What Qur'an says about reading and understanding it.

[Musalmaan]

If anyone else on the forum believes I need to explain something, please let me know. I will be more than happy to talk about the issues.

If someone wants to contact me, my email is muhammad_iqbal@msn.com.

Best wishes to all.

[MOHD HUSSAIN]

posted 01-25-2004 11:06 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I was under the impression that the religion followed by the Jews was known as Judaism connected with Juda. Can someone throw some light on who Juda is and how he is connected to Jacob?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 1439

S. Insaf
Active
Member # 424

posted 01-26-2004 02:47 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Akber Allahbadi has said:
Mazhabi behas mein' ne kee hee naheen'
Faltoo aql mujh mein' thee hee naheen'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 111

MOHD HUSSAIN
Very active
Member # 109

posted 01-26-2004 04:22 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well Summed up Saifuddinbhai--It really goes thro the roof when so many names are mentioned for references & some of them are so old & not authentic anymore- I can Quote a agood Gujarati Sher from Jalan Matri"s Ghazal as
Shraddha no jo ho vishay to,puravani shi jaroor?
ke Quran man to payanbar ni sahi nathi!-------
It means That faith does need no proofs as none of the pages of Quran have been signed by the great Mohamed! So we can go on & on --------

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

I have witnessed enough inertia with respect to the topic under discussion here that I feel compelled to write back here, and therefore this post.

In addition, I will sacrifice some literary style and brevity to explain the matters in detail. Also to remove the objections of whose translation and why context and why nots, I will translate the verses myself directly, and will also include as much verses as are enough for me to explain what I need. If a reader disagrees, they should feel free to understand these verses on their own and I will be more than happy to help them understand how I stand what they mean.

The reason I believe that verses 12:1-2 refer to Muslims in general is the fact that it is *impossible* according to the Arabic grammar to construe the language to apply to a singular person. The second last word of the second verse is "la'lakum" and the last word is "ta'aqeloon". Both in classical as well as modern Arabic, "kum" denotes a second person plural audience. It *cannot* be used for a singular audience. Similarly, "ta'aqeloon" is also used only for a second person plural audience. Since it is impossible to use this construction for a singular audience, it cannot be addressing Muhammad (sws) obviously- that is also grammatically not possible. Even in the third verse, it must be understood that "O Muhammad" is an interpretive addition and not part of the verse itself. Therefore, if I remove all the interpretive additions, the verses translate like this:

"Alif. Lam. Ra. These are verses a clear Book. We have revealed it as an Arabic Qur'an so that you will understand.
We will narrate to you the best of narratives through this Qur'an that we have revealed to you- verily you were unaware of this aforetime." (Yousuf 12:1-3)

There is no indication in the third verse that this is an address directly to Muhammad (sws.) If someone believes that the first two verses are addressed to Muhammad (sws), they must provide a proof to believe so. And why would it be said that this is a 'clear Book' – Kitabumubeen? How can a book be mubeen (clear) if it cannot be understood by its readers? This verse is such a clear address to Muslims, both because of Qur'an very specific usage of words and because of the content that I do not see how can it be interpreted any other way.

Taking the analogy of the physics book, there are many people who sit at home and study the Book and understand it and take their papers. Scientists such as Newton and Einstein had their independent research and did not study physics from someone. However, all of them, when studied books, kept their minds opened and studied the books with understanding. No one, while studying any book, said I will not understand the text rather ask someone else to teach it – that is obviously contrary to intelligence. On the other hand, however, people are taught Arabic such that they are only able to read Qur'an but not understand it- and this method of learning a language is reserved for Arabic only! We never do that with English. A human, when reads any book, understands it and when they are unable to comprehend it, they go and ask questions to professors, friends and teachers. This is not done with Qur'an. Qur'an is dealt with as if it is no Book at all, it is kept in cupboards, taken out every fortnight or so, read so it is not understood and kissed and put back in the cupboard. This is not how we do with a physics book!

In addition, with a physics book, we also do not start its study with preconceived notions. With Qur'an, however, we decide first that it cannot be understood, we decide first that these are the Islamic concepts, we decide first that Burhanuddin is the rightful leader and so forth and then we study the Qur'an so as to prove our points of views. We are generally not honest with Qur'an, and we do not want to learn from Allah's word, we rather want to give guidance to Qur'an!

If Qur'an was only meant for Muhammad (sws) to understand, why would it even be revealed. We all know that Allah could have revealed it just to Muhammad (sws) who could have transferred knowledge to others and we did not to have a copy of it anyway. However, we have this Book, then what is the only thing that can be done with a Book? It can only be read and understood.

Do they not then ponder on the Qur’an, or are there locks on their brains? (Muhammad 47:24)

The above verse is the situation of hypocrites who used to read the Qur’an but never tried to sincerely understand it as a word of God. As a result, Qur'an used this style to condemn them for their attitude. How can they be condemned for not pondering upon the Qur'an if Allah knows they cannot even understand it? Obviously, they are required to not only understand the Qur'an, rather ponder and reflect upon it. Hypocrites are asked to do that, how can we negate this for Muslims themselves?

And finally, if someone wants to tell someone else to read and understand a Book, how else should they put it. Allah has said it is a clear Book, He has said that you should read and understand it, He has said that you should ponder upon it, He has said that it is guidance- tell me, how else can He say all of these? Only the way He has already said so.

It must also be kept in mind that Salman Farsi translated the Qur'an in Persian and Muhammad (sws) not only handed a copy of translation to Persian Muslims, but also allowed them to study it in their own language. This is exactly what is 'official'.

To those who believe that they cannot understand Qur'an, I shall ask that if God really wanted you to understand Qur'an, how should he put it? Since your birth you have been told that Qur'an cannot be understood, so you obviously have that notion. Then what is the only way to find out what Allah wants? To see if Qur'an says it can be understood by you or not. The Jews and the Idolators at the time of Muhammad (sws) did not accept him as a prophet because they said that he had brought forth a religion other than their forefathers, and they kept believing in their own faith for no rational reason whatsoever. Qur'an labeled them as deaf and dumb because they had closed their ears and their brains to Allah's commands. There is only one way you can find what Allah wants and that is to study Qur'an. If Qur'an says that it is not meant for you to understand, obviously you abide by the law.

I hope this helps,
Best Regards

[porus]

Comment about your contribution.

1. Quran is not addresses only to Muslims but to all humankind.
2. 12:1-3 cannot be assumed to have beenn revealed at the same time. Thus the pronouns need not have consistency throughout a series of ayats in any single part of the Quran. In line with all the exegetes, it is best to assume that Quran talks to each and every human being directly, even if the ayats are specifically addressed to Muhammad or to others, beleivers or non-believers, whether in singular or plural. The reason is that all humans possess the attributes of believers, hypocrites, and kafirs to varying degrees.
3.It is very presumptous to state that Al-Muqatta'at (the abbreviations) are put in Quran for poetic effect. Muslims believe that Quran is literal word of God and God does not need to decorate his speech for any poetic effect. Yusufali makes a valiant but wholly unsatifactory attempt to explain al-Muqatta'at. His belief that only those suras which refer to the Quran itself have these abbreviations is a fact but does not explain anything. Exgetes agree that they have mystical meanings but only Bohras and other Ismailies claim that it points to taawil with mystery being revealed to Imam of the Ahle-bayt.

[porus]

Quran is indeed a clear book but clarity is not always simple to discern. Its clarity is in direct proportion to preparedness of the person trying to understand it.

Preparation is a hugh task. It requires a close reading of the history of the revelation, its collection and explanations (exegesis) offered by various scholars. Add to these the vital ingredient of having experienced the world of men in its social context. And the most important is to study 'classical' Arabic, the language of revelation

Imho, there is one basic principle of Quran, understanding of which makes it clearer. That is, that it clearly points out the nature of man and man's purpose in life. It then asserts that God's laws are designed so that following those laws, man becomes the master of his life and at the same time pleases God. Great teachers have been saying this all along. e.g. Francis Bacon wrote, "Nature is commanded by obeying her".

Needless to say, these are not described in the Quran in a linear fashion but must be dug out by individuals who will identify those verses that speak directly to them based on their current psychic make-up.

That is but one approach.

So, our first task is to identify those ayats which describe the nature of man (fitrat). Then to understand how he fits in to the wider nature by identifying those ayats which describe the nature of earth and universe. Then to see if the laws, both individual and social it lays down, are consistent with that nature and whether it will lead to man's happiness, the ultimate prize.

[hur]

Porus and Musalman,
Several points.

1.) I like yourselves have my opinion of what understanding is contained in the verses. And as Porus stated..the information is both a derivative of Quranic and social histories of the verses. This cannot be separated from the understanding of the Quran. The Quran and the Ahlul bayt are with truth. Both are guidances of the other. The Quran was never taught by the Prophet as a source of all understanding but as the main directive to all understanding. This is why the Quran highlights hundreds of topics and laws but doesn't clarify the contents of the topics or laws. It highlights the belief of God and actual reality of this world and the next in both literal and descriptive terms for us understand...but never actuates the process of these things in real terms. This is why the Quran can never and was never taught to be taken "literally".

2.) The example of the physic I gave holds true. It is difficult to imagine a person reading a book without first having been taught the precepts of physics. There is mathematics, chemistry, astrology, astronomy, etc that are assumed in the writing of a book of physic. It is so with the Quran. It is assume when reading the Quran that the person can read arabic or read the language and dialect of the translation.

Newton and Einstein did study what was established as physics at the time. But you are right...they kept their minds open. So to must we when reading the Quran. We cannot confine ourselves to what WE think is written but be open for a more authentic interpretation.

3.) Again if the Quran is a clear book....what is the expanse of the word "clear"? The Quran teachs of salat, zakat, sawm, etc....yet relies on the Prophet teaching you to pray. Doesn't sound to clear to me if the Quran relies on a human (Muhammad) to explain the topics it introduces. But again this is Allah's precedent...He sends a messenger and teacher with every book.

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

Hur wrote:--
"1.) I like yourselves have my opinion of what understanding is contained in the verses. And as Porus stated..the information is both a derivative of Quranic and social histories of the verses. This cannot be separated from the understanding of the Quran. The Quran and the Ahlul bayt are with truth. Both are guidances of the other. The Quran was never taught by the Prophet as a source of all understanding but as the main directive to all understanding."
------

Can you please also explain on what basis is this argument put forth? Is this explained in Qur'an? Can you show me only one clear verse from Qur'an which states that Qur'an and Ahlul-Bayt go together? If not, I cannot place anything else even equivalent to Qur'an.

I am not going to indulge in the rest of the discussion yet, because this assumption by itself is not based on Qur'an.

Hur writes:--
"2.) The example of the physic I gave holds true. It is difficult to imagine a person reading a book without first having been taught the precepts of physics. There is mathematics, chemistry, astrology, astronomy, etc that are assumed in the writing of a book of physic. It is so with the Quran. It is assume when reading the Quran that the person can read arabic or read the language and dialect of the translation."
-----

When a Book of Physics is translated from Language A to Language B and if the person does not know Language A, does he start learning it? Or does he start studying in Language B? Obviously no one does, and if they did, then translation itself would not take place. And then why would Muhammad (sws) hand over translations to read?

I agree with Porus that Qur'an requires in its study some of the other aspects. However, I also believe that someone who does not have that knowledge can also read translations and commentaries from a variety of scholars, evaluate their arguments and then pick the point of view that seems highest on merit. I believe this is also what we do when we try to study other subjects in the World.

At the same time, I disagree that Qur'an is not meant to be read in its literal order. Qur'an was put forth by Allah in that order and furnished by Muhammad (sws), who recited it in prayers and otherwise in that particular order, and who also passed that form of recitation to Muslims later on. Consequently, the Arabs who understood Qur'an by the compulsion of their language, understood it in this particular form, and I believe there is no reason whatsoever to not study Qur'an in that order.

As for Muqatta'at, I only put forth that if you study sixth century Arabic poetry, you will find that Muqatta'at were present in their text as well. Not only that as I had put forth, these were names of different objects and so forth. Since Qur'an was a literary challenge to the Arabs of that time, I said that it provided an obvious reason for why Muqatta'at were present. Please do let me know if there is a flaw in this reasoning.

Having said that, I already stated that I understand that exegetes of Qur'an have differed on the interpretation of these and I obviously hold the above point of view to be the correct one. Unless evidence is found to the contrary, or a stronger reasoning is found why these verses have a mystical meaning or another meaning, it is difficult to accept any such reasoning for me. However, I do not wish to indulge into this topic here, we can start another thread if we want to discuss this issue further.

Hur writes:--
"3.) Again if the Quran is a clear book....what is the expanse of the word "clear"? The Quran teachs of salat, zakat, sawm, etc....yet relies on the Prophet teaching you to pray. Doesn't sound to clear to me if the Quran relies on a human (Muhammad) to explain the topics it introduces. But again this is Allah's precedent...He sends a messenger and teacher with every book."
-----

When Qur'an says it is clear, it means that every order and every sentence of the Book itself is clear. Consider this example from Qur'an:

"And establish prayer, and pay the poor-due, and bow your heads with those who bow (in worship)" (Al-Baqarah 2:43)

This sentence is very clear in its commandment. There is no confusion with regards to this sentence. If someone tells us that we have to pray five times a day, that does not change the fact that this sentence itself is still very clear.

As a result, every commandment in Qur'an is very clear and there is no confusion with regards to the message that Allah is conveying. And Prophet (sws) only practiced the Qur'an, so we understand how to practice the religion from him.

Anyone can read any verse of Qur'an whatsoever and as Allah puts forth in the Qur'an, it is very 'clear' in presenting its teachings and commands.

Regards

[porus]

Originally posted by Musalmaan:
Can you show me only one clear verse from Qur'an which states that Qur'an and Ahlul-Bayt go together?

No verse, as far as I know, makes a direct connection between the Quran and ahl bayt.

However, Muslims accept that Quran must be supplemented with authentic traditions of the Prophet.

One tradition is that following the revelation of theayat of tatheer (33:33), Muhammad took Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Husein under his cloak and declared them to be his ahl bayt.

Another tradition is the famous saying of thaqalayn by Muhammad where he enjoins adherence to both the quran and ahl bayt.

Unless you accept these traditions and the episode of Ghadeer Khum as true, you are unlikely to derive much benefit from the Shia creed.

Having said that, as an aside, both Sunnis and Shia tend to be autocratic and tyrannical as far as religion is concerned and their societies are the very antithesis of the message of the Quran. I have difficulty in accepting many Quranic prescriptions like beating wives, killing non-Muslims, cutting off thieves' hands etc. I have yet to come across a satisfactory explanation for these verses for modern times.

[Muslim First]

.
Dear Br. Porus, AS

Supposing that we accept that Qur'an and Ahlul-Bayt go togethr. My question is ;

Who is dirct representative of Ahlul-Bayt, Who holds franchise certificate from Prophet SAW and who is pious and commnds Ummah's respect?

Wasalaam

.

[hur]

Porus,
"...like beating wives, killing non-Muslims, cutting off thieves' hands etc."

-scourage is the actually term infered for chastise your wife and it only apply to the point to prevent a divorce.

-killing non-muslims only when they are threaten your life and belief.

-cutting off theives' hand is a sunnah and is done only if the plantiff doesn't give mercy to the theif. The Quran preach forgiveness for such acts.

[porus]

Originally posted by Muslim First:
.
Who is dirct representative of Ahlul-Bayt, Who holds franchise certificate from Prophet SAW and who is pious and commnds Ummah's respect?

.

Piety is in the eyes of the beholder but only Allah knows who is truly pious.

Mainstream Shia (except the Aga Khanis) believe the true Imam is absent. Bohras believe Dai is his representative. While Aga Khan and the Dai are both widely respected, only their followers will accept them as the true representative of the Prophet.

Most Muslims take the path of least resistance and follow the religion in which they have been born. Most provide a method for spiritual upliftment in their differing ways.

I tend to accept all sects as equally true. They should be judged by their own standards. If saving souls is the main function of the Imams and Dai. then they are woefully inadequate as they perpetuate religion full of empty ritual designed to secure the power structure. That is not to say that they are unable to meet many people's needs. These needs may be more concerned with jockeying for postions in a social order than with saving soul for the hereafter.

[hur]

Musalman,
Regarding my first point you wrote:

"Can you please also explain on what basis is this argument put forth?"

--I did. The Quran says to give zakat, pray, etc. but relies on Muhammad to teach the muslim. The Quran says to follow the sunnah of Muhammad (obey Allah and obey His messenger).

Regarding my second point:
I didn't regard this point to just translations...though the Prophet never endorsed one. You claim of the persian one written by Salman Farsi...there is nothing claiming it was official or an actual translation but a conceptual interpretation for him to understand.

To the point, which you didn't address, the pre-education for reading a physics book is definitely required. So is the same for the Quran. You say a person can read a translation and "evaluate" scholars opinion. Without knowing if the translation is correct, how is the person to evaluate anything relating to the Quran?

Regarding point 3:

You didn't support your view with anything...you just wrote your view again. The Quran says to fast...yet defines nowhere how to fast. How is this "clear"? And again, MUBIN doesn't mean clear in understanding..but manifest or in front of your.

And this is not just to support tradition out of lack of proof...but because the Quran says to support tradition of the messenger.

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

I will humbly request the members to start separate threads on issues that are not related to Qur'anic understanding, because that just causes confusion (at least for me). Thanks.

I apologize Hur if I overlooked something or did not misunderstand, but I could not understand the reason from your email why you made this statement:
"The Quran and the Ahlul bayt are with truth. Both are guidances of the other."
Is this based on the Qur'an? Qur'an in no place says that Ahlul Bayt is one source of guidance.

Qur'an at many places has said that Muslims should follow Muhammad (sws) as well and at any of these places Qur'an could have said follow Muhammad and this and this, but Qur'an at no place did so. This obviously means that Allah's directive is restricted to Qur'an and Muhammad (sws) only.

Arabic dictionary writes the meaning of the word mubeen in following two meanings:
"obvious, plain, apparent, clear-cut, visible, clear, distinct, lucid"
You have also not provided the reason why it is a book clear as in 'front of you', and why is it not referring to the verses of the Book.

My understanding is that Surah Yousuf was revealed at Makkah before Prophet (sws)'s migration and at that time Qur'an had not been compiled in a Book form, therefore it cannot be referring to that.

Secondly, and more importantly, when Qur'an says that everyone must understand it, and it condemned those who did not understand it and just recited it (as I have already explained in my previous posts) the only possibility is that book is clear and lucid in its meaning and easy to understand. There is no other explanation possible.

Having said that, it must also be understood that the methods of worship were not completely unknown at the time of revelation of Qur'an, in fact these methods have been in place since Abraham's times. A group of people by the name of Hanifah lived at the time of revelation of Qur'an and their ladies used to practice Purdah for instance. Similarly, they used to fast and offer prayers and perform Hajj. Qur'an, therefore, when commanded to offer prayer, it did not have to declare the method of worship because it was already known at that time. It had been known before Muhammad (sws) and Bani Israel and Bani Ismael used to offer prayers. As a result of Qur'anic commandments, Muslims started offering these acts of worship and Muhammad (sws) fixed any changes that needed to be fixed. This becomes clearer from verses such as the following:
"Fasting is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you …" (Al-Baqarah 2:183)
It must also be understood that Qur'an alone forms the law of the religion of Islam- the law revealed by Allah. Muhammad (sws) set up a society to practice it and he explained the details regarding Qur'an. Therefore, if someone ascribes a saying to Muhammad (sws) which is against the Qur'anic verdict or which talks about a law that is not contained in Qur'an, obviously that saying has been wrongly ascribed to Muhammad (sws) for we know he cannot contradict Qur'an.

Translation of Qur'an was handed over to Persians by Muhammad (sws) himself and he himself allowed them to read it. I think if the Prophet (sws) did it, it becomes 'official' by the same analogy that when the prophet offered a prayer using one method, that also became official.

I do not agree with you that translations are 'correct' or 'incorrect'. I haven’t seen one such translation, I'd rather call them differences of opinion. The Muslims of sixth century knew the sixth century Arabic better than anyone, they were the ones who were poets par excellence at that time and challenged non-Arabs to competitions. Qur'an answered them and challenged them to bring a Surah of the like thereof. They were the ones who were converting from Judaism and Christianity and knew well the stories narrated by Qur'an, and they were the ones who best knew their history, and they were the ones who lived and learnt Islam from Muhammad (sws)- yet they had differences of opinion in the meanings of verses. Muhammad (sws) not only knew about those, rather, history shows, he appreciated gatherings in which discussions on the interpretations of verses used to take place, for that was consistent with the effort of understanding the Qur'an and 'pondering' upon the Qur'an. For instance, I can write one sentence, which is a classical example that can be interpreted two ways:
"Sit not stand"
It can be interpreted "Sit not – stand" or "Sit – not stand". This has nothing to do with translation. I must also clarify that this is just an example, such stark differences in translations usually do not exist in Qur'an, but I give it out to make my point clear. I wrote the actual text in English and an English reader can derive multiple meanings out of it. Qur'an, as it itself says, is lucid and clear, therefore the differences that appear in translations are of relatively minor nature.

I will start a new thread on traditions and meaning of Ahl-ul-Bayt that I would like to discuss with Hur and Porus. It is not a directly related issue to this thread.

Best Regards

[Musalmaan]

My apologies; I dont think I can participate in another discussion at this point, so I will not be starting new ones as I had said before.

Thanks

[Musalmaan]

As for the physics book example, I do not agree that you need some prerequisite knowledge. As I have asserted before, I took many books relating to such fields and studied them without any instructor even when I was not exposed to the subject. I believe most people do.

It is true that one comes across many difficult issues and problems, and then we turn towards our teachers for help. Same is true of Qur'an with respect to scholars. It is because of this that I said that we can study the opinions of different scholars and evalute their reasoning. We do that in physics, medical science when we go to doctors and in other fields today in the world.

[Muslim First]

.
HUR wrote:

Regarding my second point:
I didn't regard this point to just translations...though the Prophet never endorsed one. You claim of the persian one written by Salman Farsi...there is nothing claiming it was official or an actual translation but a conceptual interpretation for him to understand

There is no such thing as offical translation. Prophet did not speak any other languages. There is no authority in Islam who will certify that a perticular translation is offical. All translations are Interpreted Translatios where authors select proper meaning to the best of their abilities. Many times their orientation (Sunni,Salafi,Shia,Ismaili etc. etc.)has effect on translation and commentry.

One fact stands out to me,is that if you study more than one translation and read some Tafsirs, then you will grasp meaning of Quran, even if you do not understand Arabic.

4 transations + Transliteration + Literal meaning of every word is online at;

http://yaqb.lrhazi.com/index.php?qtoc=on

DARUSSALAM has 3 volume word by word translation of Quran.

I do hope Muslims stop being stubborn in not reading translations. Most of Quran is clear and those passages where they differ then they can go to their Scholars and be guided by them.

Wasalaam

.

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

I agree with the most of what Muslim First said, except for the following:

"those passages where they differ then they can go to their Scholars and be guided by them."

When we study the Qur'an, our aim is to find what Allah wants from us. If we go to our scholars only, we only get the story which we have believed since our births anyway. If we want to find the truth, I believe this is not the best approach.

I think we must have an attitude of being prepared to accept the truth wherever it comes from. The Qur'an tells us that the Almighty asked the Prophet (sws) to tell his addressees to bring evidences for the claims they were making, and it tells him that in case they do bring convincing evidences, the Prophet (sws) should accept them. However, if they were not willing to bring forth evidences to support their claims and were not prepared to accept the truth simply because they loved their own ideology for no rational reason, then they ought to be condemned for their attitude.

For instance the Qur'an says:

"Ask them: 'Bring a Book from Allah which is a better guide than these two (i.e. Taurat and Qur'an), I will follow it, if what you say be true!' So if they do not meet this demand, you should know that they only follow their own desires. And who is more misguided than the one who follows his own desires rather than the guidance from Allah?" (28:49-50)

It also warns those who do not apply the faculty of their reasoning and become slaves to emotions. For example, consider the following where those who do not use their intellect in the study of the Book are addressed as deaf and dumb:

"Surely the worst of animals in Allah's sight are the deaf, the dumb who do not use their brains." (Al-Anfal 8:22)

Therefore, I think in search for the truth we must never be biased and open to truth, otherwise there is no way for us to find what Allah wants from us. This is why I believe that when we study the Qur'an, we must get rid of our preconceived notions and study it with outmost sincerety and honesty to understand the Word of the Lord of the Worlds.

Best wishes to all.

[Muslim First]

.
br. Musalman

AS

I agree with your comments about my statement and stand corrected.

Tafsir Ibn-Kathir (Abridged) is on line at:

http://www.tafsir.com/

Hope my bohra brothers will take advantage of it.

Wasalaam

.

[porus]

Monumental Shia tafseer of Allama Tabatabai is at almizan.org. At least read the preface which provides explanations of biases of all exegetes including the those influenced by modern science.

Unfortunately, the translator of the original Arabic al-mizan passed away before completing the translation. However, those parts that are on line are worth studying.

Also read http://www.quran.org.uk/ieb_quran_tawil.htm to identify how scholars differ about explanations of muhkammaat and mutashabihaat. That leaves a layman with responsibility to be true to oneself in order to determine which scholar is the most rational (not necessarily logical) and which 'feels' truer.

Tabatabai has made the strongest case, imho, for following the Shia tafseer.

[porus]

I apologize for calling Allama Tabatabai is al mizan the shia tafseer. Of course, it is just a tafseer written by a Shia.

[porus]

Another useful link comparing tafseers:

http://www.tafseercomparison.org/index.asp

[hur]

Musalman,
You've begun to repeal your own statements now.
You now write:
"This obviously means that Allah's directive is restricted to Qur'an and Muhammad (sws) only."

I thought you wrote the Quran is clear for everyone one to understand without any previous understanding or adds.

The Quran is clear only when you observe and follow the traditions of the Prophet who explained the Quran.

Well...the sunnah is of Muhammad and the quote I wrote which Porus explained is a very authentic saying of the Prophet:
"The Quran and the Ahlul bayt are with truth. Both are guidances of the other"

Porus also quote the hadith of Al'Kisa which is mutawatir (beyond doubt) in classification.

Regarding "mubin" being used as manifest or in front of you...firstly Allah doesn't claim clarity on any issue except His oneness. Even hell and heaven are only shown to us in descriptions for us to imagine.

Allah says in the Quran the muslims must strive to understand it. But there is a means by which one must strive to do this. Again, if the Quran is clear as you say, describe how one must perform fasting by the Quran alone.

Your statements regarding the practices of those peoples before the Quran is utterly false except for the fact of the Hanifahs (which Muhammad was a follower of). The Jews nor Christians never performed fasting or prayers as even recorded in the Quran for muslims. They fasted and prayed as their messengers taught them not as the Quran describes. You cannot connect the old traditions as a direct connection but as a evolvement of traditions.

Please quote your source regarding the "official" persian translation.

Your right that it is separate concept...but is intergarally related. It is the bases of what I have been to say. You cannot separate the Quran from the Prophetic tradition.

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum Hur,

Hur wrote: --
You've begun to repeal your own statements now.
You now write:
"This obviously means that Allah's directive is restricted to Qur'an and Muhammad (sws) only."

I thought you wrote the Quran is clear for everyone one to understand without any previous understanding or adds.
-----

Correct. There is no contradiction in the two. Qur'an is clear for everyone to understand. I have also said, which you have clearly ignored, the fact that all directives from the Almighty are contained in the Qur'an, whereas all practices are shown to us by Muhammad (sws). Any practice or saying attributed to Muhammad (sws) which is not consistent with Qur'an cannot be accepted, because there is a chance that that statement may have been wrongly attributed to Prophet (sws). (Please follow the post to the end before commenting on this.)

Hur wrote: --
Regarding "mubin" being used as manifest or in front of you...firstly Allah doesn't claim clarity on any issue except His oneness. Even hell and heaven are only shown to us in descriptions for us to imagine.
-----
In absence of any arguments provided by Hur to why this reasoning should be accepted and is the truth, I will not add further comments to it. Users can read my reasoning and this statement and clearly make a decision as to which one they think suits better to their understanding. I, however, cannot accept any argument whatsoever unless backed from Allah.

Hur wrote:--
Again, if the Quran is clear as you say, describe how one must perform fasting by the Quran alone.
-----

As I have previously explained in one of my previous posts that commandments are clearly explained by Allah and there is no confusion with regards to commandments; Prophet (sws) practiced Qur'an by setting up a society and by performing Islamic injunctions, all of which is primarily of practical nature. Nevertheless, even if this is incorrect understanding, my lack of incorrect understanding shall never cause a problem for me to understand Qur'an directly, as told by Qur'an, and as practiced by earlier Muslims under the directions of Muhammad (sws).

Hur wrote:--
Your statements regarding the practices of those peoples before the Quran is utterly false except for the fact of the Hanifahs (which Muhammad was a follower of). The Jews nor Christians never performed fasting or prayers as even recorded in the Quran for muslims.
-----

Can you please point out where in the Qur'an is this recorded? I will like to know. I will comment after I get the reference, since if it is from Qur'an, I must understand before I make a statement regarding it.

Hur wrote:--
Please quote your source regarding the "official" persian translation.
-----

Before I quote that, can you please explain what is 'official' in Islam and what source did you use to derive that. Once I know that, I will be in a better position to answer that. Also, if you can provide me some examples of what other things are official that will help me a lot.

With respect to the tradition of Ahl-ul-Bayt, my question is that God could have very easily said the same thing in Qur'an if it was an essential part of faith -- why has that not been done? If all articles of faith, all commandments of Shariah are present, why is this missing? Again, all *commandments* of Shariah are present in Qur'an – this is also a commandment, not a practice, why not in Qur'an?

If it is not in Qur'an, then don't we believe that Qur'an suffices for our salvation in the Hereafter? If we read Bani Israel's history in Qur'an (Al-Baqarah verses 46-120), we find that one of the major problems with them was that did not themselves understand the Book of God given to them, and then they blindly followed their scholars and leaders. Qur'an has condemned them for their behavior – should we be doing the same?

Best,
Musalmaan

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykumk Porus,

Thank you for your sincere consideration of my argument. I am not as concerned that you accept what I say to be correct, but that you evaluate my argument honestly without any preconcieved notions. Needless to say, I do not imply that anyone on this forum is not sincere and I will also take this opportunity to wish success to all.

We shall all be answerable to God on the Day of Judgment on our intellectual conviction of what the truth is and on our striving honestly to find it and practice it.

May God show us the path of his liking.
Fond regards.

[hur]

Musalman,

Just to clarify...Quran is clear if you follow Muhammad's tradition (which is a command in the Quran).

If you agree to this...than you have done what I asked originally...the expanse of what "clear" covers.

Saying that...one must know at least a good studying of hadith to understand even a translation of Quran effectively, other than the concept of Oneness.

You see as one reads the Quran, they will be commanded to do many things...yet the Quran doesn't explain how or when to do them. If without the study of traditions 2/3 of the Quran will only be acknowledged yet not understood.

I don't mean to say if a tradition contradicts the Quran it should be followed..I totally agree. But that has nothing to do those that do...which you must know to implement the commands of the Quran.

You wrote:
"Prophet (sws) practiced Qur'an by setting up a society and by performing Islamic injunctions, all of which is primarily of practical nature. Nevertheless, even if this is incorrect understanding, my lack of incorrect understanding shall never cause a problem for me to understand Qur'an directly, as told by Qur'an, and as practiced by earlier Muslims under the directions of Muhammad (sws)."

--have you read this yourself? My lack of understanding doesn't stop me from understanding. How does that make sense? That's like saying I cannot understand english, but I can read it. What have you gained? So because you know about salat...it is of no consequence that you don't know how and why it is performed? I hope you understand what I am getting at.

Regarding the Ahlul Bayt...note that there is many precedents of status of the families of other Messengers in the Quran. They were leaders and examples of their Ummahs. They were raised above all others in piety and iman. Then you have the traditions of the Prophet which testify the same things about his own family.

Surah al'Imran
31. Say: If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your faults, and Allah is Forgiving, MercifuL
32. Say: Obey Allah and the Apostle; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers.
33. Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations.
34. Offspring one of the other; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

You asked for reference from the Quran regarding the past traditions being similar to those brought by the Prophet. My point was there are no references to indicate there were the same or close. Jews and Christians made prayer to God, and fasted to God, but not as muslims in the Quran or as the Prophet taught. Yes all of them made dua to God, this is what made all Prophets muslims...but no Prophet taught a required motioned prayer (salat) or a month of fasting for his followers. These were things the Prophet Muhammad taught both to pagans, Christians, Jews,..etc.

This is why I asked for evidence saying they were similar. Again your asking me for proof of my statement...yet haven't given any for your own.

Regarding mubin, you didn't give any reason for using "clear" as a definition either. The major translators except one use "manifest". How can you expect me to qualify my statement (which I actually did) when you haven't?

Regarding the word "offical", I meant a text that was allowed by the Prophet to copy and distribute as a means for dawa for personal use. It is one thing to reference notes about verses..it is another to make a translations to give to others.

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

Hur wrote:---
have you read this yourself? My lack of understanding doesn't stop me from understanding. How does that make sense? That's like saying I cannot understand english, but I can read it. What have you gained? So because you know about salat...it is of no consequence that you don't know how and why it is performed? I hope you understand what I am getting at.
---

My apologies on this one - the exact sentence should have been "My inability to understand Qur'an does not change the fact that I must understand it." And this is based on the same principle as that of my inability or unwillingness to offer prayer does not change the fact that I must offer prayer as commanded by the Almighty, learning how to offer it in the process. Almighty has commanded it, I cannot change his commands. I must develop an ability to understand it, whether directly or indirectly - after all, I do everything to understand anything else in the world.

Hur wrote:--
You asked for reference from the Quran regarding the past traditions being similar to those brought by the Prophet. My point was there are no references to indicate there were the same or close. Jews and Christians made prayer to God, and fasted to God, but not as muslims in the Quran or as the Prophet taught. Yes all of them made dua to God, this is what made all Prophets muslims...but no Prophet taught a required motioned prayer (salat) or a month of fasting for his followers. These were things the Prophet Muhammad taught both to pagans, Christians, Jews,..etc.
-----

In such a case, I will beg to differ and say that Qur'an indeed has provided references to indicate that they were very close. With respect to prayer, Qur'an records the following of Ibrahim (pbuh):

"And when We made the House a resort for men and a (place of) security, and make for yourselves a place of prayer on the place of Ibrahim. And We enjoined Ibrahim and Ismail that purify My House for those who visit (it) and those who meditate and those who bow down (and) those who prostrate themselves." (Al-Baqarah 2:125)

As is clear from the above verse, not only was prayer enjoined on Ibrahim, Ismail and their followers, rather their prayer was so similar to ours that it had prostration as well as bowing down.

Ibrahim (pbuh)'s prayer to God is narrated as follows:

"O our Lord, I settled a part of my progeny in this uncultivated valley by your sacred house; o our Lord so that they establish prayer." (Ibrahim 14:37)

Prophet Isa (pbuh) also taught prayer to his disciples as is evident from the Bible:

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
"This, then, is how you should pray:
" 'Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one. '" (Matthew 6:5-14)

Further, according to Hamid ud Din Farah (d:1930), an expert on Arabic, Ancient Arabic and Hebew, the word Salah had been used in Hebrew for prostration as well as prayers.

Even in modern days, the Jewish prayer is very similar to that of Muslims. Hayim Donin writes in the book "To pray as a Jew: a guide to the prayer book and the synagogue service":
"In most contemporary congregations very few people keep to the tradition of falling prostrate. Sometimes it is only the Prayer leader and the rabbi who does so. In more traditional congregations, however, some worshipers, men and women, will join the Prayer Leader and rabbi in the act of prostrating themselves."

The book further show images in which the prayer of a Jew involves not only Qayyaam, but Sajud as well. Congregation has already been mentioned above. Further, it seems they are required to perform ablution before they offer their prayers.

This method, followed by Jews today has obviously reached them generations after generations. Consequently, Qur'an did not need to tell the people who converted from Judaism to Islam the entire method of Prayer, Qur'an's verses contain only those commandments that were needed to modify their method to the correct one. So for instance, Jews did not have Ruku in their prayers at the time of advent of Qur'an, and consequently Qur'an clearly ordered that:

"And establish prayer, and pay the poor-due and bow your heads with those who bow in worship.)" (Al-Baqarah 2:43)

With respect to fasting:
"O you who believe! fasting is prescribed for you, as it was prescribed for those before you, so that you may guard (against evil)." (Al-Baqarah 2:183)

Qur'an is very explicit in saying that 'as it was prescribed for those before you'. As a result, it is evident that fasting was prescribed on the nations of the prophets before Muhammad (sws) and they were not unaware of these methods.

In Encarta, article titled "Fasting" clearly shows that Jews fast the same way as Muslims:
"Among Jews, fasting as a form of penitence and purification has been observed annually on the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, since its traditional designation by Moses. On this holy day neither food nor drink is permitted. The fast by day, but not after dark, observed by Muslims during the month of Ramadan also is a form of atonement."

The same article, describes Christian fast as this:

"In the 6th century the Lenten fast was expanded from its original 40 hours, the time spent by Christ in the grave, to 40 days, on each of which only one meal was permitted."

Consequently, Qur'an only provided instructions that brought their method of fasting to the one required by Islam. Qur'an did not have to give detailed instructions.

Keeping the foregoing explanations in mind, it becomes incredibly clear that Qur'an's instructions at that time sufficed to explain the methods of practice for all who embraced it from other religions.

Hur wrote:--
Regarding mubin, you didn't give any reason for using "clear" as a definition either. The major translators except one use "manifest". How can you expect me to qualify my statement (which I actually did) when you haven't?
------

Merriam-Webster defines the word manifest in following two meanings:
"readily perceived by the senses and especially by the sight"
"easily understood or recognized by the mind"

I have provided reasons for using clear in the sense of 'clear commandments' (second meaning above) and not as a 'clear book in front of you' (the first meaning above). I can use manifest as translation of mubeen, does not make much of a difference for me and I believe same is employed by the translators who use manifest; but the question is not that of the fact why that specific term is being used, rather why do you say mubeen means "manifest in sight" as opposed to "manifest in understanding". On what basis do you regard it this way when it is not consistent with the usage of the word Mubeen in classical Arabic and Qur'an itself?

Nevertheless, to further explain why I have used the word Mubeen in the sense I have used, here is some of the study of its root, parallel words and this particular word in Qur'an:

In an Arabic dictionary, the meaning of Mubeen is defined with the following words:
"clear, lucid, manifest, unambiguous, explicit."
This word is from the verb Bayyan which has the following meanings in the dictionary:
"make apparent , clear , clarify , manifest, explain, construe"

Although looking at all the above terms does provide a sense to the meaning of the word, nonetheless an investigation in its Arabic usage follows.

The word Yubayyan, which is 'muzaray' form, third person singular is used in the following verses of Qur'an in the meaning of explaining something:

"And when Musa said to his people, 'Surely Allah commands you that you should sacrifice a cow,' they said, 'Do you make fun of us?' He said, 'I seek the protection of Allah from being one of the ignorant.'
They said, 'Pray to your Lord for our sake to make it clear (yubayyan) to us what she is.' Musa said, 'He says, surely she is a cow neither advanced in age nor too young, of middle age between that (and this); do therefore what you are commanded.'
They said, 'Pray to your Lord for our sake to make it clear (yubayyan) to us what her color is.' Musa said, 'He says, surely she is a yellow cow; her color is intensely yellow, giving delight to the beholders.'
They said, 'Pray for us unto your Lord that He make clear (yubayyan) to us what (cow) she is. Lo! cows are much alike to us; and Lo! if Allah wills, we may be led aright.' Musa said: He says, Surely she is a cow not made submissive that she should plough the land, nor does she irrigate the tilth; sound, without a blemish in her. They said: Now you have brought the truth; so they sacrificed her, though they had not the mind to do (it)." (2:67-71)

Musa (pbuh) explained to them the cow they were supposed to slaughter. Their request to make it clear (yubayyan) was to actually make the commandment clear in terms of explanation, not in terms of bringing the cow in front of us. In fact, it is also a known fact that that cow which they finally set to find and slaughter had become very difficult to find indeed, something not really manifest.

The following verse very clearly explains the meaning of Mubeen as used for Qur'an:

"O people of the Book! Our Messenger has come to you making clear (yubayyan) many things that you used to Hide from (your) Book and forgiving many. There has come to you light and a clear (Mubeen) Book. Allah guides with it those who (want to) follow his pleasures, to the paths of peace, and brings them out of darkness into light by His will and guides them to the Right Path." (Al-Maidah 5:15-16)

As is clear from the usage of mubeen, it is not the Book that is clear, rather it is the Message in the Book, sent through Muhammad (sws), through which Allah is guiding people.

I believe it must be for this reason that the translation of Kitab-um-mubeen in the following verse is done as following by most translators:

"Ta Sin! These are the verses of the Quran and the Book that makes (things) clear (mubeen)" (Ya-Sin 27:1)

"Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back, know ye that it is Our Messenger's duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest (mubeen) manner." (Al-Maidah 5:92)

Looking at the above usage of the word mubeen, there is no doubt on the fact that clear is in terms of the clearness of the Message with respect to Qur'an.

I will still like to know how did you derive what 'official' was.

Best Regards

[hur]

Musalman,
I thank you for giving a through backing of what you believe..though I disagree with some of it.

Regarding salat as taught by Muhammad being the same as taught by other Prophets...you actually have reinforced by stance. As I originally stated, the salat as taught by Muhammad is not at all the same as practiced by Ibrahim, but is an evolution of a form of salat. I never said the earlier Prophets didn't perform a form of salat...but I said it is not the systematic method as developed by Muhammad. This is only learned by the traditions of Muhammad, not by the Quran itself. This came from my argument that one cannot read the Quran alone and understand what they are reading. Yes, you get small portions...but even then, as you showed, you needed to taken 4 separate verses from 4 separate surahs to formulated that the prior Prophets did salat with ruku, sujud, and qi'am as separate forms of salat (prayer). You would essentially have to memorize large portions of the Quran to cross reference these. And even then, you still haven't any info to how, quantity of rakats, etc to perform the salat.

This is the same for fasting. The verse from the Bible you quote refer to what the Jews did differ from what Jesus Nabi did. Your reference however is incorrect. The forty days was a test for Isa Nabi in the desert where he went for forty days and nights without food. Beyond this, Isa Nabi fasted for his iman and required no fasting from his disciples...but in couraged self motivated fasting to strenghten the soul. Lent is the time fourty (excluding sundays) before Easter, the resurrection of Christ.

Again there was no specific day(s) of fasting. Lent was established by the church..not Isa Nabi...though he encouraged it very much.

Now to mubin...and you give references...unfortunately you lose sight of the context in arabic alone...but from the various translations contexts.

Bayyinah is derived from same source as bayan and are both means of delivering a message to understand. Bayan being tied to a verbal or written form and bayyinah being tied to means by other forms like visual, hearing or meta physical (expression of intent). So in reference to mubin, the translation would use apparent, understood, or manifest. When using the word "clear", there is an assumed implication which cannot be quantified..that being the person receiving the message has understood the message. And in every verse used as reference this can not be assumed...because Allah then continually says when after receiving the message and then turn away, they are the unbelievers. If they had understood the message they wouldn't turn away. Allah says in the Quran He brought Messengers and Books to the humans and majority them still turned away in unbelief.

Secondly, the Messenger was sent to explain and preach the message. If it was "clear" in the Quran..there is no need of a Messenger to be obeyed! Allah says obeying the Messenger is obeying Allah. Why would Allah require this..if there is no other need to rely on the Messenger?

Everything is we need to know is in the Quran..however it is very compressed. We do not have the ability to uncompressed or sort this information...thus we needed a Prophet to reveal this understanding. Once revealed...the message become very apparent, manifest, mubin.

Again, official would be something that is authorized by the Prophet to be copied and taught from to others. Was Salman Farsi given ijaza to teach that translation you say he had to other Farsi speaking people...or did he use it for he own reference as notes?

[Musalmaan]

Assalamu Alaykum,

You give no references whatsoever.

Not EVEN a single source. I can also start writing what I believe and not care about where I derive this from. This time I quoted everything to make it clear.

I can quote you all the verses that will take a Christians or Jews fast or Prayer and make it a Muslims fast or prayer from the Qur'an. However, before I do that, I want you to explain me how you derived all the following:

Can you give me sources of Arabic dictionary that says where this usage of the words is which you have explained. I do not want you saying it means this and it means that?

Can you give me sources where it says where 'official' is defined. I do not want what you think it is. Who and How is it defined?

Can you give one source where it says,

"Everything is we need to know is in the Quran..however it is very compressed. We do not have the ability to uncompressed or sort this information.."

If not. Then this discussion is over and far too decided for me. I tend to leave discussions when they are left just to prove a point, not based on reason and argument.

Best Regards

[Muslim First]

.Hur wrote

Again, official would be something that is authorized by the Prophet to be copied and taught from to others. Was Salman Farsi given ijaza to teach that translation you say he had to other Farsi speaking people...or did he use it for he own reference as notes?

I believe Hur is talking about concept in Bohra religion where you have to obtin 'Raza' for everything in your life, including teaching Qur'an.

I do not think such concept exists in majority of Islam. You do not need permission from any offical to teach Qur'an or lead Namaaz (Salah). Like I said before It is not known that the Prophet SAW spoke any other languges, therefore he probably did not speak or understand Farsi. He trusted Salman Farsi RA and knew that he acquired enough knowledge about Qur'an Tafsir from him. Therefore I do not think he needed 'official permissin'. If he was given then there is no documntary proof of such event.

In majority Islam you can be self taught scholar and people will come to you to learn from you. At our Islamic center Dr. M who is professor at Pharmasy college teaches Tafsir every month. He says he acquired knowledge of Tafsir and Hadith by simply being in room when his "Shaikh' father and his scholar freinds were holding discussions in their one room dwelling.

If Ahlul-Bayt were given exlusive franchise of Knowledge of Islam then who is currant franchse Holder?

Why did not they write down offical Tafsir in Arabic so we do not have differing meanings?

Why do'nt Maulana sit down and write official translation since he claims to have knowledge of Quran thru 'Ilaham' from Imaam in hiding?

Wasalaam

[hur]

MuslimFirst,
As you have little knowledge of Islam in general from your various posts, in my opinion, I would ask you not to speak for me or explain my word.

Musalman,
Regarding sources...actually if you reference my previous posts I sources what I wrote. In my last post I gave my comments bases on what you posted. My sources for what I wrote is based on the items you quoted. Did you want me to quote the same verses?

"Can you give me sources of Arabic dictionary that says where this usage of the words is which you have explained. I do not want you saying it means this and it means that?"

---Firstly, the arabic dictionary YOU quoted from uses manifest or apparent as well as clear as a translation. So as far as dictionaries being a source...there is not difference.

When looking at the context of usage of mubin in the ayats...manifest or apparent is more correct because when something is manifest, you would choose to or not to select it. If it were clear, you would obviously select it. But Allah says the person has the option...so it cannot be "clear". This is my opinion in understanding the verse. Now if you want an authoritative source...there is none except the hadiths which is a testament in itself to that fact of needing clarification of the verses of the Quran. But again YOU have nothing besides the dictionary source to make your opinion any more authoritative.

Regarding salat..again I was commenting on the verses you quoted. You want sources...problem is there are none..that is my point. There is nothing in the Quran that supports the idea that Quran alone is enough to understand itself. In fact the Quran (which have been already quoted) and the hadith (and if you like I can quote many, two mutawatir hadiths have already been quoted)to support what I wrote.

"Not EVEN a single source. I can also start writing what I believe and not care about where I derive this from. This time I quoted everything to make it clear."

---You have formulated an opinion and quoted others who have the same opinion..clipped a few verses and translations as you suit and say that is a source. A translation is NOT a source...because it intelf is the interpretation of the translators. Sorry, documentation doesn't work that way.

Regarding fasting of Isa Nabi according to the Bible...this is general knowledge that can be found on any Christian website or textbooks on Christianity. I thought it too simplistic to quote..but:

Luke Chapter 4
4:1 Then Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan River and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness,
4:2 where for forty days he endured temptations from the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and when they were completed, he was famished.
4:3 The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread.”
4:4 Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man does not live by bread alone.’”

Last time I checked..muslims are required to fast in Ramadhan for 29-30 days and from fajr to maghrib (according to the Quran)...not continually for 40 days.

"Can you give me sources where it says where 'official' is defined. I do not want what you think it is. Who and How is it defined?"

Regarding the word "official"..this is getting stupid now. There is only one book or writing called the Quran by Muhammad..that is the arabic version. According to archives it was stamped with his seal. Now other than that I have nothing else of what Muhammad considered "official". All archives of writings, such as agreements, etc. of Muhammad have his seal. Does the translation by Salman Farsi you keep referencing have this seal? If it does..then by correlation it is approved (ijaza) by Muhammad.

"Can you give one source where it says, "Everything is we need to know is in the Quran..however it is very compressed. We do not have the ability to uncompressed or sort this information.."

--Not of that quote..because I wrote that. I do have sources (hadiths) that attest to what I wrote. The Quran says to perform fasting, prayer, Hajj, etc. It describes brief histories of the past. The traditions reveal the full context of those verses.

al'Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 53:
Narrated Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas:
Allah's Apostle said, "You will be rewarded for whatever you spend for Allah's sake even if it were a morsel which you put in your wife's mouth."

--this isn't in the Quran..though the Quran supports this inadvertantly. There are several hundred references like this that the Prophet preached..all NOT in the Quran..but inadvertantly supported by the Quran.

Surah 7, verse 158
Say: O people! surely I am the Messenger of Allah to you all, of Him Whose is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth there is no god but He; He brings to life and causes to die therefore believe in Allah and His messenger, the Ummi Prophet who believes in Allah and His words, and follow him so that you may walk in the right way.

--Again, if the Quran is clear and contains all the knowledge without needing explaination...why require the muslim to follow Muhammad to be rightly guided?

Let me know if I missed somethings.