TheMostReadBook.org

An English translation of the Quran that is as close as possible to the Arabic sacred text
View active topics
  Verse(s):    
View unanswered posts





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 01 Aug 2013, 02:37 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In his interpretation of 2:106, the eminent Sheikh Shaarawi, may God bless his soul, poses an interesting question: Why wasn't the Kaaba designated as the Qibla from the beginning? His answer is: because the Kaaba had idols in it! God did not want Muslims to pray toward a house of idols no matter how revered that house is. Only when the Kaaba was emptied of idols did the Qibla change.

As attractive as this argument is, it is historically inaccurate, since all accounts point to the year of conquest of Mecca, year 8 A.H., as the year when all idols in Mecca were brought down. But Chapter 2 was revealed earlier, around year 2 A.H. In fact, Shaarawi himself states that the duration of Qibla toward Jerusalem was 16 months in Medina.

I agree with you. Shaarawy has a point, but it was not until the idols were taken down, but until the idols became non-threatening to the faith. Pretty much like visiting the graves.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 01 Aug 2013, 12:38 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
I agree with you. Shaarawy has a point, but it was not until the idols were taken down, but until the idols became non-threatening to the faith. Pretty much like visiting the graves.

Excellent rationale. But we know that the Prophet (PBUH), and of course all Muslims in Mecca, before the migration to Medina, all prayed toward the Ka`ba! It wasn't until the migration to medina and the Prophet (PBUH) noticing that Muslims of Medina had been praying toward Jerusalem that he started to do the same. For 16-17 months that is, until the revelation came to designate the Sacrosanct Mosque as the only valid Qibla.

During the initial time in Mecca, prayer was not formal though for almost ten years. It became formal around 1-5 B.H. after the Night And Ascension Journey.

My humble answer to Ash-Sha`raawi's question is what God says in

That is, God allowed the prophet (PBUH) to choose the Ka`ba as the Qibla in Mecca, then switch to Jerusalem in Medina then switch back to the Ka`ba "in order to discern those who follow the Prophet from those who turn away from him".

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 02 Aug 2013, 02:23 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
we know that the Prophet (PBUH), and of course all Muslims in Mecca, before the migration to Medina, all prayed toward the Ka`ba! It wasn't until the migration to medina and the Prophet (PBUH) noticing that Muslims of Medina had been praying toward Jerusalem that he started to do the same. For 16-17 months that is, until the revelation came to designate the Sacrosanct Mosque as the only valid Qibla

This is a little known fact so I think you should prepare a substantiation for it when the time comes to write about it. I hadn't heard about it before, and even Shaarawi seems to have missed it (among other things in this context).

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 02 Aug 2013, 13:41 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
This is a little known fact so I think you should prepare a substantiation for it when the time comes to write about it. I hadn't heard about it before, and even Shaarawi seems to have missed it (among other things in this context).

This I found on the IslamWeb site,

فقد صلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى بيت المقدس ستة عشر شهراً، وذلك بعد هجرته صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى المدينة، وأما قبل هجرته فكان يصلي قبل الكعبة وقيل: يجعل الكعبة بينه وبين بيت المقدس فيصلي، لما أخرجه محمد بن جرير الطبري في تفسيره بسنده عن ابن جريج: أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم صلى أول ما صلى إلى الكعبة ثم صرف إلى بيت المقدس فصلت الأنصار نحو بيت المقدس قبل قدومه ثلاث حجج وصلى بعد قدومه ستة عشر شهراً ثم ولاه الله جل ثناؤه إلى الكعبة؛

وقال ابن كثير رحمه الله تعالى بعد ما ذكر جملة من الأقوال وساق بعضاً من الروايات قال: وقد جاء في هذا الباب أحاديث كثيرة وحاصل الأمر أنه قد كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أمر باستقبال الصخرة في بيت المقدس فكان بمكة يصلي بين الركنين فتكون بين يديه الكعبة وهو مستقبل صخرة بيت المقدس، فلما هاجر إلى المدينة تعذر الجمع بينهما فأمره الله بالتوجه إلى بيت المقدس... واستمر الأمر على ذلك بضعة عشر شهراً وكان يكثر الدعاء والابتهال أن يوجه إلى الكعبة التي هي قبلة إبراهيم عليه السلام، فأجيب إلى ذلك وأمر بالتوجه إلى البيت العتيق فخطب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم الناس فأعلمهم بذلك، وكان أول صلاة صلاها إليها صلاة العصر.ـ

Brief translation: At-Tabari narrates in his exegesis, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, that the Prophet (PBUH) used to direct his prayer toward the Ka`ba when he was in Mecca. Ibn Katheer mentions that the gist of the many narrations he mentions (in his exegesis?) is that the Prophet (PBUH) used to pray in Mecca in a direction that aligns the Ka`ba with the [Dome of the] Rock in Jerusalem.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 03 Aug 2013, 02:14 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Brief translation: At-Tabari narrates in his exegesis, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, that the Prophet (PBUH) used to direct his prayer toward the Ka`ba when he was in Mecca. Ibn Katheer mentions that the gist of the many narrations he mentions (in his exegesis?) is that the Prophet (PBUH) used to pray in Mecca in a direction that aligns the Ka`ba with the [Dome of the] Rock in Jerusalem.

OK, it's a bit strange that this is not widely mentioned in a subject that it is frequently discussed. I also find it strange this alignment business since it restricts the places of worship to a straight line that one's home may or may not lie upon. I have no reason to believe or disbelieve the authenticity, but I am raising the obvious points that may arise upon mentioning this.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 03 Aug 2013, 12:52 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
I also find it strange this alignment business since it restricts the places of worship to a straight line that one's home may or may not lie upon.

But recall that there was no command from God to direct prayer toward any particular place, not until year 2 A.H. The Prophet (PBUH) simply decided one on his own for 13 years in Mecca, then followed the idea of the people of Medina for a while, although he was not comfortable with it. When the test of faith that God had set in motion for Muslims had passed, God revealed the Qibla direction He wants.

The idea of aligning Mecca and Jerusalem may very well be the reason the people of Medina, which is between Jerusalem and Mecca, thought that the Qibla is Jerusalem.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 04 Aug 2013, 12:48 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Pragmatic wrote:
I also find it strange this alignment business since it restricts the places of worship to a straight line that one's home may or may not lie upon.

But recall that there was no command from God to direct prayer toward any particular place, not until year 2 A.H. The Prophet (PBUH) simply decided one on his own for 13 years in Mecca, then followed the idea of the people of Medina for a while, although he was not comfortable with it. When the test of faith that God had set in motion for Muslims had passed, God revealed the Qibla direction He wants.

The idea of aligning Mecca and Jerusalem may very well be the reason the people of Medina, which is between Jerusalem and Mecca, thought that the Qibla is Jerusalem.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I am in fact raising doubt that the alignment command ever took place, regardless of what progression of events took place and why. My reason is that such a command would render most places unfit for prayer, since only in places that are on the straight line with Kaaba and Jerusalem can one obey such command.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 04 Aug 2013, 13:23 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Maybe I wasn't clear. I am in fact raising doubt that the alignment command ever took place, regardless of what progression of events took place and why. My reason is that such a command would render most places unfit for prayer, since only in places that are on the straight line with Kaaba and Jerusalem can one obey such command.

I see, and you'd be right.

It seems to me that the Prophet (PBUH) had the habit of praying toward the South side of the Ka`ba only (which extrapolates to Jerusalem), and never toward the other three sides. I have no proof of that, but it would explain why everybody, including the Prophet's ambassador to Medina, Mus`ab ibn `Umair, may God have been pleased with him, understood that Jerusalem is the Qibla. If Mus`ab thought that it was the Ka`ba that was the Prophet's Qibla, or if the Prophet (PBUH) had told him it was, Mus`ab certainly would have told the Ansaar (Medinites).

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 24 Aug 2013, 15:43 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la, in his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ, pages 102-103, discusses this claim without taking sides, though he comes across as rejecting it.

He mentions a story without authentication that is interesting. He says that when this verse was revealed,

people asked the Prophet (PBUH), "O Messenger of God, how do we call upon Him: privately or publicly?", that's when this verse was revealed,

So, they asked him, "How do we call upon Him: facing the Qibla or not?". That's when 2:115 was revealed.

That story implies that 2:115 is talking about supplication and not prayer, which 2:144 is talking about. Thus, there is no cause to think abrogation of either one. A reasonable refutation. I just wish that Shu`la, or his book verifier, Dr. M. Ibrahim Faaris, had authenticated this story.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2013, 20:15 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Abu-Bakr Al-Hamdaani does not disagree with this claim, in his book الاعتبار في الناسخ والمنسوخ من الآثار, pages 50-51. He does however, report that scholars have differed on whether the abrogated was by a verse or by the Sunna. Interestingly enough, those who rejected that the abrogated was by the Sunna were the ones who believed that the Quran can only abrogate itself! So, they firstly assumed that an abrogation occurred here, then assumed that the Quran may not abrogate the Sunna!

Two wrong assumptions and neither of them had to be made. There is no abrogation here, since the direction toward Jerusalem was the practice of Muslims of Media before the Prophet (PBUH) migrated to it, and he chose to follow suit. There was no order from God yet.

Secondly, the Quran can of course abrogate the Sunna, since the Prophet (PBUH) was human and could make mistakes. Chapter 80 was revealed to correct one of his mistakes.

Al-Hamdaani also mentions something interesting that Ash-Shaafi`i said about 2:144. He opined, but didn't seem confident in the opinion, that "the face of God" in 2:144 meant the direction God chose. There is no need to belabor the interpretation of 2:144; the face of God is everywhere. It's a metaphor; God is not in any one place nor is He facing any one direction, may He be sanctified and exalted.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently 17 Sep 2019, 12:52

All times are UTC

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group