>open quran>chapter 18>sun sets in a puddle
>>16892323Figurative.The Quran thereby debases the legends of Gilgamesh and Hercules meeting the "Sun God" in the west.
>>16892323You might as well call sunset and sunrise don't make sense.
>>16892323>what are metaphorical lines
>>16892595cope, that's what they are.
>>16892323>open quran>chapter 2 >immediately starts with mysterious letters no one knows the meaning of>sea splitting>dead people being revived>men turned into monkeys>man being revived by touching his corpse with a dead yellow cow's body part>stones that fall because they fear God>angels teaching people magic>more dead people being revived>a dead man and his donkey being revived>dead birds being revived
>>16892323>>16892766>open quran>first chapter>god talks and prays to himself like a schizophrenic
>>16892323>>16892595Clearly not correct since Muhammad doubles down on this in the hadith. Look at https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4802 and https://sunnah.com/abudawud:4002When the sun was setting Muhammad pointed it out and told people it actually physically goes somewhere. What he's saying wouldn't make sense unless he means it actually genuinely goes somewhere.
>>16892633>too low IQ to comprehend the words of God>>16892777>Bringing up a Hadith with a completely different context from a VERSE from the Qur'an>"See they're the same thing!"Concession accepted, living with a retard mindset must be tough.
>>16892825>Bringing up a Hadith with a completely different contextWell no, the context is the sun and its destination. That is the sole focus of these sahih hadiths. You're arguing the ayah in the Koran wasn't meant as a literal descriptor. So we look at what Muhammad taught elsewhere on the subject. Multiple times while the sun was setting he pointed it out to people and told them it was physically going somewhere. He uses the same terms as he did in the Koran.If you disagree with this approach then good luck figuring out how to do basic things like pray without going to the sunnah in this manner.Further, Muhammad directly says in the first one there from Bukhari that this is what the ayah he refers to was meant to teach.
>>16892595How do you know if methaphorical or not?
bump
>>16892777All stories in the Quran are plagiarized.The Alexander story is no exception.
>>16893710For over 400 years ALL mufasirun regarded the verses about the Sunn setting in a muddy spring as literal.When the muslims conquered educated people and were taught astronomy and other sciences they started claiming the verses were metaphorical.If you meet an idiot who claims the verses are metaphorical just ask him what Al-Tabari thought [he thought they were literal].
>>16894635Didnt the joos also claim alexander believed in their god
>>16892595orthodox Muslims take the Quran literally though. It's why Muslims, just like Mormons, think God has a body (lmao)
>>16894681God literally walks with adam, noah and Jacob tho
>>16892323Its crazy how much of a mess the Quran is, forget ideology, historically speaking it's falsifiable.>>16894635Also this, it literally takes from other sources, rewrites some things and acts like its all new. Imagine if someone writes a story that says "I went to ride my red bike and then ate strawberry ice cream" then someone comes along and writes "i went to ride my orange bike and then ate blueberry ice cream, totally new story by the way, first time someone telling it"
Muslims are just Christians that go hardcore on everything. Christians: well, most of the fantastical stuff in the bible is just metaphorical, there are no 'pillars of the earth' below ground or anythingMuslims: Everything the Quran says is literal. There are pillars down there. Christians: yeah, the bible was written by man but inspired by god, so they were communicating the general idea of it and it's up to us to interpret what he was trying to say through them. Muslims: The Quran is the literal spoken word of god transcribed onto the page. The Quran, the book itself, has always existed, before the universe itself.
>>16892323>Quran: "He saw the sun setting into a muddy spring">Retard, 1400 years later: OMG STUPID MUSLIMS THE SUN DOESNT ACTUALLY SET INTO A MUDDY SPRING>Anon, 2024: "I saw the sun set behind the mountain">Retard, 1400 years later: OMG STUPID ANON THE SUN DOESNT ACTUALLY GO INTO THE MOUNTAINS ACTUALLY THE EARTH IS THE ONE THATS SPINNING
>>16894725The fantastical elements of the Bible were viewed as quite literal for most of Christian history.
>>16892457>The Quran thereby debasesWhy debase everything but jew stories?
>>16895506Or why care about debasing things none at the time believed in?
>>16895498The verse literally states that Alexander travelled to the PLACE where the Sun sets, and he watched/observed the Sun as it LITEREALLY set in a muddy spring.For over a thousand years Muslims have been writing tafsirs (commentaries) on the Qur’an. The content has ranged from giving a background to the circumstances of the revelation to the interpretation of the revelation. Despite the Qur’an’s claim to clarity various authors have written their tafsirs in order to explain what the Qur’an means. For example, Mujahid in the first of the tafsirs notes on surah Al–Baqara.65 that Allah did not physically turn a village into apes but that “they retained their human form while their hearts and souls became deformed, like those of apes.” So whilst it can be worthwhile looking at their interpretations, it must be remembered that the tafsirs can and do vary in their explanation of what the various ayah mean. In chronological order the first 20 tafsirs are as follows:
>>16895873Tafsir Mujahid 104 AH – 722 ADTafsir Ghareeb al-Quran 120 AH – 738 ADMuqatil bin Sulaiman 150 AH – 767 ADTafsir Sufyan al-Thawri 161 AH – 778 ADTafsir Abdul Razaq al-Sanaani 211 AH – 826 ADTafsir al-Quran – Al-Tustari 283 AH – 896 ADTafsir al-Hibri 286 AH – 899 ADTafsir Furat al-Kufi 3rd C. AH – 9/10th C. ADTafsir al-Hiwari 3rd C. AH – 9/10th C. ADTafsir al-Nisa’i 303 AH – 916 ADTafsir al-Tabari 310 AH – 922 ADTafsir Nazhat al-Quloub 330 AH – 942 ADTa’wilat Ahlul Sunnah 333 AH – 945 ADTafsir Bahr el-uloum 375 AH – 985 ADTafsir Ibn Abi Zamanayn 399 AH – 1009 ADTafsir Ali Ibrahim al-Qimmi 4th C. AH – 10th C. ADHaqa’iq al-Tafsir-Al-Silmi 412 AH – 1021 ADTafsir al-Kashf wal bayan 427 AH – 1036 ADAlHidaya ila bulugh alNihaya 437 AH – 1046 ADTafsir al-Mawirdi 450 AH – 1058 ADFor the first 400 years none of the tafsirs stated anything other than that the sun sets in a spring. The main contention was concerning whether the spring was muddy or whether it was hot. However, during the Middle Ages, perhaps as scientific knowledge became more widespread, so the tafsirs, starting with Tafsir al–Mawirdi, began to reflect that knowledge and diverge from the plain reading of the verse.In his 9th century Tafsir al-Qur’an Al-Tustari makes no comment on the verse and leaves it to the reader to take the plain and obvious meaning. In 919AD Al-Tabari’s tafsir states the sun was “setting into a muddy spring”. Then he confirms that this refers to the sun literally setting in a muddy spring:
>>16895876“Then he said: For the sun and the moon, He created easts and wests (positions to rise and set) on the two sides of the earth and the two rims of heaven, 180 springs in the west of black clay this is (meant by) God’s word: “He found it setting in a muddy spring,” meaning by “muddy (hami’ah)” black clay-and 180 springs in the east likewise of black clay, bubbling and boiling like a pot when it boils furiously.”Al-Tabari makes mention of the two views regarding hami’ah referring to muddy or hot but it is clear from the way that Al-Tabari writes that he takes this passage as being literal. It is important to note that Al-Tabari is writing around 300 years after Muhammad’s death and is one of the most respected tafsir writers in Islam, his writings being standard reference works even today.In 1273AD Al-Qurtubi qualifies the verse by saying that,“It seemed to his eyes as if it was going inside the spring which might be hot because of the sun or there is mud in or around it. as we see the sun goes into the ground if we were watching it.”Al-Qurtubi states that the spring is there but that it only seemed to Dhul Qarnain that the sun was setting into it. However, he then states that the spring might be hot due to the sun or that there is mud in or around it, reflecting the initial debate as to whether it is hot or muddy. One of the problems with this interpretation is that the account is not written from the point of view of Dhul Qarnain (the account is in the third person, not first) but Allah is giving an account of what happened.
>>16895879However, in Tanwir al-Miqbas minTafsir Ibn Abbas, (written either in 1297 or up to the early 15th century) the literal stance is maintained and it states that the sun sets into “a blackened, muddy and stinking spring; it is also said that this means: a hot spring”. Once again, any dispute revolves around whether the spring is muddy or hot, not whether the sun actually sets into it. In the 14th century Al-Kashani spiritualises the story and states that the setting of the sun refers to,“the setting of the sun of the spirit, he found it setting in a muddy spring, namely, one that was mixed with mud, which is the corporeal matter, an admixture of dark bodies, similar to where He says from a drop of mixed fluid [Q. 76:2]; and he found by it a folk, namely, the egocentric faculties, the corporeal and the spiritual.”He thus avoids having to enter into any discussion regarding the place where the sun sets as he completely reinterprets the words of the Qur’an and negates any claim to clarity. However by so doing he also negates the idea that this is a clear revelation that needs no explanation.
>>16895884By the end of the 14th century Ibn Kathir states that Dhul Qarnain,“saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean” and “Hami’ah is, according to one of the two views, derived from the word Hama’ah, which means mud.”He makes no mention of the other view and inserts “as if it were” into the verse thereby changing the clear meaning of the words used. In the mid-15th century Tafsir Al-Jalalayn again confirms that the sun sets in a muddy spring containing black clay but then goes on to say that “its setting in a spring is described as seen from the perspective of the eye”. That the spring is literal is confirmed by the fact that “he found by it that is by the spring a folk of disbelievers.” So, according to this interpretation, Dhul Qarnain travelled to this muddy spring, he reached it, but it only appeared that the sun set in it. This interpretation translates وَجَدَهَا Wajadah; عَيْنٍ Aynin; حَمِئَةٍ Hamiyah, and; بَلَغَ Balagha in the standard ways but the authors recognise the impossibility of the sun setting in the spring and so “from the perspective of the eye” is added. However, does this fit with the tense used in the ayah up to that point? The verse supposedly records what Dhul Qarnain saw, not how it appeared to him – unless the Qur’an is being unnecessarily confusing.
>>16895886In 1505 As-Suyuti referred to Dhul Qarnain’s finding of the setting-place of the sun as,“he found it setting in a muddy spring (‘ayn hami’a: [a spring] containing ham’a, which is black clay): its setting in a spring is [described as seen] from the perspective of the eye, for otherwise it is far larger [in size] than this world; and he found by it, that is, [by] the spring, a folk, of disbelievers.”As-Suyuti, like Ibn Kathir before him, explains that the verse is referring to Dhul Qarnain’s perspective and explains that he has used simple science to arrive at this conclusion. One cannot help but question whether the verse is now being interpreted in the light of contemporary scientific knowledge even though this verse is supposed to be part of the clear proof that Muhammad is a prophet and therefore cannot be adjusted according to modern knowledge.At the end of the 17th century Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi II in his Hayat al-Qulub states, “Finally, Dhu’l-Qarnayn reached the place where the sun sets.” He says nothing in regard to whether the sun was setting in a spring or water, muddy or hot, but does make a definite statement that Dhul Qarnain reached the place where the sun sets.By 1965 Sayd Qutb’s commentary “In the Shade of the Qur’an” renders the verse in a different way, “it appeared to him that it was setting in dark, turbid waters”. As with some previous tafsirs, “it appeared to him that” is added to the text and “spring” is changed to, “dark, turbid waters”. Once again it seems that an attempt is being made to change the clear meaning of the verse into something that, at its highest, is hardly implied.
>>16895887Muhammad Asad’s “The Message of the Qur’an” (1980) argues for a meaning of,““abundance of water” – which, according to many philologists (cf. Taj al-‘Arus), is one of the meanings of ‘ayn (primarily denoting a “spring”). As for my rendering of the phrase “he found it (wajadaha) setting…”, etc., as “it appeared to him that it was setting”, see Razi and Ibn Kathir, both of whom point out that we have here a metaphor based on the common optical illusion of the sun’s “disappearing into the sea”; and Razi explains this, correctly, by the fact that the earth is spherical.”Asad claims that this explanation was already advanced in the now lost Qur’an-commentary of Abu ‘Ali al-Jubba’I who died in 915 or 916AD.In 2007 Usmani, in Volume 5 of his commentary states that,“The word: (hami’ah) in the succeeding phrase: (into a miry spring) literally means dark marsh or mud carrying the sense of water beneath which there is dark mud and which causes the water itself to appear black. As for the sense of his seeing the Sun setting into such a spring, it means that an onlooker perceived it as setting into the spring because there was no habitation or dry land in sight.”This does not really fit in with what the Qur’an says as this explanation makes no allowance for finding a People living nearby (as ayat 86 says). Also in 2007 Imran Hosein’s Surah Al-kahf: Arabic Text – Translation and Modern Commentary, renders the verse,“until, when he came to the (land of the) setting sun, (since there was no land beyond, it appeared like the end of the earth) and he found it setting in a dark, turbid sea; and nearby he found a people.”
>>16895890In his Surah al-kahf And the Modern Age (2007) Hosein expands the thought to state “he found it setting in a spring of murky water (i.e., the Black Sea – Tafsīr Jalālain).” By doing so Hosein limits the furthest extent of Dhul Qarnain’s conquest to the coast of the Black Sea. He doesn’t address why ‘ayn would be used rather than bahr or why the Qur’an needs to be explained in this way.Maybudi in his “The Unveiling of the Mysteries and the Provision of the Pious (Kashf al-Asrar wa ʿUddat al-Abrar)” of 2015 completely ignores this verse. In Aurangzaib Yousufzai’s Surah al-Kahaf An Academic and Rational Translation (2017) the problem of the spring is allegorised into, “he reached a community whose Sun of glory and prosperity was setting into an abyss of darkness.” In this way modern translators avoid the question of whether the sun actually sets in a muddy spring or not but by so doing they deny the plain meaning of the Qur’an and present it as needing to be explained so that it may be understood.Once again we are confronted with a confronted with a dilemma: the Prophet, the Sahabah and the early tafsir writers all agreed that the Qur’an means what it says, that it was a clear revelation that needs no explanation. However, as time has gone on later authors and today’s apologists have had no choice but to say that Surah al-Kahf.86 is not clear and an explanation is needed. In the next part we will examine the arguments of the apologists.
