Powered by UITechs
Get password? Username Password
 
 
<< Previous Page
1 2 3 4 5
Next page >>
Page 2 of 5

  Reply to Topic    Printer Friendly 

AuthorTopic
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Tuesday, March 06, 2007  -  10:38 AM Reply with quote
Quote: The word “Zikr” has been used here for the Holy Qur’ân as has been used in the verse 15:9 and it has been made clear that the people can only benefit from its guidance when they are led by the explanations of the Holy Prophet (pbuh).

Reply: The statement of Maulana is very much in line with the traditionalist point of view. This is basically representing the 'Tafseer Bil Riwayah' school. Here, if you notice, because Quran is claimed to be the subject of trained scholars only - it hence becomes unaccessible for the common i.e. the common man can only access it through trained scholars (and the implicit hint is: those scholars only who belong to the traditional school). This view provides the basis for Taqleed (blind followership). So if one is believing in this, one has to be a Muqallid as well.

However, if you look at the viewpoint of people like Maulana Maududi, their approach of translating and explaining Quran in simple accessible language, makes it possible for the common man to understand the message Quran is presenting. For reference, please have a look at the 'Muqaddama' Maududi Sb has written at the start of Tafheem-ul-Quran. Here the premise is totally different, according to this alternate view, although a common man may not be equipped with the academic tools to analyze Quran, but the message in it is fairly simple and easy to grasp for him/her. So much so that a common man can also, based on his basic reasoning skills can compare and evaluate two differing scholarly views of Quran and Sunnah.

Quote: Now, if everyone, in every age is in need of the prophetic explanation, without which they cannot fully benefit from the Holy Book, how would it be useful for them to preserve the Qur’ânic text and leave its prophetic explanation at the mercy of distorters, extending to it no type of protection whatsoever

Reply: I did not understand the above statement.

Regards,
Salman
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Tuesday, March 06, 2007  -  11:56 AM Reply with quote
Dear Salman

Have a look on the Maudoodi Sahib explanation of the same verse from Tafheem-ul-Quran.I think you will be surprized to see that he has also explained this verse same as Taqi Usmani Sahib did,but with more details.

16:44) We sent the former Messengers with clear Signs and Books, and now We have sent the Admonition to you (O Muhammad!), so that you should make plain and explain to the people the teachings of the `Book which has been sent for them ; *40 and so that they (themselves) should ponder over it.

*40 In this connection, it is worthwhile to note that this duty of making plain and explaining the teachings of the Book' was to be performed by Prophet not only by word of mouth but also practically. It was required that he should organize, under his own guidance, a Muslim Community and establish it in accordance with the principles of the Book. This duty of the Holy Prophet has been stated here especially to show the wisdom of sending a man as a Messenger, for, otherwise the Book could have been sent through the angels or could have been printed and sent directly to each man. But in this way; that purpose for which AIlah in His Wisdom and Bounty and Providence designed to send the Book could not have been served. For, that purpose demanded that the Book should be Brought by a perfect man, who should present it piece by piece, explain its meaning, remove the difficulties and doubts, answer objections, etc. , and above all, he should show towards those who rejected and opposed it that kind of attitude which is worthy of the bearer of this Book. On the other hand, he should guide those who believed in it in every aspect of life and set before them his own excellent pattern of life. Then he should train them individually and collectively on the principles of the Book; so as to make them a model society for the rest of mankind.

Let us now consider this verse (44) from another point of view. Just as it cuts at the root of the argumentation of those who rejected the Creed that a human Prophet could bring the Book, in the same way, it repudiates the view of those who plead that the Book should be accepted without any exposition of it from the Prophet. This latter view is contradictory to this verse, whatever be the position taken by its exponents. They might either be of the opinion that (a) the Prophet did not give any explanation of the Book he presented or that (b) the only acceptable thing is the Book and not any "Exposition" thereof by the Prophet, or that (c) now the Book alone suffices us, for its "Exposition" by the Prophet has lost its utility or that (d) now the Book alone is authentic for the "Exposition" by the Prophet has ceased to exist, or if it does exists, it cannot be relied upon.
If they take the position (a), it will mean that the Prophet did not fulfil the purpose for which he was chosen to be the bearer of the Book: otherwise Allah could send it through an angel or directly to each person.
If they take the position (b) or (c), (God forbid) they will be accusing Allah of doing a useless thing by sending His Book through a Prophet, when He could have printed copies of the Qur'an and sent those directly to the people.
In case, they take the position (d), they, in fact, repudiate both the Qur'an and its "Exposition by the Holy Prophet. Then the only rational course left for them would be to accept the view of those who believe in the necessity of a new Prophet and a new revelation; whereas AIlah Himself considers the "Exposition" of the Book by the Prophet as an essential thing, and puts it forward as an argument for the necessity of a Prophet. Now if the view of the rejectors of Tradition that the Explanation of the Holy Prophet has disappeared from the world is to be accepted, then two conclusions are inevitable; First, the Prophethood of Muhammad (May Allah's peace be upon him) as a pattern for us has ceased to exist, and the only relation we have with him is the same that we have with the other former Prophets, e.g. Hud, Salih, Shu`aib, etc. (May Allah's peace be upon them). That is, we have only to testify that they were Prophets but we have no obligation to follow their patterns, for we have none with us. This position obviously leads to the need of a new Prophet, for it automatically refutes the doctrine of the Finality of Prophethood. The second inevitable conclusion will be that a new Book is needed because in that case the Qur'an alone could not, according to its author, suffice. Thus in the face of this verse, there is no argument left to prove that the Qur'an is self-sufficient to explain itself, for it itself says that there is no need of a Prophet to explain it. Thus it is absolutely necessary that a new Book must be sent down. May Allah destroy such people ! In their enthusiasm to repudiate Tradition, they are really cutting at the very root of Islam itself.

Note:-I have mistakenly quoted the verse No. wronly(15:9) in my previous post, the correct verse No.is( 16:44)
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Tuesday, March 06, 2007  -  11:59 AM Reply with quote
Maulana Maududi writes in the introduction (Deebacha) of his Tafheemul Quran:

"While doing this work I was neither considering the needs of scholars and research persons, nor of those people who have graduated from studying Arabic language and religious sciences and now want to carry out a detailed research on Quran. A lot of work has already been done and is available to quench the thirst of such people. I want to do this work for those people who are avergely educated people, who are not very well acquainted with Arabic language and for whom benefitting from the huge corpus of Quranic studies is not possible otherwise."

he further writes:

"The objective in front of me while doing this work was, that a a common reader must be able to understand the meaning and purpose of Quran clearly while reading this book"

Regards,
Salman
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Tuesday, March 06, 2007  -  12:13 PM Reply with quote
Thank you for the detailed response. You are right it is verse 16:44, let me add even verse 16:64 is explaining the same thing. Although my purpose was not to discuss this issue, my purpose was to explain that Maulana Maududi was of the view that it was possible for the common man to access Quran through self study. That was his objective of writing his Tafseer. That I have shown in my previous post.

Regards,
Salman
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Tuesday, March 06, 2007  -  12:25 PM Reply with quote
Regarding the verses 16:44 and 16:64, I had the following discussion with Mr. Tariq Hashmi on email. My questions are in red, and Mr. Hashmi's reply is in blue. I am posting it here for your interest.

According to the contemporary view in Module-3,
“As far as the verses which say that the Prophet (sws) was bestowed with the status of explaining the Qur’an, no doubt that the authority of the Prophet (sws) is unquestionable; however, since the explanations of the Qur’an by the Prophet (sws) have not reached us with tawatur, therefore each one of them will only be accepted after it is found in accordance with the Qur’an”

I have following questions in this regard:

If the Prophet (sws) was bestowed with the status of explaining the Quran according to verses like 16:44 and 16:64, was this status applicable only in his lifetime, or is it also applicable on us (the muslims of present times)?


Reply: I would add to the above extract that no doubt the Prophet was to be obeyed by all the believers and he had the most sound knowledge of the book of God but the Book itself was claimed to be and was in fact easy to understand for its direct addressees. Great many verses say that the Book of God was revealed in clear lucid Arabic of the day. That is why you would not find the Prophet (Sws) explaining the Quran to the Muslim followers or to the non believers. He would simply recite the Quran before say for example the people coming to him from far off places of Arabia. They never asked him what is this he uttered.

You will find very little in this regard. In fact the most authentic statements ascribed to the Prophet (Sws) are found in the Book of Ahadith. The early works of Ahadith contained sections dealing with the prophetic explanation of the Quran. If you go through the book of Qurnaic exegesis in Bukhari you will not find anything explained in strict sense of the word explanation.

The most important fact explained in the quote (above) is that the Prophet\s sayings of all kinds (including the worldly matters) were binding for all. But these alleged explanations have not reached us through tawatur (that is through generation to generation mode of transfer which provides absolutely authentic knowledge). That is why we need to examine these in the light of more authentic sources.


If his status is still applicable on us and because of some historical accident, his explanations did not reach us through tawatur—why wasn’t an arrangment made in the divine scheme of things (the way it was done in case of Quran) to ensure that those explanations reach us safely to maintain that status of the Prophet? Can one deduce from this fact that it was never intended (by Allah and the Prophet) to preserve those explanations, despite 16:44 and 16:64? if yes then why?

What has been deemed the basic need of human beings for all times to come and which forms part of the Shari’ah has been passed on through tawatur and is sure to last forever. As for these verses they do not strictly say that the Qur’an was in need of explanation and the Prophet (sws) was bound to explain it. They in fact state that it was the Prophet’s duty to make it clear to the addressees. For if we take it to mean otherwise it would contradict the Quranic claim of being a clear Book. I think the material needs to be adapted for there have been a development in the view point of the authors.

If the Ahadith explaining the Quran just serve the purpose of confirming what
Quran has already said, then what epistemological advantage do they have?


Reply: They would add to the justification of one’s understanding. They also tell us how the Prophet applied the Quranic injunctions and understood them. However, the number of such ahadith which are relatively authentic is very small.
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Wednesday, March 07, 2007  -  6:34 AM Reply with quote
Dear Salman
Quote:-my purpose was to explain that Maulana Maududi was of the view that it was possible for the common man to access Quran through self study.

He did not say that in your previous post and by writing the tafseer of Quran for the common man, further show that what you have said is not correct.
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Wednesday, March 07, 2007  -  7:02 AM Reply with quote
Well whatever he said in that quote, I meant that :)
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Wednesday, March 07, 2007  -  7:10 AM Reply with quote
Dear Salman
Reply of Brother Tariq:-. They would add to the justification of one’s understanding. They also tell us how the Prophet applied the Quranic injunctions and understood them. However, the number of such ahadith which are relatively authentic is very small.


He is not qualified to say this.See how the qualified people(Maudoodi Sahib) sees this issue and what are the Maulana Maudoodi's views regarding such people.This I have copied from my yesterday's post where Maudoodi Sahib has explained the verse (16:44).Have a look.

People who says

(d) now the Book alone is authentic for the "Exposition" by the Prophet has ceased to exist, or if it does exists, it cannot be relied upon.


In case, they take the position (d), they, in fact, repudiate both the Qur'an and its "Exposition by the Holy Prophet. Then the only rational course left for them would be to accept the view of those who believe in the necessity of a new Prophet and a new revelation; whereas AIlah Himself considers the "Exposition" of the Book by the Prophet as an essential thing, and puts it forward as an argument for the necessity of a Prophet. Now if the view of the rejectors of Tradition that the Explanation of the Holy Prophet has disappeared from the world is to be accepted, then two conclusions are inevitable; First, the Prophethood of Muhammad (May Allah's peace be upon him) as a pattern for us has ceased to exist, and the only relation we have with him is the same that we have with the other former Prophets, e.g. Hud, Salih, Shu`aib, etc. (May Allah's peace be upon them). That is, we have only to testify that they were Prophets but we have no obligation to follow their patterns, for we have none with us. This position obviously leads to the need of a new Prophet, for it automatically refutes the doctrine of the Finality of Prophethood. The second inevitable conclusion will be that a new Book is needed because in that case the Qur'an alone could not, according to its author, suffice. Thus in the face of this verse, there is no argument left to prove that the Qur'an is self-sufficient to explain itself, for it itself says that there is no need of a Prophet to explain it. Thus it is absolutely necessary that a new Book must be sent down. May Allah destroy such people ! In their enthusiasm to repudiate Tradition, they are really cutting at the very root of Islam itself.
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Wednesday, March 07, 2007  -  9:02 AM Reply with quote
Yes, I did read your yesterday's post. I think Mr. Hashmi's response makes sense despite what Maulana Maududi has written. You can however disgree with it.

Edited by: salmant on Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:22 AM
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  5:32 AM Reply with quote
Ofcourse i am disagree but it is not just my self and Maudoodi sahib but all the learned people are disagree except Follow Quran only people.Even I have red some where the words of Maulana Ameen Ashsan Aslahi sahib where he said the ahadith have help him a lot to undersatnd the Quran.Also he used to give the taleem of ahadith of Ahmed Muttwa and others to the people at the latter stage of his life.

But God have made every one free to decide what he feel is correct.There is no argument on this.
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  6:22 AM Reply with quote
Quote: But God have made every one free to decide what he feel is correct.There is no argument on this.

Reply: Very well said. I totally agree.

However, when you say, "but it is not just my self and Maudoodi sahib but all the learned people are disagree except Follow Quran only people" - its an overgeneralized statement!

Let me explain how. The statement Tariq Sb is making, as far as I understand, does not fall in any of the categories a, b, c or d as mentioned in Maududi's quote. Infact if you analyze Maududi's modus operandi of Tafseer, you will find a similar method being used by him as well while explaining Quran. For example, I have quoted in another thread Maududi's exlpanation of verse 16:68. In that explanation Maududi invokes several other Quranic verses such as 40:12, 99:5 and 28:7. However does that surprise you that Maududi himself did not use any Hadith in the explanation of this verse besides Quran? Does that mean he is among 'Follow Quran only' people, or in his own words, a 'Munkir-e-Hadith'? Absolutely Not. It means that despite his extensive research, he could not find a relevant and authentic Hadith to explain this particular verse. This atleast proves one of Mr. Hashmi's points that there are'nt many authentic Hadith explanations available for every part of Quran. There are only a few.

A difference between his, and Maududi's approach however would be that Maududi would use different principles of selecting a Hadith, for explanation purposes, from the available ones than Mr. Hashmi. So there could be an occasion (i.e. explanation of verse) where Mr. Hashmi would use a Hadith and Maududi wouldnt. Or vice versa. So if that happens, that would be basically a healthy academic difference of opinion on the selection of Hadith. It cannot be used to suggest the wrongness of beliefs of one or the other.

Regards,
Salman
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  9:49 AM Reply with quote
Dear Salman,

As far I understood Brother Tariq's views, he thought that there is no clear orders from Quran for a need of Prophetic explanations to understand the Quran.Eeven for others matters where we find the guide lines and clear orders of Prophet(pbuh) in the many ahadith and being used by earlier fuqaha for the development of Shariah and we used in our routine daily life.He says that if we a hadith came with tawatur and we don’t have any small doubt in its reliblity than only that hadith we can follow. Accepting a hadith as sahih he has his own creteria.This is the approch for Quran and Ahadith is against the every learned scholars of 1400 years of history.

After studying the two courses he wrote one is for Sunnah and the second one is for hadith and my own discussion with him in the course furum, I can safely placed him in the category “d “as defined by Maudoodi sahib in his tafheem.

Regards,
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  9:59 AM Reply with quote
Quote: I can safely placed him in the category “d “as defined by Maudoodi sahib in his tafheem.

Reply: You need to revise your saftey standards, otherwise Maududi himself is falling under the category d), which clearly cannot be the case, as explained in my earlier post. Another question, Do you think Maududi Sb himself never differed with the earlier scholars on such matters?
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  11:12 AM Reply with quote
If you think that Maulana Maududi never differed with earlier scholars, it will be useful to read the following letter by Maulana Yusuf Ludhianwi:
http://www.alinaam.org.za/library/maududi.htm
usmani790

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  11:50 AM Reply with quote
Dear Salman,

Maulana Maudoodi thoughts are very clear as far as the ahadith are concerned.Only because he used ayats to defind another ayat, you can put him in any category he him self defind.This is a method to understand the Quran also traditional schelors used to follow it.

I am very much aware of the difrences between Maulana Maudoodi and tradional schelors.They never thought that he was Munkareen-e-hadees.With all the diffrencess they have with the Maulana,they still regards his effort on many issues specially his work agaisnt qadiyanees.

You need to calmly thought about it what I have said in my previous post.

Regards,
salmant

PAKISTAN
Posted - Thursday, March 08, 2007  -  12:09 PM Reply with quote
Ok while I think calmly about what you said. :)
Lets focus our attention to the original question that we had, which was:

Can a common man read and understand the message of Quran by self-studying?

Reply to Topic    Printer Friendly
Jump To:

<< Previous Page
1 2 3 4 5
Next page >>
Page 2 of 5


Share |


Copyright Studying-Islam © 2003-7  | Privacy Policy  | Code of Conduct  | An Affiliate of Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences ®
Top    





eXTReMe Tracker