peace brother Ayman,
Thanks for the feedback. And also thanks for your help when it was called upon during the writing of this article. As always, I appreciate it.
It's nice to actually discuss the contents of the article in the thread I created for it, so let's begin...
Firstly, you only cover some of the points I raise, but having said that the points I raise about understandings other than "time" (e.g. institution") are scattered throughout the article, so its not ideal but I will try and list them here so its easier for yourself to review:
1) The point you make about 22:25 is NOT actually the problem I highlight. Quote from article:
"In terms of 'act/institution of SJD' the terms "akifu/devotee/resident" and "baadi/bedouin/visitor" would require explanation."
If my memory serves me correctly, the only explanation for this was by bro Tanveer (whom I think you agreed with) and that was "baadi" means "one who left to find clarity". I was not convinced at the time by this, and nor am I today. It fits rather poorly once cross-referenced.
If you have an explanation for the quote from the article, please let us know.
2) You said:
"So as you can see, 2:142-150, 22:25 and 6:151-153 can best be understood and can only be tied together by the inviolable insitution of obedience."You try to link AMAH with the straight path and cite 6:151-153, and imply AMAH is equivalent to that or built upon those principles. Firstly this equating-link is ok at best and tenuous at worst. Secondly, your use of strong terms such as "...can only be tied together..." is unwarranted. Such tying together is not even necessary in the first place. AMAH and the straight path are mentioned separately in 22:25 and 2:217. Sure they may be related but certainly not equivalent.
There are more troublesome elements for your understanding, e.g. you do not explain the "change in qiblah", i.e. if the believers changed to this straight path you refer to, it implies they were not on this straight path prior to 2:142-150. Please explain.
It does not seem to fit the explanations given in 2:142-150 which are: "...so that not will be for the people against you debate, except those who wronged among them. So do not fear them, but fear Me and that I may complete My favour upon you and so that you may be guided." and "Wherever that you will be, God will bring you (all) together. God is on every thing Able/Powerful."
3) You said:
" This helps explain passages such as 9:19 and 9:28 where those who violated the first commandment shouldn't be the ones in authority telling people what is inviolable. "Are you implying it is people who decide what is and is not inviolable, rather than God/Quran?
Further, it does not explain 9:19 or 9:28. Quote from article:
" 9:19 also seems to imply there is a tangible difference between "watering of those undertaking HaJJ and development of AMAH" and "one who believed in God and the Last Day and strived in the cause of God". This might present some issues with any understandings that try to equate AMAH with God's system in full, as striving in the cause of God would surely involve trying to develop AMAH, thus making them overlap/similar, IF it meant something like that."
Please explain.
Quote from article:
"This clearly implies the polytheists participated in AMAH previously, and "if you fear poverty" shows there is a potential monetary impact to this decision. These two issues require explanation for whatever meaning of AMAH is chosen."
Please explain.
4) You said:
"As for 2:196, it talks about those whose family are already present in the inviolable institution of obedience, i.e. are already implementing it. "There is no "fee/in" in 2:196 prior to AMAH. But even if we let that slide, the above does not make sense within the context of 2:196. The context is clearly about those travelling to the designated location and what to do in various circumstances etc not whether they are in a government institution or not. How does one formally enter into such institution and thus be excluded from the requirements mentioned? Also, what is the reasoning behind such a setup?
5) what do you translate and understand "masjid" as?
6) Please explain, and ideally provide a translation of 17:1-7 according to your understanding. Further, please explain the vision in 17:60, and 48:27 with respect to your understanding.
7) The problems with holding the view that AMAH is all the time, not at a specific time is that: all the verses with AMAH seem to have specific contexts, in 2:196 are you implying they do this all the time, what makes the usage inviolable sometimes and sometimes not, why is AMAH always singular, and masjid singular as well as plural, why only the latter chapters, it would imply in 9:28 that the polytheists are somehow incapable and not allowed to change their belief system (i.e. believe in and accept the straight path) after this year of theirs, which makes little sense etc.
Quote from: AymanAs for 17:1, it actually creates a major problem for "the time' understanding since a few years later can hardly be called "the farthest/remotest time"
Not at all. The person being taken from A to B is the messenger of Quran, and since a human being's lifespan is finite, they will die at some point, thus "the farthest/remotest time of SJD" will likely be the last inviolable time-period they will experience before death. Interestingly, this is a good match with the traditions which say the prophet died shortly thereafter.
I strongly recommend re-reading the article, and insert your understanding into each verse to see if it works, bearing in mind what I have said above.
The understanding of AMAH as "the inviolable time of SJD" may be a novel one, but one that is, by far, the most coherent, logical and practical understanding in my view. Since it is novel, it will take some time to digest, which is understandable.
