certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islamic Ideology (05 Jul 2017 NewAgeIslam.Com)


Islam and Mysticism: Is ‘Nafs’ Soul? (Part - 1)



By Naseer Ahmed, New Age Islam

05 July 2017

The dictionary defines mysticism as vague or ill-defined religious or spiritual belief, especially as associated with a belief in the occult. The Quran describes itself as Kitabum Mubeen or a perspicuous Book which is lucid, clearly expressed and easily understood - a Book that makes everything clear beyond a shadow of doubt. Islamic religious knowledge is therefore lucid and crystal clear and what is vague or ill-defined is not Islam. Islamic mysticism is therefore an oxymoron although mysticism among Muslims is pervasive and has completely distorted the simple religion of the Quran.

Growth in our knowledge follows two paths a) Exponential growth based on empiricism and logical reasoning. This is incremental, step-wise growth which can be thought to be continuous b) Discontinuous growth or by sudden leaps through inspiration. The proofs of many of the theorems in Mathematics came years after the theorem was formulated. For example, while Ramanujam gave us many brilliant theorems in number theory, the proofs of those theorems were provided by other Mathematicians several years later. Einstein struggled with the mathematical proof of his general theory of relativity for several years while the theory was already formulated by him. Equally brilliant scientists had difficulty understanding even after the proof was provided so how did Einstein think up such a different model of the physical world? The empirical proof of his theory also followed much later. So, it wasn’t even a case of formulating a theory to fit observed behaviour. Such leaps of knowledge through insight can only be thought of as inspired or based on intuition which is another word for the same thing.

Mysticism is also defined as the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, which may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender. The Quran is a Book of revelations and contains all the ‘mystical’ knowledge that man needs, but is inaccessible to human intellect in foresight. The Quran describes itself as a Book that cannot be produced by man. It is a Book that has come as a revelation from God or is inspired by God and therefore, the simple challenge in the Quran to those who deny it, to produce anything the like of any of its Surahs or chapter. This challenge is discussed in detail in my article: Science and Religion.

The Quran has cleared all mysteries, and therefore any ‘mysticism’ that is not firmly anchored in the Quran, or else is not Science, are myths and falsehoods and a product of hallucinations.

 (5:15) O people of the Book! There has come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There has come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book, -

(36:69) We have not instructed the (Prophet) in Poetry, nor is it meet for him: this is no less than a Message and a Qur´an making things clear:

The Book is not to be interpreted as one may interpret poetry. Its verses do not have multiple meanings as poetry does but these have only one clear unmistakable meaning. Those who however choose to interpret rather than ascertain and understand the clear meaning are the lovers of philosophy and poetry and not honest seekers of the truth. They are the mystics of Islam, the distorters of the simple faith of Islam.

Prophets Sent With A “Clear Message”

Prophets were sent with a clear message They are referred to as “Rasoolum Mubeen” or bearers of the clear message, or as clear warners “Nazeerum Mubeen”: 7:184; 11:25 , 22:49, 26:115; 29:50; 38:70; 43:29; 44:13; 46:9; 51:50, 51; 67:26; 71:2;

Prophets of Islam Did Not Possess “Mystical Knowledge”

The Quran makes clear that the prophets of Islam did not know anything beyond what was revealed to them by inspiration and what was revealed to them was for all mankind and shared by them with all.

(46:9) Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear."

 (7:188) Say: "I have no power over any good or harm to myself except as Allah wills. If I had knowledge of the unseen, I should have multiplied all good, and no evil should have touched me: I am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings to those who have faith."

(11:31) "I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor claim I to be an angel. Nor yet do I say, of those whom your eyes do despise that Allah will not grant them (all) that is good: Allah knows best what is in their innermost thoughts and feelings: I should, if I did, indeed be a wrong-doer."

(6:50) Say: "I tell you not that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden, nor do I tell you I am an angel. I but follow what is revealed to me." Say: "can the blind be held equal to the seeing?" Will ye then consider not?

Pursuit Of The Occult Is Worship Of Satan And Kufr.

As far as belief in the occult or in magical powers is concerned, the Quran makes clear that pursuit of the occult or of magical powers is to follow the Satan and therefore Kufr and Fitnah and the buyers of magic will have no share in the happiness of the Hereafter.

(2:102) They followed what the progeny of Satan gave out (falsely) against the power of Solomon: the Kafala were, not Solomon, but the progeny of Satan, teaching men Magic, and such things as came down at Babylon to the angels Harut and Marut. But neither of these taught anyone (Such things) without saying: "We are only for trial (Fitna); so do not commit Kufr." They learned from them the means to sow discord between man and wife. But they could not thus harm anyone except by Allah´s permission. And they learned what harmed them, not what profited them. And they knew that the buyers of (magic) would have no share in the happiness of the Hereafter. And vile was the price for which they did sell their souls, if they but knew!

(103) If they had kept their Faith and guarded themselves from evil, far better had been the reward from their Lord, if they but knew!

While it was Allah’s angels who taught mankind the occult, it was as a trial and those who succumb to its temptations have sold themselves to Satan and will have no share in the happiness of the Hereafter.

There Is No Scope for Mysticism in Islam

When the Quran leads one into light, who, except the followers of Satan will seek the vagueness of mysticism and enter once again into the depths of darkness?

(2:257) Allah is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be companions of the fire, to dwell therein (For ever).

Do We Have A Soul?

What is mysticism without the soul? But do we have a soul? The primary meaning of "soul" in all religions and cultures is the non-material or “spiritual” part of our "true-self", with a consciousness and intelligence of its own, even without our body and without our brain, which does not die when our body dies, and perhaps existed even before we were born. No such thing exists nor is it recognized by Science or by the Quran. Even though such a concept of soul is illogical and unscientific, and there is no empirical evidence of its existence within us or within others, the belief in the existence of such a soul in all religions and cultures including among Muslims is very strong. To be told therefore that the Quran does not have such a concept of soul would be shocking to most people but is true as we shall soon see.

Two words in the Quran are often mistranslated as “soul”. These are:

1.       Ruh

2.       Nafs

The irony is that these two words are not even synonyms. Clearly therefore, there is no single word in the Quran that means soul and two words that are not even synonyms have been misused to mean “soul”. The Quran simply has no concept of a soul, and none of the verses in which the subject is death, or resurrection, contain either of the two words.

What is it that we have apart from our physical body and brain? We have our life’s experiences in the form of memories, acquired knowledge, patterns of thinking, consciousness of self and a moral conscience or reproaching self that we have developed based on our religious moral teachings or secular ethics which tells us when we are wrong. We also have our senses and the temptations that these senses lead us into and the controlling self which prevents us from indulgences that we have learnt to consider immoral or unethical. We have cognition to use a modern all-encompassing word. None of what is discussed can be called “soul”. I have just described the meaning of Nafs in the Quran. Nafs is the consciousness that we have in a state of wakefulness which leaves us when we are asleep and when we die. What is Nafs without the body, the brain, the memories, patterns of thinking or mental processes, the senses, the nervous system and the organs? The Nafs also dies when the body dies and there can be no Nafs without a living person. All of it, including our physical body, mental processes, memory, feelings etc. can be thought of as information, which can be used to recreate us on resurrection exactly as we were when alive, including our “Nafs” as described. There is no independent existence of Nafs without the living body in a state of wakefulness as far as Science is concerned, and also as far as the Quran is concerned as we shall see.

The English word soul is also used to mean a person, self, inner-self, innermost being and conscience. When used in this sense, it means Nafs but since we are interested in finding out whether it means “the indestructible true self capable of existence without our living body”, we will ignore all other meanings of soul except this one while translating the Quran. I have looked up translations by forty of the most popular translators and given brief statistics of how they have translated.

The Nafs Dies

Yusuf Ali (3:145) Nor can a soul (Linafsin) die except by Allah´s leave,

Literal Translation: It is not for a person to die except by Allah’s leave

Linafsin is translated as “a soul” by Yusuf Ali while it means “for a person”. Thirty one other translators translate similarly as soul in this verse. Since the concept of soul is that it does not die, Nafs is better translated as “person “in this verse since it is the person who dies. A living person is inseparable from his Nafs as discussed and Nafs has no existence independent of a living person which also dies when a person dies. In the Quran, there is no concept of Nafsun that does not die and therefore it does not mean “soul” by its primary meaning. Eight translators have translated Linafsin correctly as person, human being or self.

كُلُّ نَفْسٍ ذَآئِقَةُ الْمَوْتِ29:57,21:35,3:185

Every Nafsin shall have a taste of death

Clearly Nafsi means person and not some indestructible “soul”.

(Thirty three translators have translated Nafsin as soul and seven have translated it as person, human being or living being).

63:11 وَلَن يُؤَخِّرَ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِذَا جَاء أَجَلُهَا وَاللَّهُ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

Literal Translation: But to no person/self (Nafsan) will Allah grant respite when the time appointed (for it) has come; and Allah is well acquainted with (all) that ye do.

We have established that “Nafs” dies and cannot therefore be what lives on after we die. or may have existed even before we were born.  It is not soul by its primary meaning. When translators translate Nafs as soul even when the verse speaks of the death of Nafs, it is clear that they have used soul to mean person.

Nafs as Temptations and Feelings

Nafs is al-Ammara Bissu or Nafs is the enjoinder of evil

The senses are prone to temptations. For example, Yusuf (pbuh) was sought to be seduced when he had grown into an adult by the Aziz’s wife who had adopted him when he was a child. Yusuf (pbuh) says that he does not absolve himself of blame for being human; his senses are also prone to the temptations of desire even when such desire is illegitimate. It is only through the mercy of God that he could save himself from temptations that may have lead him to do an evil act.

(12:53) "Nor do I absolve my own self (Nafsi): the senses are certainly prone to the evil temptations (Nafs al-Ammara Bissu), unless my Lord do bestow His Mercy: but surely my Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

(Twenty eight translators have translated Nafsi as soul while twelve others have translated it as self, inner self or myself.)

20: 96 قَالَ بَصُرْتُ بِمَا لَمْ يَبْصُرُوا بِهِ فَقَبَضْتُ قَبْضَةً مِّنْ أَثَرِ الرَّسُولِ فَنَبَذْتُهَا وَكَذَلِكَ سَوَّلَتْ لِي نَفْسِي

Literal Translation: He replied: "I saw what they saw not: so I took a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger, and threw it (into the calf): thus did my inner self (Nafsi) suggest to me."

(Thirty translators have translated Nafsi as soul. Three translators as mind, and eight others as self/inner self/lowerself/ownself).

4:128     وَأُحْضِرَتِ الأَنفُسُ الشُّحَّ

And the Alanfusu are swayed by greed

(Thirty translators have translated Alanfusu as soul. Ten others have translated as persons or people).

فَطَوَّعَتْ لَهُ نَفْسُهُ قَتْلَ أَخِيهِ فَقَتَلَهُ فَأَصْبَحَ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

5:30 Then prompted to him his Nafsuhu to kill his brother so he killed him and became of the losers

Here Nafsuhu is “his feeling self” with its inclinations, temptations, envy, fear, greed, etc.

(Twenty nine translators have translated Nafsuhu as soul. Eleven others have translated it as self, selfishness, lower-self, passion, mind, evil thought, ego).

Nafs al-Lawwama or the self-reproaching conscience

(75:1) I do call to witness the Resurrection Day;

(2) And I do call to witness the self-reproaching conscience: (Eschew Evil).

(3) Does man think that We cannot assemble his bones?

(4) Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers.

(5) But man wishes to do wrong (even) in the time in front of him.

Nafs al-Lawwama may be described as the cognitive dissonance we experience when what we do is contrary to what we believe is the right thing to do. Our sense of right and wrong, or the values of our society, are learnt in the same manner as we learn our mother tongue. We imbibe our values and sense of right and wrong while learning to communicate since what we learn through our interactions is not just the language but also the values of the society with which we interact. This further gets refined based on our efforts directed towards acquiring necessary knowledge for leading a moral life. The cognitive dissonance may be dealt with honestly by changing our actions to conform with what we believe is right or we may succumb to our temptations and do evil acts. We may even rationalize such behaviour.

(Thirty four translators have translated Nafs as soul. Only six have translated it as conscience.)

 Nafs al-Mutma`inna or the Nafs that is content and at peace

Those who will be successful in the hereafter are described as the Nafs al-Mutma`inna or those whose conscience is at peace with self

(89:27) To the persons whose Nafs or consciousness is at peace and satisfied (Nafs al-Mutma`inna) will be said

(28) "Come back thou to thy Lord, - well pleased (thyself), and well-pleasing unto Him!

(29) "Enter thou, then, among My devotees!

(30) "Yea, enter thou My Heaven!

Whose Nafs will be completely content and at peace? Those who dealt with their cognitive dissonance honestly and acted in accordance with what they truly believed to be right. Those who were satisfied with their lives in every way and did not yield to greed, envy, hate, anger and carnal desires and who remained grateful to God for all that they received.

Such persons whose are at peace with themselves and with God will enter Heaven. Such state is not possible as Yusuf (pbuh) says without the Grace and Mercy of Allah.  Without belief in God, people will tend to suppress their cognitive dissonance with rationalization, succumb to their lower desires, will be greedy for more of everything, envious of those who are better off, hate others for what they are, feel insecure and defend their faults/mistakes. The Nafs that are not completely satisfied are those who die wanting to live longer, dissatisfied with what they could achieve or feeling unfulfilled in some respect. The Nafs that will be in peace will be those who know that they did their best with the best of intentions and remaining true to their own selves and beliefs and to the best of their knowledge, using every opportunity to do what was best under the circumstances.

Each one of us knows to what extent we have attained the status of Nafs al-Mutma`inna. Such a Nafs is fearless, optimistic, free of hatred and certainly not paranoid. Paranoia is a sign of a Nafs that is ill at ease with self and his environment.

(Thirty four translators have translated Nafs as soul. Only six have translated it as human being or self.)

16:7 وَتَحْمِلُ أَثْقَالَكُمْ إِلَى بَلَدٍ لَّمْ تَكُونُواْ بَالِغِيهِ إِلاَّ بِشِقِّ الأَنفُسِ إِنَّ رَبَّكُمْ لَرَؤُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ

Literal Translation: And they (animals) carry your loads to a land which you could not have reached except with great trouble to yourselves (Alanfusi). Indeed your Lord is surely  Most kind, Most Merciful.

Yusuf Ali: (16:7) And they carry your heavy loads to lands that ye could not (otherwise) reach except with souls distressed: for your Lord is indeed Most Kind, Most Merciful,

Trouble is to the body and not the “soul”.

(Six translators have translated Alanfusi as soul. Twenty four have translated it as yourselves)

39:42 اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

Yusuf Ali (39:42) It is Allah that takes the souls (l-anfusa) at death; and those that die not (He takes) during their sleep: those on whom He has passed the decree of death, He keeps back (from returning to life), but the rest He sends (to their bodies) for a term appointed verily in this are Signs for those who reflect.

What is taken away in our sleep is not our soul but our consciousness. In our death also what we lose is our consciousness of self.  What is taken away in both sleep and death is consciousness which returns for those who do not die but does not return for those who die. (l-anfusa) therefore means consciousness and not soul. This verse makes the meaning of Nafs amply clear. It is what a living person has in a state of wakefulness. It is not what you have in a state of sleep, coma or death. Neither does it have any existence independent of a living person in a state of wakefulness

(Thirty translators have translated Alanfusa as soul. All others have struggled with the correct meaning and confused sleep with death. They have translated it as “self” taken away when asleep and sent back to those who have not died and wake up. The correct meaning simply is that it is our consciousness that is taken away when asleep and given back when we wake up but does not return to those who die. Death is described in very simple words as losing life or consciousness of self permanently while sleep is temporary loss of consciousness. Only one translator Shabbir Ahmed comes close)

In this part, we have seen what Nafs means and what it does not mean. It certainly does not mean the indestructible soul which survives after death. It means our ‘feeling, thinking, discerning, prone to temptations, rationalizing self and our reproaching and correcting conscience in a state of wakeful consciousness’ or simply the unique individual or self or being that we are, which lives and ultimately dies. Death is for both the body and the Nafs. Although many translators have freely translated Nafs as soul, in no verse does Nafs take the primary meaning of “soul” but only the secondary meanings. We can conclude that Nafs is not “soul” by its primary meaning of “our true indestructible self that lives on after we die” in any verse of the Quran. In the next part, we will see what ‘Ruh” means.

Naseer Ahmed is an Engineering graduate from IIT Kanpur and is an independent IT consultant after having served in both the Public and Private sector in responsible positions for over three decades. He is a frequent contributor to NewAgeIslam.com

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/naseer-ahmed,-new-age-islam/islam-and-mysticism--is-‘nafs’-soul?-(part---1)/d/111786

New Age IslamIslam OnlineIslamic WebsiteAfrican Muslim NewsArab World NewsSouth Asia NewsIndian Muslim NewsWorld Muslim NewsWomen in IslamIslamic FeminismArab WomenWomen In ArabIslamophobia in AmericaMuslim Women in WestIslam Women and Feminism

 




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   91


  • I DO NOT KNOW IF OUR ULEMA WILL AGREE TO BUILD THE CONSENUS THAT  NOT EVERY VERSE IN QURAN IS UNIVERSALLY APPLICAPBLE, BUT RATHER, CONTEXTUAL.

    By GRD - 11/2/2017 10:10:31 AM



  • Editor, This is a corrected version and the previous versions may be deleted.

    Yunus Sb,

     If we can agree on what we finally seem to agree to irrespective of who said what and when, we should be able to close this discussion.

    We appear to be on the same page now that the Quran did not consider all the Mushrikin as Kafirin even in the very last verses of revelation in Surah Taubah. You have already confirmed that. Simply by implication therefore, the Quran could not have considered all the Mushrikin as Kafir before whether in Surah Al-Kafirun or verses 98:1,6 or in any other verse. The Mushrikin are however not considered as believers but disbelievers. Logically therefore, Kafir cannot mean a disbeliever since all the Mushrikin are not Kafirin. Also kafaru has also been used for those who profess belief but are hypocrites and for those who consume usury and commit other grave sins among the believers. Since a Kafir can be both among the believers and the disbelievers it cannot mean a disbeliever. A more appropriate word for it may be Sinner.

    We also agree that the punishment in 9:5 is only for the Religious persecutors if they do not seek asylum as per 9:6, do not leave hejaz before the end of the 4 month period of amnesty, or do not accept Islam and pay zakat and establish regular prayers.

    Those who did not indulge in any form of religious persecution are free to practice their religion and pay zakat as per 9:29 although barred from entering the sacred mosque as per 9:28.

    We can therefore boldly and unequivocally, proclaim the following which goes a long way in establishing Islam as a religion of peace:

    1.    Kafir does not mean disbeliever even in one verse of the Quran. The closest English word that describes ‘Kafir’ is ‘Sinner’ and ‘Kufr’ is ‘Sin’. Kufr is possible by person of any faith. The word Kafir has been used in the Quran to mean a die-hard Sinner not amenable to change his ways or repent. The disbelievers who are kafir will therefore not believe. Not all the disbelievers are kafir and they will believe once they realize the true nature of belief/disbelief. Who among the disbelievers is a kafir from the perspective of his beliefs can be known only after the fact – whether he became a believer or died rejecting belief. Rejection from certain knowledge is the criteria and not mere non-acceptance from lack of knowledge or conviction. There is not even one verse in the Quran that considered all the Mushrikin of Mecca as kafir and the verses only refer to the kafaru among the Mushrikin clearly implying that not all are kafir.

    2.    The Quran also speaks of the kafaru among the believers. Not all the believers who commit kufr are kafir if they repent their transgressions. Those who do not repent on committing what they know to be a sin, may get inured to even the feelings of guilt, and become die-hard sinners or kafir. The kafir among the believers who are such unrepentant sinners, will be in hell-fire prepared for the kafirin.

    3.    The most odious form of kufr is injustice and oppression. So much so, that those who will not desist from oppression are Kafir, who must be resisted or fought against until they agree to mend their ways and give up on their oppressive ways. Oppression is the only form of Kufr, against which the permission to fight is given in the Quran. The faith professed by the oppressor/oppressed are not a consideration

    4.    Specifically, there is no permission to fight against the kufr of deliberate disbelief. Only peaceful preaching with gracious speech is permissible.

    5.    The Quran  affirms that the freedom of conscience in Islam is absolute and without any restraints. “Let there be no compulsion in religion” and “To the peaceful disbeliever be his way and to me mine” are fundamental principles. These principles were never compromised by the Prophet in his battles against the religious persecutors. The Prophet was fighting not the disbelievers and disbelief, but the Religious persecutors and oppression to establish the Deen of Allah, in which there can be no oppression or injustice and people are free to practice any religion. 

    If you have any reservations, please express them and let us be clear about what we agree and what we disagree and decide to agree to disagree on the points on which we cannot agree.

    As far as your definition of kufr is concerned, it is a correct definition and for that matter, even a simple definition of "to cover up" would be right as I have said repeatedly. A kafir is however not simply a person who commits kufr. If that were so, all of us would be kafir.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/12/2017 12:02:51 AM



  • This kafir/mushrikin debate is futile and anachronistic. We should be ashamed to consider it a suitable subject for such a prolific discussion.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/11/2017 12:58:50 PM



  • Naseer Sahab.

    You have presented a chart with the title: ’Shifting stance of M.Yunus.

    The fact is the content of the charts as quoted from thread are fully consistent as noted below in yellow highlight:

    Top left hand box: All Mushrikin are kafir.

    As per the commentary quoted under this title, the Qur’an regarded those immediate audience of the Prophet mushrikin who witnessed the truth of Qur'anic revelation unfolding before their eyes but dismissed it.

    The Top right hand box

    My commentary is : “those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir.I agree with you that the Qur'an does not treat all muhsrikin as kafirin.

    Bottom Left had box.

    I never made that comment under this thread. So it is not a part of this debate. In.all probability the comment was in relation to your research on nafs. Can you please pass the reference.

    Bottom right hand box: So virtually you are adopting the interpretation tabled in my jt. publication and claiming it as your innovative theological insight.

    MY FRESH COMMENTS:

    The title of the top left hand column: “All Mushrikin are kafir” is phrased by you and not suggested or claimed or endorsed by me..

    As regards my position on the meaning of the word kufr/kafir, I have already said this with immaculate consistency in ten of my comments under this thread and in not a single comment have I changed my position. If you claim I said otherwise in some other thread, please provide reference. Here are all my comments under this thread in chronological order.

    1. Dear Naseer Sahab:

    “What you said about the dictionary based translation of Qur’an is perhaps true for most modern translations though… If you have time, do take a look at my work. Now coming to your interpretation of the word Kufr please tell me precisely how it differs from the one tabled in the glossary of my work copied below:

     Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The Qur’an refers to its recalcitrant audience by the plural noun forms kafirun, kafirin, which, for want of any appropriate English counterpart have been rendered as disbelievers or deniers as appropriate. The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).

    By muhammd yunus - 8/28/2017 6:30:57 AM

    2. Dear Naseer Sahab,

    Thanks for your enlightening response. I still want to know precisely how your interpretation of the word kufr/ kafir differs from mine: 

    "Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition."

    I have only added the following explanatory bit under my above interpretation of the word 'kufr', shedding light on how this word has been translated traditionally
    "for want of any appropriate English counterpart (the words kafirun, kafirin) have been rendered as disbelievers or deniers as appropriate." By muhammd yunus - 8/28/2017 7:28:20 PM

    3. Dear Naseer Sahab,

    Your last short definition of Kafaru brings all those believers in its pale “who are inclined towards self-indulgence and will go wherever their lusts take them.”  It is a very tricky interpretation as it will enable Muslims to call fellow Muslims a kafir who in their perception are “inclined towards self-indulgence and slave to their lusts”…..I think this topic has been discussed very extensively and it is time to leave it here.

    As far as my position is concerned I am happy with the following definition of kufr/kafir appearing in the Glossary of my jt. publication as I earlier mentioned:

    kufr: Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The ..The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).

    By muhammd yunus - 9/1/2017 5:38:41 AM

    4. Dear Naseer Sahab,

    I believe Surah al-kafirun is addressed to the 'mushrikin' among the Prophet's immediate audience who were witnesses to the Qur'anic revelation and were adamantly dismissing …
    I think let us terminate our discussion here for a great deal of time has been devoted to it and we are going round and round in a closed circuit debate.
    By muhammd yunus - 9/1/2017 7:55:58 PM

    5. Dear Naseer Sahab

    As I understand and also put in my exeg work, there is no category of people called 'kafirin.' I believe the Qur'an regarded the mushrikin in its immediate audience as kafir because they witnessed the truth of Qur'anic revelation unfolding before their eyes but dismissed it. Thus the kfirin in the opening verse of Sura 109 were the inveterate denier of the Qur'anic revelation among the mushrikin.  Thus   my position remains unchanged on the issue and i think we must terminate this conv. and move on to any new topic.
    By muhammd yunus - 9/4/2017 7:31:29 AM

    6. Dear Naseer Sahab,

    I never 'banked' on Picthall's translation. I merely quoted him to illustrate to you that different interpreters have interpreted 98:1 differently.

    The bottom line is as I mentioned earlier I find nothing wrong with the following interpretation of the word 'kufr' as noted in my exeg. work and much as I may find  your research exhaustive, I am still not very clear how  You interpret this word. Can you tell me in very simple terms how it differs from mine below:

    "Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The Qur’an refers to its recalcitrant audience by the plural noun forms kafirun, kafirin, which, for want of any appropriate English counterpart have been rendered as disbelievers or deniers as appropriate. The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).  
    By muhammd yunus - 9/6/2017 1:49:08 AM

    7. Naseer Sb,

    Frankly speaking i find my definition of kufr - blatant denial or violation of what is just and rightful - no matter the semantics - fitting all the following cases that you illustrate to derive the meaning of kufr from the Qur'an:

     1. Oppression and Religious persecution

    2. Active opposition of belief, denial  of the clear Signs of God shown to the people in the haughty/conceited manner of Pharaoh. Simple disbelievers who do no harm are not kafir.

    3. As far as the believers are concerned, ingratitude to God in the form of being niggardly or consuming usury or ill treating the less fortunate.

    4. oppression and injustice is also kufr for the believers.
     
    Do we close this debate. Only then we will discuss 98:1 
    By muhammd yunus - 9/6/2017 7:48:14 AM

    8.Naseer Sb,

    Here is my point by point response in blue ink to your comment dated 9/7/2017 2:53:43 AM 

    ….. You have not evolved any new meaning of the kafirun. All you are saying after your extensive research is what is noted– in my exeg. Work published in 2009. Copied below:  

     kufr: Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The Qur’an refers to its recalcitrant audience by the plural noun forms kafirun, kafirin, ..The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).

     So virtually you are adopting the interpretation tabled in my jt. publication and claiming it as your innovative theological insight. I do not claim to be any innovator in religion. I write what my probe into the Qur’an dictates to me. Surely there must be countless other scholars holding the same view.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/9/2017 5:49:55 AM

    9. Dear Naseer Sb

    Your comment dated 9/10/2017 1:16:01 begins with the following para that presumes the I am falsifying the Qur’an…:

    The fact is the following definition that appears in my jt publication dated June 2009 is consistent with what you have concluded above and so your concern for me for falsifying the Qur’an is misplaced.

    Kufr is Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The Qur’an refers to its recalcitrant audience by the plural noun forms kafirun, kafirin, ... The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).

    Kindly note I have already said this four of five times during recent exchange of mails and going to say this again and again if you go on charging me of misinterpreting the notion of kufr or claiming that what I have written is your original understanding of the term kufr. I of course do not make any such claim.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/10/2017 3:38:49 AM

    Kindly also note, while posting the last comment above I wrote ‘I said this four or five times’ without realizing that was the 9th time I was saying. I stand by my above definition appearing in my jt publication the tenth time with this commentary.


    By muhammd yunus - 9/11/2017 7:09:30 AM



  • The shifting stand of Yunus Sb without acknowledging that he has changed his stand

    All Mushrikin are Kafir

    In the Qur’anic epistemology, all the polytheists among its direct audience stood as kafirin in God’s sight.”

    As I understand and also put in my exeg work, there is no category of people called 'kafirin.' I believe the Qur'an regarded the mushrikin in its immediate audience as kafir because they witnessed the truth of Qur'anic revelation unfolding before their eyes but dismissed it.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/4/2017 7:31:29 AM

     

     

    Stand changes but pretends it has not change

    This obviously implies that those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir.

    "I agree with you that the Qur'an does not treat all muhsrikin as kafirin. (9:4)."

    Naseer Sahab,

    The fact that you have come up with a very non-traditional and unique interpretation of the word kufr and its other derives, strongly disagreed with me on a few issues/ aspects of the Qur'anic message and your articles have your unique signature demonstrates that you  have produced an original work based on your own research."

     

    So virtually you are adopting the interpretation tabled in my jt. publication and claiming it as your innovative theological insight. 


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/11/2017 3:28:59 AM



  • Yunus Sb,

    Your realization, that not all the Mushrikin of Mecca were deemed kafir in the Quran by admitting the same after 9 days of intense debate during which you adamantly argued otherwise, calls for your explaining what made you misinterpret earlier, the otherwise very clear meaning of Surah Al-Kafirun.

    The fact is that you ignored the clear meaning of the Quran, and judged the Mushrikin of Mecca as kafir based on your dictionary meaning of kafir, and based on such uncalled for misjudgement, misinterpreted the Quran. Since every scholar has done the same, your change of view can have a positive impact on the rest. You owe it to Allah, after having misinterpreted Surah Al-Kafirun and other relevant verses, to put the record straight by admitting what made you err and what is the correct way to understand the clear meaning of the Quran so that the damage done by your arguments can be undone and you leave the subject by making a positive impact on all others who similarly misinterpret by following the same defective process.

    I am afraid, that your several attempts to run away from the debate rather than accept your mistake, and then slyly making it appear that you have not changed your view when you have, is not what is expected of a believer and only a hypocrite behaves this way.

    Your acceptance and endorsement of the following will go a long way in promoting the correct understanding of the Quran, besides presenting Islam in it’s correct form:

    Quran is a perspicacious Book without ambiguity and without contradictions and it is our faulty understanding that lead to the contradictions.  The wrong prevailing notions prevent the emergence of the following important truths which when accepted, dramatically change our understanding of the religion of Islam for the better.

    1.    Kafir does not mean disbeliever even in one verse of the Quran. The closest English word that describes ‘Kafir’ is ‘Sinner’ and ‘Kufr’ is ‘Sin’. Kufr is possible by person of any faith. The word Kafir has been used in the Quran to mean a die-hard Sinner not amenable to change his ways or repent. The disbelievers who are kafir will therefore not believe. Not all the disbelievers are kafir and they will believe once they realize the true nature of belief/disbelief. Who among the disbelievers is a kafir from the perspective of his beliefs can be known only after the fact – whether he became a believer or died rejecting belief. Rejection from certain knowledge is the criteria and not mere non-acceptance from lack of knowledge or conviction. There is not even one verse in the Quran that considered all the Mushrikin of Mecca as kafir and the verses only refer to the kafaru among the Mushrikin clearly implying that not all are kafir.

    2.    The Quran also speaks of the kafaru among the believers. Not all the believers who commit kufr are kafir if they repent their transgressions. Those who do not repent on committing what they know to be a sin, may get inured to even the feelings of guilt, and become die-hard sinners or kafir. The kafir among the believers who are such unrepentant sinners, will be in hell-fire prepared for the kafirin.

    3.    The most odious form of kufr is injustice and oppression. So much so, that those who will not desist from oppression are Kafir, who must be resisted or fought against until they agree to mend their ways and give up on their oppressive ways. Oppression is the only form of Kufr, against which the permission to fight is given in the Quran. The faith professed by the oppressor/oppressed are not a consideration

    4.    Specifically, there is no permission to fight against the kufr of deliberate disbelief. Only peaceful preaching with gracious speech is permissible.

    5.    The Quran  affirms that the freedom of conscience in Islam is absolute and without any restraints. “Let there be no compulsion in religion” and “To the peaceful disbeliever be his way and to me mine” are fundamental principles. These principles were never compromised by the Prophet in his battles against the religious persecutors. The Prophet was fighting not the disbelievers and disbelief, but the Religious persecutors and oppression to establish the Deen of Allah, in which there can be no oppression or injustice and people are free to practice any religion. 

    I expect you to respond positively as a true believer. May Allah help you to find the necessary courage and honesty. There can be no redemption in running away from it.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/10/2017 11:39:44 PM



  • Naseersaab's coercive, threatening and insulting manner of discourse renders him incapable of being a credible colloquist. He does not have the capacity to absorb what others are saying, so he is stuck helplessly with his arbitrary and capricious theories and cannot bring himself to realize how erroneous and ridiculous they are.

    He says to Yunus sahib, "It is my duty to do my utmost to try to save you from the sin of falsification of the Quran and denial of truth." Such arrogance and hubris towards an aalim like Yunus sahib make Naseersaab a laughing stock in this forum. Let us pray for his recovery from such pride and mulishness.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/10/2017 12:44:02 PM



  • mr. naseer ahmed called mr. ghulam mohiyuddin a "lying hypocrite".

    He did not call me muhammad yunus a "lying hypocrite".

    but of course in the past mr. naseer ahmed has always claimed to prove his "point" by calling his questioners "apostates, hypocrites, militant apostates, islam haters, islamophobes and a lot of other sweet sounding names. all of them more desperate than the previous.

    mr. muhammad ynus should call to mind an old discussion about the right hand possessions.

    both mr. naseer ahmed and mr muhammad yunus called each other every epithet esteemed in islamic discourse. but that is beside the point.

    another was the discussion about if saudi arabia makes money out of the hajj. while mr. naseer ahmed kept arguing that saudi arabia actually loses money by hajj. it was touch and go util one mr. sadaf typed out a piece of his mind for mr. naseer amed. that really made things hit the fan.

    another was about the tablighi jamaat. ditto. imprecations and takfirism by mr. naseer ahmed against everyone who said that they did not approve of the tablighi jamaat.

    his favorite sword is to ask out of the blue "do you believe that the Qur'an is the word of God"?.

    this stops even the elephants of exegesis on their tracks.

    that is the epitome of the unbroken record if islamic discourse and dissent and islamic conflict resolution.

    the final arbiter is by acusing the other of being a mushriq, munafiq or kafir.

    here this matter has stood from the past 1400 years. and here it stills shuffles around.

    you need to do a lot of running to just stay in the same place.

    By hats off! - 9/10/2017 7:10:57 AM



  • Naseer Sb.
    Ref your last comment re interpretation of 'ruh' I regard this as something belonging to the mutashabihat or unseen world and I am not at all qualified to explore its true meaning. Besides, it is not a part of my exegetic agenda. My agenda is to expound the ahkamat of the Qur'an using the Qur'an's vocabulary and illustrations and share my findings with fellow Muslims.

    Currently I am writing short articles on some critical religious themes and notion and that keeps me mentally occupied. So I am not mentally free to participate in your purely academic debate re the real meaning of 'ruh' - though your research on the meaning of nafs had impressed me as acknowledged earlier.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/10/2017 4:46:13 AM



  • Dear Naseer Sb

    Your comment dated 9/10/2017 1:16:01 begins with the following para that presumes the I am falsifying the Qur’an:

    “It is my duty to to do my utmost to try to save you from the sin of falsification of the Quran and denial of truth. I reproduce below from my article a section that further makes the point clear although I have already presented enough evidence.”

    You then pen accounts of the people of various prophets who were destroyed on account of kufr and conclude with the following statement:

    “Simple disbelief is not enough to make a person kafir but active rejection and denial in the form of hindering people from the path of Allah.”

    The fact is the following definition that appears in my jt publication dated June 2009 is consistent with what you have concluded above and so your concern for me for falsifying the Qur’an is misplaced.

    Kufr is Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition. The Qur’an refers to its recalcitrant audience by the plural noun forms kafirun, kafirin, ... The Qur’an also connotes kufr with canceling or effacing something (29:7, 47:2), being thankless or ungrateful (17:27, 76:24).

    Kindly note I have already said this four of five times during recent exchange of mails and going to say this again and again if you go on charging me of misinterpreting the notion of kufr or claiming that what I have written is your original understanding of the term kufr. I of course do not make any such claim.


    By muhammd yunus - 9/10/2017 3:38:49 AM



  • Yunus Sb,

    You have made the following categorical statements in the past:

    In the Qur’anic epistemology, all the polytheists among its direct audience stood as kafirin in God’s sight.”

    As I understand and also put in my exeg work, there is no category of people called 'kafirin.' I believe the Qur'an regarded the mushrikin in its immediate audience as kafir because they witnessed the truth of Qur'anic revelation unfolding before their eyes but dismissed it.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/4/2017 7:31:29 AM

    You have conceded after 9 days of adamant refusal that “those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir.”

     

    The above is still an ifsy butsy statement given very reluctantly.

    Do you agree categorically, that the Quran did not consider all the Mushrikin of the Prophet’s times as kafir in any verse of the Quran? Do you agree that the kafirin are a subset of the Mushrikin, Christians, Jews and the hypocrites among the Muslims? Do you agree that therefore Kafir cannot mean disbeliever? Do you agree that “Sinner” may be a more appropriate word for it and “disbeliever” is both incorrect and highly misleading?   


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/10/2017 3:10:49 AM



  • What Yunus Sb was maintaining adamantly:

    I believe Surah al-kafirun is addressed to the 'mushrikin' among the Prophet's immediate audience who were witnesses to the Qur'anic revelation and were adamantly dismissing it and were just committing kufr. But the same 'kafirun' eventually entered Islam.

    By muhammd yunus - 9/1/2017 7:55:58 PM

    How he has revised it after nine days of debate and after being called a lying hypocrite

    “I believe Surah al-kafirun is addressed to the 'mushrikin' among the Prophet's immediate audience who were witnesses to the Qur'anic revelation and were adamantly dismissing it and were just committing kufr.” This obviously implies that those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir.

     

    The same kafirun has been slyly changed to This obviously implies that those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir. And he has the gall to pretend innocence and accuse me "When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff.”! He lacks the honesty to accept his mistake which he has slyly revised.

     

    Now Yunus Sb, can you come clean on 98:1 as well? What about 98:1 whose meaning has been logically derived by me in my comment a week back: By Naseer Ahmed - 9/5/2017 11:46:28 PM ?

     


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/10/2017 2:53:50 AM



  • Yunus Sb,

    It is my duty to to do my utmost to try to save you from the sin of falsification of the Quran and denial of truth. I reproduce below from my article a section that further makes the point clear although I have already presented enough evidence. 

    3.3 When Does Rejection Of The `Truth’ Brought By The Messenger Become Kufr?

    The earlier Prophets such as Noah, Moses, Lut, Shoeb, Saleh and Hud also preached to the Mushrikin of their times. At the end of the mission, the disbelievers were totally destroyed by an act of God. The persons who had become kafir by virtue of rejecting the “truth” were not known even to the Prophets, unless Allah informed them about it. For example, Jonah (pbuh)  (verses 37:139 to 142) assumed that Kufr of belief was proven against the people to whom he was sent. He therefore left them and this is described as an act worthy of blame. He was swallowed by a fish, repented and went back to the people who then accepted belief.

    Another example is Noah (pbuh) who is informed by Allah in verse 11:36 that "None of thy people will believe except those who have believed already!....”. This verse confirms the guilt of Kufr of belief on the remaining people. Noah is asked to build an ark and take the believers with him and the rest are drowned in a flood.

    Contrast 11:36 with (8:33) which is a Medinian verse “But Allah was not going to send them a penalty whilst thou wast amongst them; nor was He going to send it whilst they could ask for pardon.”

    Very clearly, Allah has not confirmed the kufr of rejecting belief on the Mushrikin of Mecca even after the Prophet had migrated to Medina and considered that they could still ask for pardon.

     

    Also Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), towards the end of his prophetic mission, is given the command in verse 9:5 to kill all the Mushrikin after the four month amnesty period with certain exceptions. As far as the Mushrikin of Hejaz are concerned they were the people, as per verse 36:6 “… whose fathers had received no admonition, and who therefore remain heedless”. They were also the direct addressees of the Prophet’s mission. This command of Allah, is similar to the destruction wrought by Allah on the disbelievers at the end of the Prophetic mission in the case of the Prophets Noah, Moses, Saleh, Shoeb, Hud and Lut (PBUT). In the case of the other people, the destruction was by an act of Allah but in the case of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) it was to be through the believers. The Mushrikin of Hejaz to be destroyed were guilty of both the obvious Kufr of waging war against the Muslims and for the hidden Kufr of disbelief or rejection of the “truth”.

    It may also be noted that in the case of every other Prophet, since the destruction was by an act of God, we do not know whether the people were destroyed for the Kufr of belief or for the Kufr of persecuting the believers or for both. In the case of Muhammad (pbuh) however, the command to kill was only those who had committed the Kufr of persecution, or waging war or breaking their treaty and remaining defiant after the 4 month amnesty period. Since I could find no record of anyone being killed as per 9:5, I presume that either they migrated during the amnesty period or accepted Islam but no one was actually killed. The remaining people had a choice to retain their faith but even these people eventually accepted Islam as Allah Himself says in verse 8:23, if Allah finds any good in the people, he makes them listen to the message.

    The following verses further elaborate the point beyond which a Mushrik becomes a kafir for not accepting belief.

    (41:53) Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their innermost being, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?

    Also:

    27:14 "And they rejected those Signs in iniquity and arrogance, though their inner selves were convinced thereof: so see what the end of those who acted corruptly was!

    Whether the truth has become manifest in their inner self, God alone can say. A Mushrik does not become a kafir for rejection of the message until the truth has become manifest in his innermost being and his own self will witness against him on the Day of Judgment. It is not enough that a Messenger of God has brought him the message and he has not accepted.

    Again regarding the Meccan pagans, after the conquest of Mecca, the Quran says:

    (9:6) "If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge."

    This is proof that those Meccans who had not accepted Islam despite the Prophet preaching in Mecca for 13 years and for another 8 years in Medina,  were to be treated as merely “those without knowledge” and not as kafir, even if they had fought against the Muslims earlier. The mere act of seeking asylum was to be treated as a sign of non-defiance or of not being a kafir.

    3.4 How will God judge earlier generations to whom no messenger was sent?

    As a corollary of this discussion, it should be clear as to how God will judge people of earlier generations who had received no guidance. They will be judged by the standards of their own society. In general, a Mushrik who dies a Mushrik without receiving guidance until the truth becomes manifest to him and his heart and mind have acknowledged it, will not die a kafir and will be judged by standards appropriate to him. A Mushrik becomes a kafir only when his own self will testify against him that he rejected the “truth” or if he rejected Allah for any reason (with or without knowing the “truth”) and hindered men from the Path of Allah and died rejecting Allah.

    (47:34) Those who reject Allah, and hinder (men) from the Path of Allah, then die rejecting Allah,- Allah will not forgive them.

    Simple disbelief is not enough to make a person kafir but active rejection and denial in the form of hindering people from the path of Allah.

     


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/10/2017 1:16:01 AM



  • Yunus Sb,

    The meaning of kufr/kafir is not among the Mutashabihat.

    The meaning of Ruh being "Divine Inspiration" is made amply clear and the fact that it does not mean soul in any of the verses.

    Probing deeper into what is "Divine Inspiration", to whom it comes and why, what is the process, why does it not come to everybody, how does one know if it is divine inspiration and not the promptings of the devil etc is hidden knowledge and probing into it or speculating on it is not called for.

    However, based on what is said about the Ruh, one can confidently say that it is not "soul".

    Based on the discussion in the three parts of the article and also on the verses on resurrection that I have included in my comment addressed to you, one can confidently conclude without a shadow of doubt, that the Quran does not support the concept of an immortal soul.

    The question as to what happens after death is what every religion is expected to have an  answer to. The Quran gives a clear unambiguous answer. A dead person remains dead until he is raised up again on the Day of Judgment. He rises from the grave. It is not his soul from Alam-e-Barzakh that is fleshed out.

    The stories about Alam-e-Arwah, Alam-e-Barzakh, punishment in the grave, the souls of saints listening to your prayer and interceding etc are speculative stories about the Mutashibihat which is frowned upon. There is no support for any of this in the Quran.

    Bringing out the clear meaning from the Quran on a subject that is widely speculated and ending such speculation which does harm to one's faith, and promotes superstitious beliefs is very much the right thing to do. Failure to do so when Allah has given you both the knowledge and the brains would be ingratitude to God and dereliction of duty.

    By choosing to maintain silence, you have chosen not to support a truth that I am trying to bring out which is currently covered by the falsehood of more than a 1000 years.

    I have never claimed any innovation. On the contrary, I have consistently maintained that I do not interpret. It is those who interpret who innovate. I just take the clear meaning from the Quran. This clear meaning is not what is available in Islamic literature. I have also said previously that we have no idea what the Prophet and his companions believed. They certainly knew the clear meaning of the Quran which I am trying to bring out. Most of our scholarship begins in the 9th century around the time the ahadith were compiled. Before this, the Quran was Kitabum Mubeen which everyone understood and there was no need for scholarship. After the ahadith were compiled, there was a great need for the scholars to re-interpret the Quran in the light of the ahadith. From this point onwards, the distortions occur and we have no record of any scholar having previously contested the existence of an immortal soul. This is what makes me the first to do so. I do not innovate. I simply take the meaning of the Quran which no one else does and that is what makes me unique. I try my best to make known my methodology so that more people can do what I do. I would like my skill to spread and not keep it to myself and take with me into my grave. In any case, since what I present is exhaustive, the correctness of what I say is easily verifiable.

    Since you are a knowledgeable person about the Quran, your silence on this subject is tantamount to hiding the truth that must have become manifest to you. To use your language, it becomes  "Willful rejection or denial of any self-evident or irrefutable proposition".

    And if you disagree with what is said, you have an even greater duty to record your disagreement.
     
     May Allah guide you on the path of truth. I need not warn you on the consequences to a scholar on his silence or ambivalence or evasion when he is being called upon to witness/support the truth.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 9/9/2017 11:48:35 PM



  • Naseer Sb,

    Since you called me “a lying hypocrite” in your last mail, let me defend my position by posting my comment in blue ink over your following comment dated 9/9/2017 1:21:51 PM:

    In a recent comment in a different thread you agreed with me and said "I agree with you that the Qur'an does not treat all muhsrikin as kafirin. (9:4)."

    But this is precisely what I said in my last comment to you, copied below:

    “I believe Surah al-kafirun is addressed to the 'mushrikin' among the Prophet's immediate audience who were witnesses to the Qur'anic revelation and were adamantly dismissing it and were just committing kufr.” This obviously implies that those mushrikin who were not “adamantly dismissing it” may not have been regarded as kafir.

    Verse 9:4 in Surah Taubah is among the very last verses revealed some 17 years after revelation of Al-Kafirun. How is it that the Quran considered all the Mushrikin as Kafirin in an early Meccan Surah but not in a late Medinian Surah?

    This verse never featured in our debate which centered around Surah 109.

    Is what you say “time bound” or “thread bound”?

    It is obvious that the tone of the Qur’an changed with time and immediate circumstances of the revelation – but this is a new theme and I think it is going to be unending debate if you go on raising new themes and ask me for an answer. You may be getting satisfaction with this endless debate, I am reaching my tether’s end of patience for I do not believe the precise definition of kufr and whether all the mushrikin in the Prophet’s era were kafir has any significance at all 1400 years later. So kindly spare me this debate.

    .

    at you said yesterday must not be considered today and what you said in a different thread was meant only in that thread?  Am I just being a literalist, and a consistency freak? Or are you also simply another of those lying hypocrites? Your abusive comment in bold reminds me of Cicero’s quote: “When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff.”

     

     


    By muhammd yunus - 9/9/2017 8:27:20 PM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content