly "inahu al-7aq" points our attention to a specific concept (the "mathal") that was mentioned previously.

In 11:17, "inahu al-7aq" refers specifically to the book and NOT to any general actions.

In 22:54, "inahu al-7aq" refers specifically to the book and NOT to any general actions.

28:52-53, "inahu al-7aq" refers specifically to the book and NOT to any general actions.

Please notice that 2:144 we hear that those who were given the book (not a compass and not a map) know that "al-masjid al-haram" is the truth. Hence, once again we see that "al-masjid al-haram" is simply the institution of authority that implements The God's truth in the book. Hence, if Al-Masjid Al-Azhar ever gives up Hadiths and implements the TRUTH in the book, it can be "al-masjid al-haram" who people turn to.


The sequence of changes beginning from 2:142 (and not 2:143) shows why the Masjid Al-Haram is recognized as the ?truth? by those who received the scripture (it is the same system that all the prophets taught).

Quote
I didn't choose it as a verb. The word "makkat" can only be either a common noun or a proper name and it can never be a verb. Any word whose meaning makes sense in the context MUST be understood as a common noun. On the other hand, proper names are meaningless labels that don't reflect the truth about what is being described. Hence, you are not really a "lion" and Layth is just a label. However, if I say: "The "lyth" is the king of the jungle and he preys on weaker animals" then this is most likely a common noun.

The common NOUN meaning of "makkat" as "destruction/wearing down/insistence on the adversary" fits perfectly in the context of 48:24.

But we can only choose to look at it as a proper name if the common noun doesn't fit well in the context. In this case, the common noun fits perfectly as demonstrated below:

48:24. And it is He Who has restrained their hands from you and your hands from them in the midst of destruction/wearing down/insistence on the adversary, after that He gave you the victory over them. And Allah sees well all that ye do.


I do not see why this is such a ?big issue? for you? If the ?choice? between a noun and a name exists, then why try to force one over the other?

I agree that 48:24 can work as a noun, but it also works as a name.

Quote
It is an indisputable fact that "post-quranic" hypocrites were in the habit of naming things to match concepts in the great reading. For example, they named the building that they built themselves Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa long after the revelation of the great reading to match the common concept of "al-masjid al-aqsa" in the great reading. The other indisputable fact is that your ONLY source for the name Makkat is those same people.

You yourself know that what they named Kaabat in Makka is not the real "kaabat", otherwise you must then give up your whole Jerusalem idea and follow the Sunnis belief in Makka.

If you are still interested in archeological physical evidence, then research Nabataean idols and find out what the stone cube whose height is slightly more than the other dimensions represents. What you will find for yourself is that this stone cube represented the Nabataean idol Dhu-Al-Shaara (Dusares). You will also find out that the pagan ritual of spinning seven times around Dhu-Al-Shaara was done to celebrate his birth.

The "post-quranic" hypocrites simply renamed their idol from Dhu-Al-Shaara to Kaaba so that they can continue their pagan practices while pretending to follow the great reading. Why do you put it past them to rename an insignificant small town where a pagan shrine survived to Makkat?

As for Bakka, it is a proper name because the common noun doesn't make sense in the context. Hence, it can be understood as a meaningless label.


OK, I see your argument in this point. I will reflect upon this and tell you if I make any changes.

Quote

Do the Jews accept the Restricted Temple as their Qibla?  

Yes, the do. In fact the Jews do take the Temple Mount as their "qibla" EXACTLY like what you are proposing. Haven't you been following what is happening over the past few decades in Palestine? The extremist Talmudic Jews want to destroy the current sectarian structures on the Temple Mount and rebuild their Temple on it.


Brother, I do not know why you insist on a point which is not valid! The Jews DO NOT take the Temple Mount as their Qibla (they have not done so for nearly 2,000 years since the Roman destruction of their Temple). The Jews take the area of Jerusalem in general, and the wailing wall in particular to currently be their facing.

When the extremists rebuild the Temple and make it their Qibla, then let us debate this point.

Quote

Do the Christians?  

The Christian's "qibla" is also physical. The "pre-quranic" Christians faced east for prayer. This was also the general pagan practice, especially of communities that idolized the sun. For more information, please see: Davies, J. G., Orientation. In: The New Westminster Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship, ed. J. G. Davies. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986.

This pagan custom together with assigning Sun-day as the holy day for Trinitarians may not be a coincidence. Emperor Constantine was known to be a pagan sun worshiper and would have influenced such decisions at the Nicene.


Good, that proves that they did not take the Masjid AlHaram as their Qibla (which conforms with what God tells us).

Quote
You are wrong. Talmudic Jews do take the Temple Mount as their orientation. Exactly like Sunnis take what is presently called Makkat as their orientation.

Talmudic traditions also contend that one should avoid turning his back to the Temple; thus, the rabbis argued that someone, for example, to the south or north of Jerusalem should face east or west when relieving himself! [see: Babylonian Talmud, Brachot 61b].


The ?key? in your argument is Jerusalem and not the Temple Mount. I have read many of the Jewish teachings and the vast majority FORBID orienting to the Temple Mount until the Temple is re-built.

That there would be someone who goes against the flow and claims an orientation to the Temple Mount is possible, but does not negate from the vast majority who do not do so.

Quote

You are wrong because while the average Jew is forbidden from some of the areas of the Temple, the Rabbis are not. It is the same situation today in Makka where the average Muslim is not allowed to go inside the so-called Kaabat while the Saudi political and religious elite are allowed to. Perhaps they are afraid that people will find out that the only things inside Dhu Al-Shaara are three stone pillars. As I said, the whole area of the Temple Mount was named so for no reason other than it is where the Jewish Temple that they faced was.

Following the "qiblat" of the Temple Mount is EXACTLY the same falsehood that Talmudic Jews follow.


You have answered your own question.

Quote
The "qibla" is not just about "salat". 10:87 doesn't say anything about "qibla" being followed exclusively at the time of "salat". 2:149-150 make it clear that even while on the move, one should face "al-masjid al-haram". There is no exception to not facing it.

So this leads to THREE physical impossibilities:

1. One cannot EVERYWHERE face the Temple Mount.
2. One cannot on the move face the Temple Mount, unless he sees it and is heading there (This is a big problem for your understanding because we know that "salat" can be done on the move).
3. Once the Temple Mount is under the horizon, it is impossible to be facing it.


All your points above have been addressed.

Quote
Since 2:115 mentions the direction/"wagh" as related to the physical directions of east and west, then it is indeed talking about a physical direction. What The God is telling us is that physically, His direction is everywhere. On the other hand, 2:144 tells us that there is ONLY ONE direction to the TRUTH (in the same way that there is only one path that is straight). The same thing can be deduced from 2:177.


Yes, God is physically everywhere, which is why I am surprised you keep pulling the ?below the horizon? argument regarding Qibla. As for the true Masjid Al-Haram, it is the truth?This is the same system that was incorporated by Abraham and the prophets after.  

Quote
I hope that my comments have been helpful and even though I may sound harsh sometimes, please do not take them negatively. Try to think back to the time when you first heard about Hadiths being falsehood.


I have no problem with arguments getting heated?I do however plead that we stick to short posts as postings like this one took something close to half a day to be able to respond to (thank God it?s the weekend here!).
`And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!` (The Quran 39:45)

ayman

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2989
  • Karma +15/-6
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #56 on: September 18, 2004, 02:19:21 AM »
Peace brother Layth,

Here is what you said (emphasis mine):

Quote from: "Layth"
I agree that in 2:143 the reference of the ?big deal? is to the ?target they were upon,? but I disagree with your analysis for you have skipped a very important verse which shows that the target ?they were on? at this point and which is being referred to as a ?big deal? was the 2nd Qibla (not the 1st):

?The foolish from amongst the people will Say: ?What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on?? Say: ?To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path.? (Quran 2:142)

The prophet and his followers have already made the shift away from the ?original? Qibla, hence the people commenting ?what made them change??.

Thus when 2:143 is read in this light, it confirms that the Qibla they ?were on? and which was a ?test? is in fact the 2nd Qibla.


As you thoughtfully suggested, I will keep this short and sweet :) . Here are the facts:

1. Notice how you admit that 2:143 talks about the "qibla" they ?were on? EXACTLY like 2:142 talks about the "qibla" they ?were on?. Hence, those are the SAME "qibla" they ?were on? and it is NOT the 2nd "qibla" that will still come in 2:144.
2. Since this "qibla" they ?were on? is related to the physical directions of east and west in 2:142, then the "qibla" they ?were on? in 2:142 and 2:143 is a physical target/"qibla".

In conclusion, 2:142-143 talks about abandoning, or as your translation said "turning away from" (NOT switching/changing to a new one) the "qibla" they ?were on? and the only information given about it is that it was a physical "qibla". This "abandonment" is a test. Those who fail the test will see the physical "qibla" they ?were on? as a big deal.

Let's agree on this first before I address your remaining points.

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman.

idolfree1

  • Guest
3 salawaat
« Reply #57 on: September 18, 2004, 02:22:20 AM »
Peace be upon you,

Are we told to maintain salaat for only one day? Or are we to maintain it MANY DAYS?

I think if we consider, as in the verse where we are told to guard the salaat(3 or more), salaat(singular) wusta,...

It implies that over the course of our lives, we are expected to maintain more than three salaat.

Layth

  • Administrator
  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2845
  • Karma +16/-4
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #58 on: September 18, 2004, 04:05:17 AM »
Peace Ayman,

I found your explanation of what I said to be extremely confusing...

Here is what I am saying regarding 2:142-144

2:142 The foolish of the "people" will say "what made them change their Qibla?"

This confirms that there was/is a Qibla and there was also a change causing the "foolish from the people" to question why it happened.

Note that the people were not questioning the original Qibla, but they only questioned when the change happened.

2:143 Gives the answer by stating that the Qibla they were made to be on (i.e. the 2nd Qibla) "Kunta 3layha" was done to test those who follow the messenger from those who turn on their heels.

2:144 Comforts the messenger's distress from being turned away from the original Qibla and informs him that from henceforth they may all turn towards the Masjid Alharam.
`And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!` (The Quran 39:45)

ayman

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2989
  • Karma +15/-6
  • Gender: Male
3 salawaat
« Reply #59 on: September 18, 2004, 02:15:43 PM »
Peace brother Layth,

Thank you for your explanation. I can now see why you are confused.

Quote from: "Layth"
I found your explanation of what I said to be extremely confusing...


Brother, you are confusing yourself by changing what 2:142 is saying as clearly demonstrated below:

Quote from: "Layth"
Here is what I am saying regarding 2:142-144

2:142 The foolish of the "people" will say "what made them change their Qibla?"


Compare the above to your earlier more correct translation below:

Quote from: "Layth"
?The foolish from amongst the people will Say: ?What has turned them away from the focal point that they were on?? Say: ?To God is the east and the west, He guides whomsoever He wishes to a straight path.? (Quran 2:142)


Why did you change "turn away" to "change"? You are confusing yourself.

In simply "turn away" there is no implication of having a new "qibla", it is simply rejecting the existing "qibla". On the other hand, "change" implies changing from the qibla-1 to a new qibla-2.

Quote from: "Layth"
This confirms that there was/is a Qibla and there was also a change causing the "foolish from the people" to question why it happened.


Indeed, there was a "qibla" that we KNOW was PHYSICAL because of the reference to the EAST and the WEST in 2:142. Let's call it qibla-1. At this stage (2:142-143), there is no "change". There is only TURNING AWAY from qibla-1. In other words, there is rejection of qibla-1.

In 2:142 the messenger had already turned away from qibla-1 and people can SEE that he turned away (again confirming that 2:142-143 are talking about a physical "qibla").

Hence, the TEST in 2:143 is about the TURNING AWAY from qibla-1. The ONLY information we know for sure about qibla-1 is that it was PHYSICAL.

Quote from: "Layth"
Note that the people were not questioning the original Qibla, but they only questioned when the change happened.


Yes, they didn't question the PHYSICAL qibla-1. They questioned why the turn away from the PHYSICAL qibla-1. As clear, this is about the rejection of  PHYSICAL qibla-1 NOT about "the change" to another "qibla".

Quote from: "Layth"
2:143 Gives the answer by stating that the Qibla they were made to be on (i.e. the 2nd Qibla) "Kunta 3layha" was done to test those who follow the messenger from those who turn on their heels.


As you imply, the only way that your interpretation would work is if "alati kanu 3alayha" refers to qibla-1 in 2:142 and then suddenly "alati kunta 3alayha" refers to qibla-2 in 2:143. Hence, once again, it is not surprising that you feel confused.

How did you get to the second qibla-2 when it is not even mentioned until 2:144?

The plural expression "alati kanu 3alayha" used in 2:142 by the people who questioned the turning away from qibla-1 is the same singular expression "alati kunta 3alayha" used in 2:143 to address the prophet. Hence, it must still be talking about qibla-1.

Moreover, the past tense of "alati kunta 3alayha" clearly points to the previous qibla-1 since it is the past "qibla" that he WAS on.

The other indisputable fact is that qibla-2 is not even mentioned until afterwards in 2:144.

Hence, this test has NOTHING to do with qibla-2. It has EVERYTHING to do with the turning away from qibla-1.

Quote from: "Layth"
2:144 Comforts the messenger's distress from being turned away from the original Qibla and informs him that from henceforth they may all turn towards the Masjid Alharam.


The messenger was not distressed, he was unsatisfied. Hence, The God tells him that he will turn him towards a "qibla" that will satisfy him ("tarDaha"). This means that he was unsatisfied with qibla-1.

Why was the messenger NOT satisfied (not "radi") with qibla-1? Is it its location? We are NEVER told where qibla-1 was. This means that it doesn't matter WHERE qibla-1 was. The only thing that matters is what we are told. The ONLY thing we are told about qibla-1 is that it is PHYSICAL through the reference to the PHYSICAL directions of EAST and WEST. Hence, the messenger was not satisfied because it was a PHYSICAL "qibla".

To make it short, please notice how you now switch back again and change "change" to "turn away". Again, I can see why you said that you are confused. Confusion can be a good thing or it can be a bad thing depending on what we do about it. It is a good thing if it causes us to throw our existing interpretation and make a fresh start to reach a less confusing and more logical understanding.

I hope my explanation is less confusing now. If it is not, please let me know and I will be glad to clarify further.

Peace and all best wishes,

Ayman.