What is the ‘kitab’ of 3/7 ?

The interpretation of Ch 3 Vs 7 of the Quran has a great variety of opinions among Quranists and even Traditionalists. For me, the ‘kitab’ mentioned in this book is a fluctuating system of signs. I believe this bexause the ‘decisive signs’ are the mother of the book and signs are very personal and fluctuating from person to person. The discussion about this can be seen here.

Your Tongue


75/16 Do not agitate with your tongue to hasten therein.
75/17 Indeed, upon Us is its collection and its declaration.

I found this passage interesting because, to me, it reaffirms the idea that each individual is to ponder on the quran and formulate an opinion.  This is in contrast to the belief that there are authenticated or authorised commentaries that we should all abide by.  The key word for me is lisānaka, ‘your tongue.’  The ‘your’ is singular, meaning the verse speaks to the individual reader of the quran.  You are not to rush with your tongue regarding the quran.  Why?  Because its collective and complete interpretation, as well as its declaration to the world, is not your burden. 

In essence, take your time with it and only declare what you’ve understood. 

6/38 – Nothing have neglected from WHERE ?

Interesting comment in our FB group today about 6/38:

And there is not a creature in the Earth, or a bird that fly’s with its wings, but are nations like you. We did not leave anything out of THE BOOK; then to their Lord they will be gathered
quranist are fond of using this verse to state that the Quran is fully-detailed but I personally cant accept this. Have a look at the context. It’s talking about dabbah (creatures) and tha’ir (birds). Al-kitab here refers to this, the kitab of nature. To me, its a miscontextualised reading to say that al-kitab refers to the Quran.

Interesting Discussion on Al-Kitab and Al-Quran

My good friend and esteemed head of the International Quranic Insitute, Rizwan Sherazi, started a very interesting thread in the Mohamed Shiekh IIPC fb group last night.

Basically, the question is: did all the prophets recieve the Quran? This would mean that Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa etc etc recieved the Quran as we know it. My current position is ‘no they didn’t’. Here is my answer to that question:

That al-kitab muFaSSaL (as per 6/114) is the subject matter of the Quran (as per 10/37, ‘taFSeeL al-kitab’) . The process of tafseel is something which is done via language (see 41/44, if Quran was ‘ajami’, ppl would say why are its ayat not ‘fussilat’) . Yawm al-Fasl is a time people are sorted out, i.e. put in the right place. Therefore, to me, al-kitab is the subject matter (which is ahkaam, laws of human world) and al-quran is the elucidation of the subject. Think of it like subject of maths. It’s very systematic, ordered, written down in the universe (maktub) but a maths textbook is a mere formulation of that system. Al-kitab is subject of maths, al-quran is the best, perfect textbook. There are other inferior textbooks (the bible, hadith, philosophy, religion) all pertaining to the subject. Al-quran is also the current edition of the best textbook. Prior to it, there were other editions although not in existence now.


Some notes on the ahl al kitab

I have now blogged the study of the ahl al-kitab phrase from chapters 2 and 3. Thanks to the concordance of the Quran, I was able to see that this phrase is heavily used in chapters 2-5 then drops off completely till ch 29! What does this tell us?

To me, since the proper name ‘al’ is used in ahl AL kitab, it shows for one thing there is a variety of ideas which are equated to ‘kitab’, mostly to do with commands and systems. More so, these kitabs are predominant in chapters 2-5. Perhaps chapters 2-5 are a group in that sense. After all, their tone is markedly different from the next chapter, ch 6.

uswatun and hmd

I have a train of thoughts about hmd from 61:6. (see http://www.quranists.net/forum/index.php?topic=90.msg447#msg447 )

When I looked at the definition of  “precedent” I noticed that the synonyms are example, model, pattern, standard, which reminded me of uswatun. Uswatun has been discussed recently in the QuranRoots group

So I was thinking : in 33:21, 60:4 and 60:6 it seems to me to be about setting an example  and 5:26, 5:68, 7:93 and 57:23 could be warning not to take an example from those kinds of people.  The ones setting the example are of course following Allah’s words. I’m thinking the ones who  hold fast to the Kitab are the ones who are exemplifying 19:12, 2:63, 2:93, 7:145, 7:170-171, 43:43, 22:78

Interestingly : l-ḥamīdu is in 57:24 which comes after tasaw (from same root as uswatun) in 57:23

Ibrahim 60:4 “There has been a us’watun ḥasanatun for you in Abraham and those with him…”

4:125 And Allah wa-ittakhadha Ibrahim “khalīlan”  – it is interesting to ponder, then, what is “khaleelan”  ? It is used in 9:47 : it seems (to me) to be conceptually the same kind of thing. wala-awḍaʿū khilālakum seems to be lead to  yabghūnakumu l-fit’nata   ( I am thinking that taking away the exemplary intentions/behaviour*  would lead to fitnah).

So I am reflecting on all this and ponder that the only way to lead by example is to follow the precedent set by Allah and to not take examples from the wrong-doers BECAUSE Alhamdulillah 

*= intentions are more from WITHIN (khalil seems to connote some kind of “insides/inwards/within” and behaviour seems more outwardly

Just thinking out loud


Today I got to notice that ARD (earth) is very close in meaning to RDY (be pleased):

ARD = Alif-Ra-Dad = To rotate, bring forth herbs abundantly. Land abundant, fruitful, productive, luxuriant with herbage. Place for alighting or abiding. To tarry, await, expect, be patient. “Earth, as opposed to heaven: and the ground, as meaning the surface of the earth, on which we tread, and sit, and lie”. Good land. Remain, fixed, tarry in expectation [on the ground]. Heavy, slow, sluggish, inclining, or propending to the ground. Submissive. A carpet, anything that is spread. A tremor, vertigo arising from a relaxed state. Wood-fretter, termite.

RDY= Ra-Dal-Ya = to perish, fall down, he tumbled down into a deep hollow or cavity or pit, break, knock, exceed a thing, to beat in order to break, blandish, destroy, he went away. arda (vb. 4) – to bring to destruction/ruin. tradda – to fall. mutarddiyatun – that which falls, which is slain by a fall.

Now I have a problem with fitting God into the concept of RDY, where it is to be humble. However, I seem to be able to relate God being “pleased” much more with ARD.

Sahih International: 9:100 – And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct – Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment.

Could it be possible that Allah turned “fruitful” and “productive” to them as they turned to Him? Because I can’t imagine Allah “humbling”. The ‘anhum’ also scares me a little bit.