In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Shocks Christians When He Says This!"
61:6"And when Isa son of Maryam said: O children of Israel! surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic"
Ahmad in this verse is in the grammatical form of ism tafdeel. For example a sentence might say "this person is kabeer/great but that one is akbar/greater". Ism tafdeel indicates that the characteristics described are greater in the individual concerned. It is an observable reality that the prophet Muhammad's name is much more revered than that of Jesus. That characteristic reached a point that the ism tafdeel became equivalent to the prophet Muhammad's proper name. It is reported that nobody had that name prior to the prophet. Shortly after the prophet's time however, Muslims began using it as a name. Ibn Abi Ahmad for instance, who narrated ahadith from Abu Hurayra who himself died around 59AH. Or another hadith narrator who was his contemporary, named Al Jamdi Abu Ahmad. The prophet referred to himself as Ahmad, among 5 other names. His companions did too, including in poems about him.
Ibn Ishaq in his sirah refers to "Ahmad" while relating the story of the prophet's birth.
Hassan b. Thabit said: ‘I was a well-grown boy of seven or eight, understanding all that I heard, when I heard a Jew calling out at the top of his voice from the top of a fort in Yathrib “O company of Jews” until they all came together and called out “Confound you, what is the matter?” He answered: “Tonight has risen a star under which Ahmad is to be born.”
Muhammad, through his appellation and the praises he receives virtually every second of the day, fulfilled that prophecy in both ways, as established in the Quran
94:4"And We raised for you, your remembrance."
Further, nobody came after the prophet Jesus claiming to be a messenger of God and whose evidences were repeatedly and consistently treated as magic
46:7"Our clear lucid verses were read to them. But, referring to the truth as it came to them, the unbelievers said, “This is obviously a magic!”".
The prophecies speaking of the prophet Muhammad that were written down were not removed which is why the Quran says that the people of the book
2:146"recognize him as they recognize their sons".
The Quran does not speak of alteration but of deliberate misinterpretation of these prophecies by those who heard the Quran, because of the implications
2:146"and a party of them most surely conceal the truth while they know (it)".
Jn14:16"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor (paraclete) to be with you forever. The spirit of truth, the world cannot accept him because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him for he lives with you and will be in you"
Jn15:26"When the Counselor (paraclete) comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me"
Jn16:7"But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor (paraclete) will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you"
The Greek "paraclete" is used in the New/Greek Testament for a comforter, advocate, counselor etc.
1Jn2:1"..we have an advocate (paraclete) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous."
Here the paraclete is translated as "advocate". This is one of a prophet's functions, and although anyone could potentially be qualified as an advocate, the context of its use in the Greek writings is that of an envoy from God. It is applied to Jesus the human prophet, who identified himself as a prophet, and who was similarly recognized by the multitudes as a prophet Matt21:11,Mk6:3-5Lk13:32-4 who was a human being
"made like his brothers in every way"Heb2:17.
So when Jesus prays God to send "another" paraclete in Jn14, one can justifiably argue that he is asking God to send another prophet like him who will be an advocate, a counselor and comforter, all of these being the descriptions of a prophet. Like Jesus the advocate 1Jn2:1 and prophet of God Matt21:11. There was never "another" holy spirit. More on that point later on.
In answer to the video "The Prophet’s Desire - Muhammad Marries Adopted Son’s Wife"
The prophet was at first reluctant to publicly announce the command to marry her and concealed it in his heart, fearing public reaction, until Allah brought it to light and definitely ended the notion that adopted children were blood children
33:37"and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife...and Allah's command shall be performed. There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before".
And the 3rd repercussion of this marriage was to lift the burden which society put upon divorced women who were degraded and often couldnt remarry. The degradation of divorced women is still present in the Bible Matt5:31-32 and many societies throughout the world. That marriage, to a divorced woman, ex-wife of an adopted son, who in addition was now considered of far lower rank than the prophet because of her previous union with a manumitted slave brought down all theses social stigmas, unjust notions and illogical practices.
So deeply were these customs anchored that to counter balance them the prophet, in addition to having practically exposed their falsehood with his marriage, according to history further stressed the psychological reform by giving the most public and generous marriage ceremony to his guests than he had done with all his other marriages.
Besides serious defects in its transmission chain and the untrustworthy, sometimes entirely rejected persons that related it, one version of the story of Zayd and Zainab as reported in some traditions including in Tabari's tafsir, presents several absurdities that led it to be criticized by specialists in hadith and completely rejected. For instance Zaynab was the Prophet's cousin, he knew her through familial relations going back to Mecca. He saw her and interacted with her 100s of times in his aunt's house, and it was the Prophet that arranged the wedding to Zayd in the first place. Besides the fact the Prophet was repeatedly providing marriage counseling to prevent the union from breaking up, what did he miss during all these years that he suddenly noticed during that short period during which Zaynab was married to Zayd? The idea that he suddenly noticed her "beauty" is an absurdity, because he had already seen that "beauty" multiple times before she was even married. In pre-islamic times the dresscode for both men and women was much more liberal. There is nothing that the prophet would have missed from her appearance that he suddenly discovered now. He had plenty of opportunities to approach her without creating any polemic or transgressing any taboo.
The prophet Muhammad isnt the biblical David who saw a woman's beauty for the first time and decided to forcefully take her for himself by setting up the assassination of her innocent husband. You dont suddenly have a heart change based on seeing something you have already seen multiple times before and neither do you secretly desire someone whom you had just arranged to marry with another and in addition provide not one or two, but repeated counseling to make the union work despite the difficulties. How could there exist any lust when the Prophet is trying to prevent the marriage from falling apart, and when the marriage occured right after the divorce meaning there is no way he could have lusted for her while trying to make her marriage work? It is interesting to further note that even those reports saying the prophet had a sudden heart change upon seeing Zaynab's beauty, depict him as hiding his feeling from Zayd and repeatedly denying his desire for her, urging Zayd over and over to keep his wife despite the troubles in their marriage. The prophet could have covered up his "scheme" by using Zayd's own pretext to his advantage, when he came to the prophet complaining of her being "arrogant and hurts me with her words". Instead he would tell him to fear God and preserve his marriage. He uses neither direct nor indirect ways, not even the furthest hints and suggestions that could influence Zayd to break his marriage apart.
The Quran therefore expressly contradicts the story-telling of the seera writers who collected it. Not only because of its depiction of the incident that leaves no room to such polemics, as just shown briefly, but also due to the fact the verse is narrating a past event, prior to the verse's revelation. This unequivocally cancels the claim the prophet used the revelation to achieve a secret desire. The prophet did not go around reciting this verse, which wasnt yet revealed, nor any other verse in relation to Zaynab, prior to making his intentions towards her known publicly. After he was ordained to marry her, the Prophet feared the reaction of the people once he would make the announcement
"you feared the people, when you should have feared God".
Aisha reportedly said that his fear was such that if any divine command were to be covered up by the Prophet, concealed and never made known, this would have been it. The verses points to the exact opposite of the hatemongerers' claims who think what the prophet was concealing in his heart was his lust for Zaynab while the verse says the Prophet concealed something that God wanted to bring to light. This paints God, or more absurdly Muhammad himself whom they say fabricated the Quran to suit his needs, as wanting to bring to light his own secret lust for Zaynab, in other words God wanted to humiliate his prophet, or more absurdly, Muhammad who invented the Quran explicitly issued a statement to expose and humiliate himself. Reason and truth are found elsewhere of course than this tangled web weaved by people who arent interested in truth nor reason. God "brought to light" not a secret lust, but a command to marry Zaynab for a social reform as regards adopted children
"so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons".
These words show that the consequence of what Allah "would bring to light", would stop the believers from having any "difficulty" ie repercussions or pressures in their society. How does the supposedly bringing to light of the prophet's secret lusts create this reform, as opposed to the bringing to light of the command to marry her, which the prophet already knew about but concealed due to his fear of the people's reaction? That is why, as a side note, Zaynab used to pride herself in the fact that the ordinance to marry her was purely divine, while there was always a human element that brought about the prophet's other unions.
The story of Muhammad's sudden crush for Zaynab isnt integrated in the prophet's biography prior to Tabari's time. That is 300 years after the the prophet's passing away. It doesnt appear in Ibn Ishaq's biography which precedes it, and neither is it found narrated by the early authorities in the field, such as Urwa bin al Zubayr, ibn Shihab al Zuhri and others. The story could have entered the exegetical tradition through the channel of the qussaas, the story tellers, notorious for their elaborations upon the lives of the prophet's wives. In that case, recent scholars argue that the inspiration is the Biblical account of the prophet David's encounter with a naked Batsheba, followed by his lusting for her.
In answer to the video "The Prophet’s Desire - Muhammad Marries Adopted Son’s Wife"
Another crucial component of that marriage relates to the pre-Islamic perspective on adopted children. At the time, Arab custom considered adopted children as blood children. Besides being against nature, they would also pass onto them the adopter's genealogy and name, thus confusing their identity. The overarching Quranic principle of preserving the adopted's true identity, as will be shown later, negates any practice that compromises this issue. This includes the modern practice of 'closed adoption' which usually conceals any disclosure of information such as the identities of the biological kin. Even if for some other reason the biological father is unknown it is still not a reason to confuse their identity by giving them the adoptive family's name because it neither corresponds to truth nor reality. In all cases, adopted persons can be addressed as brethren in religion or friends and there is no blame if they are sometimes referred to as sons metaphorically, out of affection, just as one would do with any person regardless of there existing blood relations or not 2:220,33:4-5. What the Quran does is abolishing the unnatural, unpractical, and even dangerous implications of treating non-relatives as blood relations while counterbalancing with an emphasis on practicality and moral duties towards the adopted. In Islam, the relation with an adopted person is that of guardianship, tutelage, training, protection, until he/she is mentally and physically able to enter into society, possibly using his/her own inheritance to live their life independently 4:2-7. It is not a father/mother - child relationship.
Keeping the adopted's original identity secures his specific rights, and inherited wealth that are in the adoptive father's responsibility.
This wealth is forbidden to be approached or released 6:152, until the child is fully grown and mature, having reached a mariageable age and intellectual maturity/rushd. After repeated testing by the guardian and once he is reasonably convinced of them having reached maturity, he may allow them to start up their own life anew 4:2,6,8,10. The property will be returned in the presence of witnesses in order to make sure that the guardian's judgement in the matter was sound. Before that time, the guardian is warned not to consume with extravagance and hastiness the orphan's wealth and if he is a rich man then he should abstain altogether from even touching the property. The purpose of the Quran, again, as is the case with safeguarding their identity, is so that orphans are given the best chance to kick start their own life when they are able to.
However, the Quran adds its usual pragmatic instruction that if the guardian is poor then "let him eat reasonably" "out of" the profits of the orphan's capital, not "from" the capital itself lest it is eaten up completely 4:5. Then the Quran reminds again the God-fearing people, the spiritual aware, not to fall back to the previous unjust sytems of share and swallowing the weak orphans' property because their offspring could very well be in the same situation 4:9. This particular verse does not tell the people to show mercy and compassion, they are told to fear Allah as He is quick in requiting evil. It is a threat that whatever they swallow unjustly by usurping orphan's rights, is equal to swallowing fire into their bellies 4:10. Their soul is already burning for their deeds.
In pre-Islamic times, orphans were abused by men who would take them under their wing only to take advantage of them not having any close relatives for protection and dispossessed them of their property which they rightfuly inherited, replacing it with worhtless belongings 4:1-2. The Quran, like past scriptures Prov23:10-11, strongly reprimended this type of injustice as already shown. It laid stress on the relation between good care, kindness and compassion, as well as respect and honor towards the orphans with success in the Hereafter 107:1-3,93:9-10,89:17.
The HB echoes that notion Prov14:13. The emphasis of the Quran is such that even the sincere believers became affraid of taking orphans under their care lest they would act unjustly towards them. But they were reassured that Allah knows the sincere welldoers. They should mingle with the orphans as they do with any of their Muslim breathren, with sincerety of heart 2:220 caring for them patiently and compassionately 4:36,90:11-17, considering their needs whenever giving for charity 2:177,215. This is what qualifies one as among
90:18"the people of the right hand".
Preserving the adopted's identity opens the possibility for inheritence rights besides those of the natural heirs 4:8,33. If the adoptive parents had no children or desire to give a specific portion of the inheritence to the adoptive child or else, they can do it in writing or even before their death 4:11-12. It also prevents compromising the legitimate inheritence of biological offspring, even in some cases in Wesern societies making the adopted the complete heir in lieu of the blood children. Preserving the adopted's identity avoids the risk of accidental incest. Another obvious problem is the lack of medical advantages of not knowing one's biological family. I
slam does it utmost to guarantee the well being of the weak people of society, including the orphans, while at the same time making it clear they need to preserve their real identify and not be confused with one's own children. This isnt a negation of adoption but rather of the practice of joining their name to one's own name and compromising their and the biological offspring's rights 33:4-5. This was the opportunity to erase these customs unfortunately still existing nowadays among non Muslims. Such a behavior is nothing short of identify theft, in addition making someone believe they are real children of the household in which they grow up. When such children realize the truth they suffer much disappointment and grief. It is the responsibility of the entire community to help children in need. They should be taken in and nurtured but again, not confused with one's own children.
Adoption in the Quran is thus more of a long term foster care which while offering guardianship for the individual, does not legally assume any biological kinship and rights. The Quran's stance therefore isnt against adoption, which is never banned, but against confusing the adopted person's identity.
All these crucial societal reforms are first introduced through admonishment in sura Ahzab 33:4-5 and then with the practical example of the prophet's marriage proposal to Zaynab, now ex-wife of an adopted son. This clearly drew a distinct line from any biological connection with the adoptive family. Nothing could strike harder and clearer at the root of that deeply ingrained belief other than a union one would consider incestuous precisely due to that notion. And none other than the most eminent member of a community, one whom an entire nation looks up to as the epitome of morality could do a better job at setting the example.
The point of the marriage of the prophet and Zaynab was therefore to implement a social reform, and the prophet, being the moral authority of his comunity as well as last transmitter of divine law 33:40, was the most apt in enforcing it. It is in that reform of principles that Muslims are obliged and commanded to follow the prophet's example. Marrying the ex-wives of their adoptive sons is neither a command nor necessity since the reform was already implemented by the prophet. But it shoud however never be hindered by all the false notions spoken of earlier and which the Quran came to reform, hence the statement that
"there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them".
In answer to the video "The Prophet’s Desire - Muhammad Marries Adopted Son’s Wife"
The eighth wife of the Prophet was Zaynab bint Jahsh of the Asad tribe. This particular marriage had multiple aims. Zaynab was the Prophet's first cousin, from a noble lineage and at first, the prophet arranged her to unite with Zayd ibn Haritha, a slave he had freed from his guardians, and whom he then adopted. It was unthinkable at the time for such unions to happen between the daughters of the aristocracy and a slave even if he was freed.
This was a radical step taken by the Prophet in order to bring down the sense of superiority the Arabs had over slaves. The process had already started through the countless verses of the Quran speaking of dealing with the weak people of society including slaves as one would deal with his own family 4:36 that it is allowed to marry from among them 4:3,25,24:32,33:50 since the primary criteria distinguishing the people including for marriage, is piety 25:77,34:7,49:13.
By persuading both Zayd himself who was hesitant and Zaynab along with her family who were skeptical as well, the marriage did finally happen and the Quran alludes to the context of skepticism as regards the prophet's decision in introduction to the story 33:36. But Zaynab could not overcome the deeply ingrained social class system she was brought up with. That she had personal tastes and requirements (unrelated to religion) that werent met in the person of Zayd (social status), doesnt make her sinful. It just exposes her limits in terms of self-sacrifice as regards her materialistic outlook of life. She would have been praiseworthy had she been able to restrain that aspect of her personality but she certainly isnt condemned for failing to do so. Even the prophets' wives are told to kindly divorce him and go live their own life as they please, without any disapproval put on them, if they cannot handle the humble lifestyle inside his household 33:28-29.
Zayd complained many times to the Prophet and wanted to divorce her at one point but the prophet would keep telling him to be patient and keep his own wife, for the command was meant at accomplishing a higher and beneficial objective
33:37"And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah".
Taqul, when used in the simple present in classical Arabic conveys the notion of persistence and continuity of a state, ie the repeated attempts of the prophet at hindering the seperation. Nothing less could have been expected from the noble prophet who many times is depicted as a fatherly figure to his people, providing them with sincere and pragmatic advises in their private lives
"Anyone who incites a woman against her husband or a slave against his master is not one of us".
But the situation did not improve and Zayd finally divorced her, about a year after they united and he had no more desire for her of any sort
"when Zaid had accomplished his want of her".
The marriage thus ultimately failed. Both sides couldnt surmount their differences and reform themselves. But this failure did not mean that the objective of the ordinance failed. This prejudiced society that was gradually being reformed was shown, through the union of people originating from both extremities of society and under a messenger of God's blessing, that the oft repeated Quranic principle that a person's merit should only be measured by his righteousness and God-consciousness, as strongly stressed just 2 verses prior 33:35, is a reality all members of the Muslim community must learn to deal with, even in such intimate areas as marriage.
Critics argue that the union's failure did not help to bring about the reform that the command was supposed to bring, but the object of the command was not to make a union work after several years of marriage, despite the parties' freewill so the objection is irrelevant. The object was to show in what a person's true merit lies in and this was succesfully established since the taboo surrounding the union of 2 persons from different social origins was broken.
In answer to the video "Allah Sends Rain DOWN From The Sky"
The winds stir/tutheer, move, scatter or gather the clouds/sahab in the sama/sky, pressing them together then rain falls from within it 2:22,7:57,24:43,35:9,56:69,77:1-4,78:4. Note the singular IT, refering to the cloud from where rain drops. It does not say from the middle of the cloud itself or from in between 2 clouds. The verse 30:48 says the clouds are made into (not broken into) fragments/kisafan so that we see rain coming from the cloud. Note the singular again, not from between 2 chopped up pieces of clouds, as in a sponge losing its water after being sliced. It says a visible entity, the cloud, is changed into smaller entities so the transition must be a visible phenomenon like the spreading of the cloud spoken of prior to its fragmentation is also a visible phenomenon.
Clouds themselves are innumerable water drops suspended in the sky, so technically rain drops are cloud fragments falling from within the cloud itself. The description of rain as being fragments of clouds is in fact extremely accurate. The Hebrew Bible on the other hand describes clouds like solid entities on which God travels around to visit the wicked nations with His punishement Isa19:1,Ps104:3, or like sponges, delivering the rain they absorb in case God allows water to fall from the "firmament" on them
Job36:27-32"He increases drops of water; they pour rain into His cloud..Or will one understand the spreading of a cloud..Behold He spread His rain over it..Over the clouds He covers the rain, and He commands it through one who prays".
Water therefore does not originate from the clouds themselves but from the heavens, clouds are only carriers of that heavenly water Jer10:13. Besides stocking water "above the mountains", behind the firmament in "His upper chambers" Ps104, God also has reserves of hail and snow Job38:22-3. An angel named "Aph Beri" is the one tasked by God for "burdening" the clouds with water and driving them through the earth. See Rashi on Job37:12.
All these citations werent made to disparage the Bible, rather at pointing what would have been the outcome had the Quran been the product of a 7th century human being. The Quran had many occasions to expose itself as the product of an ancient human mind, as it speaks in many places of phenomenons similar to the ones refered to above in the HB. And yet we do not find anything remotely similar in terms of faulty depictions of the workings of nature.
The Quran further says, some of what comes down from the sama' goes back up to it 57:4,34:2 in a ever recuring cycle as denoted with alrajaa 86:11. Literally the word means to return and is used in classical Arabic for the rain. It is a very appropriate description of rain since it is the same water that rains down and returns to the sky in a cycle. It is this very cycle that is sworn by as a testimony of the reality of resurrection.
The Quran in 56:68-70 when drawing attention to God's mercy says the water coming from the cloud could have been salty and such an assertion can only be made if one is aware of the evaporation phenomenon that causes fresh water to evaporate from the sea and leave the salt behind. What goes down to the Earth, penetrating it 23:18 or flowing throughout it 39:21 is drank by humans and animals 16:10,25:49 who were created from it
21:30,25:54,24:45"And Allah has created from water every living creature: so of them is that which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks upon two feet, and of them is that which walks upon four; Allah creates what He pleases; surely Allah has power over all things".
Not a single living organism has been found to be entirely needless of water in any of its shapes. Water causes vegetation to grow 45:5,78:15 or mixes with already existing plants 10:24.
In answer to the video "Allah Sends Rain DOWN From The Sky"
Despite the apparent simplicity, again, once one scratches the surfaces of any Quranic passage, a most intricate discourse transpires.
The Quranic concept of attributing to Allah the consequence of a man's actions, even for the most insignificant things like the clothes man wears, as will be shown later, is in the same spirit. It reminds man that the laws of the universe are caused then allowed by Him, He is the only Independent Cause
11:56"there is no creature except that He is holding its forelock".
He "causes" the spiritual senses to be sealed, as one often reads. In Quran terminology this means He has established and allowed a process in which willful, repeated transgression leads to a progressive dimming of the innate spiritual receptivity
91:7-10"And (by) a soul and He Who proportioned it. And inspired it with its wickedness and its virtue. One has succeeded whoever purified it. And one has failed whoever corrupted it".
This higher reality in terms of causality is similar to Allah "causing" physical death as a result of repeated auto-mutilation. God could, against their freewill, prevent people from sinning 18:65-82,6:107,112,137, force them to believe 2:253,5:48,6:35,149,11:118, let them live their sinful life 111:1-5 or interrupt the system of freedom of choice at anytime 11:36, and all is done according to His Knowledge, Wisdom and Justice.
Even a person's sins can be said to be ultimately from Allah, but without precluding moral responsibility. Sins come in result of a chain of causality established, allowed and sustained at all times by Allah, according to which, willful neglect and disobedience to one's innate sense of spiritual perception leads to heedlesness to the external warnings and signs until transgression occurs. Allah "caused" the person to sin by allowing the process which fully integrates moral responsibility. Similarly in 7:16,15:39 after Iblis' curse, he says it is Allah who "ighwa" -literally "made him err". How was this done? Indirectly and not arbitrarily, not by compeling Iblis to sin but by puting him in a situation where his own arrogance and prejudice were exposed. The choice was of course his, to either obey or disobey the command. He chose rebellion and his reasons given to God after he was given the chance to explain himself were evil and totally unjustified.
Therefore nothing happens, good or bad, unless Allah wills it/allows it, and it is as a clear reminder of this supreme reality that in some instances speaking of human will, Allah's will immidiately follows
81:28-29,76:29-30"Surely this is a reminder, so whoever pleases takes to his Lord a way, And you do not please except that Allah please, surely Allah is Knowing, Wise".
This basically is one of the pillars of Quranic teachings, striking a balance between divine will and human effort. The sequence in the verses of sura takwir above make it clear, in the system of causality established, allowed and sustained at each instant by God, and which intricately integrates moral responsibility, humans need to be resolved upon an action, then God either allows or not that intent to be executed. Similarily it states in the HB in
Prov16:9"A man's heart plans his way, but the Lord prepares his step".
The system of causality being dependant upon Allah's will negates the implicit notion that His hands are 5:64"tied up" as some fatalists would taunt the prophet. Nothing passes out of His control, not even man's freewill, and he is judged according to the level of freewill he is granted. Therefore when Allah causes one's heart to turn away and be sealed, it is the same as saying that one has done it to himself, as stated in 41:4-5. They first turn away in such a manner that they become heedless to the Quran. They themselves ackowledge the immunity of their spiritual senses to it. But even then, their choices only happens if Allah wills it, ie allows it
9:127"..Then they turn away: Allah has turned away their hearts because they are a people who do not understand".
The same process is echoed by the psalmist in the HB, in the context of the Israelites' straying from the right path, repeatedly rebelling despite receiving Moses' prophetic guidance and witnessing all kinds of miracles
Ps81:13"So I let them go after their heart's fantasies; let them go in their counsels".
Again David would invoke God to guide those who willfuly stray from the path, into the evil ways they have themselves chosen
Ps125:5"And those who turn their crooked ways-may the Lord lead them away with the workers of iniquity".
It is a fundamental concept with which God interacts with humanity, leading people in the direction that they want to go, enlightening those that seek light, blinding those that seek obscurity. Again, in Ezek20:24-5, Israel's rebelliousness to God is answered with God Himself giving them what they want, more tools to continue on their rebellious path
"Because they did not perform my ordinances, and they rejected my statutes and desecrated my sabbaths and their eyes were after the idols of their fathers, I, too, gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances through which they should not live".
Th same is said in
Isa63:17"O Lord why did you makes us err from your ways, and hardenned our hearts from your fear?"
Many other verses in the Quran describe the process
6:110"And We will turn their hearts and their sights, even as they did not believe in it the first time, and We will leave them in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on"
61:5"when they turned aside, Allah made their hearts turn aside"
51:9"He is turned away from it who would be turned away".
The Quranic concept of Allah being the indirect cause of all things because of the laws of causality established and allowed by Him is reflected in many instances. In the language of the Quran everything is with God and is sent down to men 15:21. From the rain falling from the clouds 16:65 to even the most insignificant things like the clothes man wears 7:26,16:80-1 that are found in the cattle 16:5 which were themselves sent down 39:6. The same is the case with iron 57:25, the prime symbol used in the Quran to denote God's having endowed mankind with the ability to engineer, convert to his use the natural resources of his natural environement.
Allah is thus
57:3"the Apparent and the Hidden".
He is the transcendental cause of all that exists and at the same time inherently operating in every phenomenon. That higher reality is beautifuly pictured in the opening verses of sura hadid, the chapter of the iron. It is Allah Who holds the birds up in the air, yet they are themselves expanding and contracting their wings 16:79,24:41,67:19.
He is the "splitter" of the seed grain 6:95. He is the One to have multiplied the humans on earth 23:79. He established, allows and sustains the reproductive system resulting in us multiplying. He makes people laugh or cry because He controls and allows all the processes of causality from birth till death, and beyond 53:43-8. This higher principle present in every aspect of life, of which the God-conscious is always aware of, is mentionnedd by Ibrahim to his people
26:78-81"Who created me then He has shown me the way, and He who gives me to eat and gives me to drink, and when i am sick, He restores me to health, and He who will cause me to die and give me life".
This Quranic style of reminding the believer the true meaning of God's all-encompassing ownership, power and authority is also conveyed with the taking of the soul which is attributed to Allah 39:42,53:44 the angel of death 32:11, and a group of angels 6:61, or the movement of clouds of which God is responsible 24:43 (God's hand moves weather accross the earth Isa28:2, God creates the wind Amos4:13) because He is the originator and constant sustainer of the various meteorological phenomena leading to a cloud's movement 7:57,35:9,56:69.
This is a concept found in previous religious books too and in fact is an axiom of HB scriptural exegisis that a person's agent is like himself (ie the agent's action is considered as though his principal had performed it). There are many instances such as in Ex12:12 where it is God personally who promises to punish the Egyptians yet a few verses down in v23 it is the "destroyer". Or throughout Isaiah where "the Lord spoke" to such and such while it in fact was the prophet relating the divine inspiration to such a person Isa7:10.
Again in Isa22:11 it is God who is said to have built what king Hezekiah made 2Chron32:5 and this is because he was acting as God's agent during the process, trusting Him in his endeavours 2kings18:5. In 2Sam24:1 it is God that incites David to conduct a cencus while in 1Chron21:1 it is Satan, the adversary that does God's work. Hasatan by the way is an angel, just as the angel sent on specific occasions during the Israelites' exodus to execute the will of God Ex14,23,33etc. God in all those instances was "with" the Israelites through His messenger angel, the same way as a commander talking to the citizen of his nation, telling them he is with them although his soldiers are the ones defending the people. This angel/messenger of the Lord by the way is incapable of forgiving sins Ex23. It is thus very surprising that Christians would use this type of proof text as an indication of the HB having multiple divine persons. Further the book of Hebrews openly states Jesus is not an angel Heb1. This kind of language, where the agent is called God or the consequence of an agent's actions is attributed to God, is common to the Semitic revelations, and found throughout the Quran too. It stems from the monotheistic notion that God is the creator of all things, including the laws of causality which He maintains and allows at each instant.
These are straightforward notions to a person imbedded in Abrahamic monotheism. But as soon as these concepts are read through the lens of polytheistic cultures where multiple gods interract among oneanother and independantly influence the lives of the humans, then confusions appear. That is why one will never find an Israelite reading trinity or any other speculation on God's unity in any of the passages proposed by Christians.
In answer to the video "Female Genital Mutilation: Islamic or Cultural?"
Although there are ahadith that depict the prophet as saying male circumcision is part of the Abrahamic legacy, nowhere does the prophet instruct female circumcision. The most that is found leaning in favor of the practice are statements where he speaks about unrelated topics where the female involved is already circumcised, or a weak and disputed report where he is comenting on a pre existing practice, in both cases not instructing nor recommending it.
In that later hadith (sunan abu dawud) he says to avoid doing it in a way that would affect both men and women in their sexual life, meaning the procedure must be negligable.
Even if one sees prophetic approval for female circumcision in this saying, it stays far from the image of genital mutilation in the mind of those who jump for joy at anything that superficially seems to paint Islam in an unfavorable light.
In answer to the video "Scholarly Ability: Paul vs. Muhammad (PvM 2)"
Although revealed in an environement where poetry and oratory speeches were loaded with explicitly lustful and indecent language and allusions, the Quran never departs from its pattern of using respectable language and concepts.
This is particularily made clear in sura Yusuf, the "best of stories", when detailing the mistress' attempted seduction of Yusuf. The Quran beautifully combines in that context, precision in expression with a dignified vocabulary, and despite the fact that it talks about lust, utilizes the principles of piety, morals and respect without being paralysed in the process.
When the Quran addresses the themes of sex or sexual organs, its eloquence necessitates that it does not directly speak of testicles, penis or vagina. This is an established Quranic pattern accross several topics.
Contrary to the Bible with its known rude language and unsophisticated imageries, as is amply found in modern pop culture, news, and magazines, the Quran seeks not to flood the imagination with crude details so as to not trivialize certain themes. There are ample examples, such as 2:222 where it refers to sexual intercourse by using the imagery of the farmer cultivating his tilth with tenderness and deep consideration aforehand, or as "touching" the mate 2:236,237,4:43,5:6,33:49etc. The word for 'touching' is laamastum from the root L-M-S that means skin feeling an object interactively. It is used to mean mainly sex, or at least some form of foreplay. Other terminologies used in the Quran to refer to sexual intercourse is "covering" the mate 7:189 or in the context of refraining from sex it says "guarding the private parts" 23:5,33:35. In some instances where the Quran refers to women's sexual organs it literaly speaks of 60:12"what lies between their legs and hands" among other apellations.
Now we come to the passage in question which is of interest to this youtuber. 86:5-7 speaks of the fluid "coming out". It doesnt speak of origin or formation, but exiting. All people know from where seminal fluid exits from. The determination of the location where the fluid is formed is irrelevant to the point of the verse. The verse speaks of man's humble and simple origins despite him growing into a highly complex creature, and how he will inevitably be humbled once again to simple elements then recreated and brought forth to render account. The rejecters of resurrection saw it as a far fetched thing, an impossibility for a human being to be grown back after its death, decay, and return to the earth.
So instead of telling these arrogant people, who see their current state as a highly complex entity impossible to re-create, that they were once a simple fluid that exited from their father's penises, it says they exited "from between the sulb and the taraaib".
Sulb stems from S-L-B, implying strength, hardness, firmness, uprightness. Words like the backbone or the saleeb/crucifix, because of standing firmly upright, are derived from it.
Taraaib stems from T-R-B, implying some sort of resemblence, uniformity, harmony, symetry. It is used for example for turab/soil or dust, because dust grains are resembling and corresponding.
Elsewhere it denotes how the mates of paradise match oneanother in many aspects 56:37,78:33 and it can similarily describe how certain body parts like the eyes, the hands, the legs, or the ribs etc. are matching. The statement "exiting from between the sulb/backbone and the taraaib/legs or ribs" refers to man's sexual organ just like "what lies between their legs and hands" subtely alludes to women's sexual parts.
Any other propostition would suggest the people back in 7th century Arabia, or whomever the sceptics allege wrote the Quran, were ignorant of the function of testicles. This of course is an untenable assertion. For example, they used to practice castration on animals, and knew of the existence of eunuchs. An equally valid interpretation as noted by the early tafasirs, including Makki ibn abi Talib, al Mahdawi or ibn Atiya, is that yakhruju/exiting may refer to the human being spoken of earlier. This is valid both linguistically and biologically, as the womb is located between the backbone and ribs of the woman. Between, as a side note, does not entail "middle".
In answer to the video "Scholarly Ability: Paul vs. Muhammad (PvM 2)"
No such thing as shooting stars in the Quran. And as usual before we get into this allow me a little introduction related to the topic.
This noble Book is not the result of some human whim. It was an inspiration to Muhammad 42:52, whose descent is independent of his will and desires 53:3. Allah says of him
69:44-47"if the messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name, We should certainly seize him by his right hand, And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart: Nor could any of you withhold him (from Our wrath)".
The prophet wont be able to successfully pass off something false as divinely inspired because by the manner of his sudden death, those around him will understand that the prophecy of preservation came true and that what he was about to utter, or started uttering was false. Should he even misinterpret and lie over the true meaning of what is revealed to him, his heart would be sealed and he would become like the worst rejectors among his nation, blindly wandering on 42:24. Other verses issue similar warnings against tampering with the Quran to such an extent that it was imprinted in the psyche of the memorizers and all the believers.
This Book is part of a Divine Scheme meaning its implementation will be under the direct surveillance of the Almighty Himself. During the time of revelation of the Quran, the Almighty made arrangements so that the purity of the Revelation travels intact from its descent from Heaven to the heart of the prophet Muhammad to the point that evil ones were not allowed near it during the process
26:210-212"No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation), It would neither suit them nor would they be able (to produce it). Indeed they have been removed far from even (a chance of) hearing it".
Pre-Islamic Arabs believed that their soothsayers were inspired by the jinn who would bring them information from heaven, and thus sometimes accused this Quran whose eloquence and impact on the people they could not explain, to have been similarly inspired.
To refute this belief, the Quran told them that this sama' ("what is above" more commonly used for the sky), although beautified with constellations to the onlookers, has in addition been provided with protection in the times of revelation 15:16-17 through several systems.
First, the ones charged with :carrying down the exalted and purified Revelation were headed by Gabriel, around whom they are tightly knit and highly dutiful 16:2,2:97,97:1-4,80:13-16. Under his direction, these emissaries, carry the revelation, from heaven down to earth, all the way to the heart of the chosen messenger until it is pronounced to the people 72:27-8.
The carriers of revelation repelled the rebellious among the jinn from every side so they could not understand what the ones high in ranks were saying during their descent 37:8,97:4. The angels did not wait for them to be able to perceive what was being brought down to earth before driving them off from their positions. They were repelled as soon as they managed to steal the slightest hearing, the faintest sound emanating from the delegation
15:18,37:10"Except him who snatches off but once, then there follows him a brightly shining flame/shihab".
These burning objects are identified as shihab, plur. "shuhub". Only 1 type of cosmic body in our sky fits the description of a fast moving object giving its own light; meteors. They are orbiting the earth in outer space at high speeds then light up when they enter earth's atmosphere.
As already seen in 15:16-17 the Quran makes a distinction between the guarding system provided by these meteors and the shining objects adorning our sky "We have made constellations in the heaven and we have made it fair seeming to the beholders. AND we guard it against every accursed shaytan". Sama' addunya means the nearest heaven. The root D-N-W implies nearness. We talk of our world in Arabic as the dunya because it points to the world in which we are currently living in, as opposed to the akhira/hereafter which is far. Sama' addunya, the near or nearest heaven, is near in relation to the earth which includes the atmosphere that the Quran also calls sama' 16:79,30:48. The nearest heaven is thus outer space. This area, the Quran says, has been adorned with kawaakib/bright lights 37:6 AND/WA guarding/hifthan against the devils 37:7,41:12.
The Quran again, as is done in 15:16-17 separates the guarding system and the shining objects decorating the night sky (stars, planets, etc).
The verse 67:5 reiterates how the sama' has been adorned with shining objects
"We have adorned the near heaven with lamps and we have made it projectiles for the shaytan".
Although not very obvious once translated, the grammatical construction accepts in its range of meanings that both the sama' and the shining objects adorning it, as well as each on their own, have been made projectiles against the jinn. This is where the principle of not isolating verses from an established pattern come into play. The Quran as already shown, time after time, distinguishes between the The carriers of revelation repelled the rebellious among the jinn from every side so they could not understand what the ones high in ranks were saying during their descent 37:8,97:4. The angels did not wait for them to be able to perceive what was being brought down to earth before driving them off from their positions. They were repelled as soon as they managed to steal the slightest hearing, the faintest sound emanating from the delegation
15:18,37:10"Except him who snatches off but once, then there follows him a brightly shining flame/shihab".
These burning objects are identified as shihab, plur. "shuhub". Only 1 type of cosmic body in our sky fits the description of a fast moving object giving its own light; meteors. They are orbiting the earth in outer space at high speeds then light up when they enter earth's atmosphere.
Sama' addunya means the nearest heaven. The root D-N-W implies nearness. We talk of our world in Arabic as the dunya because it points to the world in which we are currently living in, as opposed to the akhira/hereafter which is far.
This area, the Quran says, has been adorned with kawaakib/bright lights 37:6 AND/WA guarding/hifthan against the devils 37:7,41:12.
The verse 67:5 reiterates how the sama' has been adorned with shining objects
"We have adorned the near heaven with lamps and we have made it projectiles for the shaytan".
Masabih are shining objects, whether permanent, fleeting, or moving, observable in the nightsky. This includes meteors, stars, planets, comets.
Prior to the scientific era, in the tafsirs of al Suyuti or ibn Kathir, it was never stated that the stars themselves we turned into missiles, the most that they said was that a flame was ejected from the stars towards some of the jinn, while the stars themselves did not move.
Before Revelation started, the jinn sat anywhere they wanted in the sky
72:9"we used to sit in some of the sitting-places thereof to steal a hearing".
This gives us a glimpse into their nature, that they had the ability to fly and float in the skies, waiting to perceive any type of heavenly information. Whatever hearing they could steal, and if they were allowed reaching an individual with it, it became a means of trial to those people who believe in their own abilities to attain to any kind of knowledge of the unseen through the jinn, as well as a trial to the gullible who are deceived by such people
"A stealthy listener (jinn) hears a word which he will convey to that which is below him and the second will convey it to that which is below him till the last of them will convey it to the wizard or foreteller. Sometimes a flame (fire) may strike the devil before he can convey it, and sometimes he may convey it before the flame (fire) strikes him, whereupon the wizard adds to that word a hundred lies. The people will then say, 'Didn't he (i.e. magician) tell such-and-such a thing on such-and-such date?' So that magician is said to have told the truth because of the Statement which has been heard from the heavens".
The prophet here refutes the belief in the occult sciences of pre-Islamic times, and still present today, where entities of the unseen have the ability to extract information that is of any use to humans
"Some people asked Allah's Messenger about the fore-tellers. Allah's Messenger said to them, "They are nothing (i.e., liars)." The people said, 'O Allah's Messenger! Sometimes they tell something which comes out to be true." Allah's Messenger said, "That word which comes to be true is what a jinx snatches away by stealing and then pours it in the ear of his fore-teller with a sound similar to the cackle of a hen, and then they add to it one-hundred lies".
As the Quran states in the context of Solomon's death
34:14"the jinn came to know plainly that if they had known the unseen, they would not have tarried in abasing torment".
The passage refers to Solomon who passed away but whose dead body was held in place by a wooden staff for a while until it disintegrated, eaten by a woodworm. It is only when his inanimate body fell to the ground that the jinn, living under his servitude, realized he was dead. The passage not only shows them as subservient to one of Allah's servants, but they are unable to even fathom something superficially hidden from them, yet very close: how then can they gratify people’s appeals to learn the secrets of the unseen? When speaking of Iblis himself, the Quran says that his pledge to God that he would doubtlessly lead astray a portion of Adam's descendants, was in fact a conjecture and guess. The archetype of jinn has no access to special knowledge, not even of the future. It was just a coincidence that his conjecture and guess became true
34:20"And certainly Iblis found true his conjecture concerning them, so they followed him, except a party of the believers".
The aforementioned hadith describing the jinn's ability to corrupt a true matter of the unseen and then deceive the soothsayer with it, is not speaking of the revelation of the Quran. Rather, of the revelation of decrees to the angels, who then transmit it among themselves. During that process of transmission, the jinn, who were allowed sitting in various locations of the skies prior to the revelation of the Quran, extracted information. Upon that, burning objects of the sky, which are none other than meteors, chased and eventually destroyed them. The traditions therefore do not entail that meteors have the exclusive purpose of chasing the jinn. When the prophet on an occasion introduced that concept, he stated that meteors similar to the one observed, served that function
"As we were sitting during the night with Allah's Messenger, a meteor shot gave a dazzling light. Allah's Messenger said: What did you say in jahiliyya when one like this one was thrown?"
He did not say "when a meteor is thrown" rather when one "like it is thrown". The likeness therefore could be in that both are meteors, but with different purposes.
When revelation of the Quran started descending from the heavens, carried by the angels down to earth, the jinn were prevented from even trying to listen
72:9"but he who would (try to) listen NOW would find a flame lying in wait for him".
Guarding angels filled the atmosphere, besides those descending with revelation 16:2,97:1-4, which further prevented the jinn from their usual sitting places
72:8"And we have sought [to reach] the heaven but found it filled with powerful guards and burning flames".
It had never happened to those jinn contemporaries of the prophet Muhammad, that even as much as trying to rise in the skies resulted in them being pelted by meteors
"So it was with the advent of the Messenger of Allah that they were prevented from their places. So they mentioned that to Iblis – and the stars were not shot at them before that".
Umar once encountered a Muslim who was a fortune teller in pre-islamic times. That person told him of the state of confusion among the jinn folk close to the time the prophet appeared
"Once, while `Umar was sitting, a handsome man passed by him, `Umar said, "If I am not wrong, this person is still on his religion of the pre-lslamic period of ignorance or he was their foreteller. Call the man to me." When the man was called to him, he told him of his thought. The man said, "I have never seen such a day on which a Muslim is faced with such an accusation." `Umar said, "I am determined that you should tell me the truth." He said, "I was a foreteller in the pre-lslamic period of ignorance." Then `Umar said, "Tell me the most astonishing thing your female Jinn has told you of." He said, "One-day while I was in the market, she came to me scared and said, 'Haven't you seen the Jinns and their despair and they were overthrown after their defeat (and prevented from listening to the news of the heaven) so that they (stopped going to the sky and) kept following camel-riders (i.e. 'Arabs)?" `Umar said, "He is right." and added, "One day while I was near their idols, there came a man with a calf and slaughtered it as a sacrifice (for the idols). An (unseen) creature shouted at him, and I have never heard harsher than his voice. He was crying, 'O you bold evil-doer! A matter of success! An eloquent man is saying: None has the right to be worshipped except you (O Allah).' On that the people fled, but I said, 'I shall not go away till I know what is behind this.' Then the cry came again: 'O you bold evil-doer! A matter of success! An eloquent man is saying: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah.' I then went away and a few days later it was said, "A prophet has appeared".
Through that guarding system, the matter became so obscure to the jinn, that they could not but conclude that
72:10"we know not whether evil is meant for those who are on earth or whether their Lord means to bring them good".
So in the time of revelation, as was the case prior, the rebellious jinn who heard something from the angels were chased by meteors. The difference being that when revelation started, they could not be allowed to corrupt the revelation, hence the increased preventive measures
26:210-12"And the devils have not brought the revelation down. It is not allowable for them, nor would they be able. Most surely they are far removed from the hearing of it".
Only those who stole something of a sound, regardless of how negligible it might have been, from the angelic delegation were followed by a meteor 15:18,37:10. The Quran therefore, just as the traditions, nowhere make absolute statements about the function of meteors. Rather, mentions are made of a specific situation with its consequence. On a general note, this "chasing" doesnt entail an odd, erratic trajectory. The object in outer space could be orbiting the earth and then made to descend, as any meteor would, into the atmosphere towards the location of the rebellious jinn, like a laser beam. Every occurrence in the universe is caused by God, and just as He causes space matter to descend into the atmosphere at a time unrelated to the jinns' behaviour, He may cause one of those entities to descend towards a jinn whenever one of them hears, or tries hearing a saying of the angels.
In answer to the video "Scholarly Ability: Paul vs. Muhammad (PvM 2)"
That isnt what the Quran says. It speaks from Dhul Qarnayn's perspective.
18:86,90 relate some of Dhul Qarnayn's journeys across the Earth. The Quran describes, as a third party observer, what he and the people he met experienced and saw in these places. 18:90 describes his arrival at the place of the rising sun, where HE saw it rising. matliAAa alshshams/maghrib alshshams do not have a fixed meaning in classical Arabic. It all depends on the context of its use. It can be rising of the sun/setting of the sun, it can be ‘the land of the rising sun’/land of the setting sun, it can be farthest east/farthest west. The scene is being described after the event had happened, and as perceived by one person. It is not making a general statement of fact as regards the cosmic path of the sun, as it does in 21:33.
Dhul Qarnayn travelled the land and at one point during his expedition saw the sun rising from where he was standing. This is how he knew he had reached the rising place of the sun, not because he had arrived at the flat earth's edges or to a place with a hole in the ground from where the sun came up. Wajadaha, means subjective perception of any of the senses. As is amply used in Arabic, the word doesnt imply that what is perceived corresponds to actual reality. It could be, just as it could not be. Again the passage relates Dhul Qarnayn's perspective, not necessarily a phenomenon physically occuring. This is seen a few verses later. It says Dhul Qarnayn "wajada" the sun rising on a people. It specifies the location of rising just as it does for the setting. No commentator argued that wajada here entails physical sunrise on a people, literally above them, because they did not think that the word indicates a literal location of sunset a few verses back. Had the word wajada, or any of the other words used indicate literal sunset, and that the early commentators endorsed such a view, then they would have stated the same as regards the location of sunrise. The fact that both Dhul Qarnayn and these people were in the same place, but yet only the locals were harmed by the rising sun proves that wajada cannot mean literal sunrise, just as it cannot mean literal sunset in a water source.
This location of sunrise was not unique, as the Quran speaks of mashaariq and maghaarib. But it was worth mentioning for the point of the story. He met a particular people there, whom the Quran says Dhul Qarnayn found the sun rising upon. The reason for singling out a group from among those standing there and saying the sun was on them from Dhul Qarnayn's view, was to illustrate how they were, contrary to himself
"a people to whom We had given no shelter from It".
The blazing sun was affecting them only as a primitive people who did not cover themselves or know how to build proper protection against it, contrary to Dhul Qarnayn and his men who were standing at the same location, and who were obviously equally under the same sun. Dhul Qarnayn's finding the rising sun has thus nothing to do with a scientific observation or general statement of fact, rather temporary perspective from Dhul Qarnayn's angle.
Similarly in 18:86, no civilisation ever believed, including the pre-Islamic Arabs, that the sun would sink in the water at night. People instead thought the sun rose and set at the flat Earth's edges. Had the Quran been merely reflecting its contemporaries' understanding of astronomy, it should have said something along the line of "he found it setting behind the water" had it meant Dhul Qarnayn reached a spot of physical sunset. But it says "in" the water. This description is appropriate to Dhul Qarnayn's location. He reached the westernmost spot of his journey, where he stopped his progress because of a water source/aynin. At this spot where he met a people, from his perspective, he saw the sun setting in the water. Al gharb as a side note means to disappear, not simply setting as in entering into another entity.
Ibn kathir, much before the scientific era and while the consensus on astronomy was geocentric, stated that this setting in a spring was from Dhul Qarnayn's perspective.
Tafsir literature as a side note is a literary genre open to reinterpretation even today, using exactly the same tools (linguistic, ahadith, fiqh) that are preserved and were available to the earliest generations of mufassirun. So to say that one tafsir says something and another more ancient, using exactly the same tools, says another is no proof of anything. Even the earliest works reported, discussed, selected, discarded previous views, as Attabari does for instance. As a further note on a particular angle of interpretation; the meaning of the Quran is not dependant on a commentator's projection of his own understanding of nature. Science is a field in constant reevaluation, and thus is not part of the exegetical tools of a mufassir. If however a commentator chooses to integrate it in his reading of a passage, then a commentator today, using the same tools available to his predecessors, added with current knowledge of nature, can supersede older interpretations in which the commentator projects his outdated scientific knowledge.
All the references in at Tabari to the sun setting in a spring allude to what Dhul Qarnayn saw. None of the views reported say that the setting place of the sun is in a spring, independently of Dhul Qarnayn's perspective. In fact Attabari, commenting on 21:33 states that the sun floats in a heavenly orbit. How could he then argue that it enters the earth to sink in a pond? Al Baghawi, al Mawrudi, Makki ibn abi Talib, Al Tusi, all of them much prior to ibn Kathir, and Al Tabarani who was a contemporary of Attabari and even ibn Qutayba who preceded Attabari all spoke of the metaphorical meaning of the verse, as a subjective perception from Dhul Qarnayn.
These verses speak from Dhul Qarnayn's perspective, what he saw on his expeditions, more specifically the people he met. That is why it speaks of several of his journeys including one inside a valley where his sight was blocked by the mountains and couldnt therefore see the sun rising nor setting 18:93. In short, Dhul Qarnayn probably saw many sunsets and sunrises on his journeys. But some of those where he saw sunrises and sunsets at the horizon were worth mentionning, because he met in them particular people whose characteristics are given in the verses 18:86-90. At the setting of the sun, it was disbelievers deserving punishement, at the rising of the sun it was very primitive people. Keeping in mind that the Quran repeatedly says there are countless rising and setting places for the sun. Finally, there is an expression used in 43:38 by the disbelievers on the day of judgement, to signify an infinite distance
"Oh, I wish there was between me and you the distance of two sunrises/mashriqayn – how wretched a companion".
The implicit meaning is that no matter how much one may pursue the physical rising place of the sun, one will never reached that spot. But even that unfathomable distance is not enough to express the disbeliever's loathing of his evil earthly companion, hence his wish to have him twice as far. This type of phraseology meant at expressing something with no qualitative or quantitative ending is found in other places, such as when depicts God's infinite knowledge and wisdom should it be put into writing
31:27"And if whatever trees upon the earth were pens and the sea [was ink], replenished thereafter by seven [more] seas, the words of Allah would not be exhausted. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise".
The Quran, it is to be kept in mind, repeatedly says there are countless rising and setting places for the sun 37:5,70:40. There isnt one single place of sunrise or sunset but each of those ephemeral sunrises and sunset spots where one can see the sun rising or setting when looking at the horizon must be referred to with a definite article when spoken of on their own 18:86,90. Mashaariq literally means "the places where the sun rises".
The east can be implicit depending on one's position on Earth however "the places where the sun rises" can also include the south or the north as happens in certain Arctic/Antarctic times of the year. Thats how accurate and consistent the Quran truly is contrary to other similarily ancient religious scriptures, such as the Hebrew Bible from where it is claimed the Quran finds inspiration.
The HB, contrary to the Quran reflects the faulty cosmic understanding of the people that penned it, speaking of
Isa45:6,Ps113:3"the rising of the sun to the place where it sets".
It speaks of the sun traveling across the heaven from one end to another Ps19:7, circling the earth Ecc1:5. A salvific figure will be coming
Isa41:25"from the rising of the sun".
When daylight was miraculously prolonged for an additional 24 hours, it was because the sun stood still, instead of the earth Josh10:12-14. The end of a day was understood as when
"the sun descended very much"
until it set
"near Gibeah"
Judges19:11-14. There is a "dwelling" God has created for the setting sun, somewhere in the heavens Ps19:5, the place where both the sun and moon stand still in the face of God's might Hab3:11. There is also mention of times where 1Sam11:9"the sun is hot" which implies that there are others where it cools down. What the ancients who wrote the Bible didnt know is that during this cooling off time, the opposite side of the round Earth was still receiving the Sun's warmth. The Sun was moving backwards in relation to the Earth during the miraculous extending of daytime Isa38:8.
Of course, the words of the Talmudic rabbis traditionaly considered God-given to Moses at Sinai, reflect all these faulty notions. In order to move from daylight to night (and vice versa) the sun had to go through the solid firmament, a dome sitting on top of the shallow flat earth. This passage happens twice a day, in the morning and the evening. As it goes through the firmament's width, the sun appears to be setting. This apparent time it takes for the sun to pierce through the firmament (approx 70min) is included until today by religious Jews as part of the daylight cycle. It is perfectly expected for a human work, the Bible, to reflect every faulty notion of its human writers.
What is astonishing is that all these erroneous views and others were equally believed by the ancient Arabs yet we do not find even as much as the remotest resemblance of any of these concepts with verses from the Quran depicting some natural phenomena.
Allah is the Lord of the mashaariq and maghaarib, the Creator and Ultimate Cause of all phenomenons in the universe, making the sun rise and set at different spots of the horizon throughout the solar year. God causes the movements in the universe making the sun rise at different spots in the horizon. Sometimes the Quran, when discribing a thing positionned far on the horizon, describes its position in terms of altitude as opposed to longitude which would have been the case had it thought the earth was flat 53:7.
