Welcome Friends: Ahlan wa sahlan!
In our last Reading we ended with Verse 107 which reminded listeners that, had God willed/shaa2/ شاء…… the Mushriks/ Associat-ers/ Shirkers/ would not have associated. This follows the general concept in HQ10:99 which indicates that -had God so willed/shaa2[1]– He could have made everyone on earth have faith and trust in Him, but that (as we understand from another verse HQ18:29) He was leaving this up to our personal choices and actions.[2]
Verse 107 ended by limiting the Messenger’s responsibility to the delivery of the Message.
COMMENTS:
1. Verse 108 makes us pay attention to all that we say.
We should not be abusive to people nor disrespectful of their freedom to ‘call unto’ other than God. We are actually being respectful of God when we watch our tongues and refrain from maligning them, because badmouthing them would give them reason to speak ugly words against God out of resentment against us, and their attitude would be more violent and their rhetoric would be more vehement than anything they would have said or done out of mere ignorance! Although we do not agree with their choices, as long as they do not force anything upon us, we must respect the fact that everyone is, indeed, free to choose!
2. In the center of this verse is the statement, “..thus we have made alluring to each people its own doings…” which, as Yusuf Ali tells us in note 936, refers to the reason behind people’s choices, psychological background, tendencies, history. Asad says, in note 93, that it implies man’s nature to believe what was implanted in childhood, “with the result that a polemic against those beliefs often tend to provoke a hostile psychological reaction.”
Perhaps this will help us understand the reaction people get when presenting differing beliefs or practices, evenbetween members of their own community. One example of that, is certain persons’ belief in the powers of ‘jinns/ghosts/evil spirits/magic.’ In their view, these ‘forces can overpower humans’ whenever the conditions allow them to do so, and often, no matter what proof we give such persons (whether Qur’anic, psychological, scientific, or historical), very few would change their minds. But even in people whose minds may not have changed, our compassionate, well-executed interaction would plant a seed!
Put simply, we must help people see that human freedom of choice and action is the very reason for human accountability. One cannot be held accountable when driven by powers beyond one’s control. Even in our courtrooms there is leniency for someone under-aged, or mentally ill, or drugged, or forced to commit a criminal act. There even are reduced sentences for completely sane adults who committed unpremeditated criminal acts on the spur of the moment. Doesn’t that tell us something?
When we believe that humans are, by nature/by default, vulnerable to a hostile takeover by other forces, we are separating humanity from the ‘takreem’ which God gave us, regarding ourselvesas creatures of diminished capacity. If that were true, there would be no accountability. It is that simple.It is NOT so!
We will grasp more of this issue as we progress through the Qur’an.
3. Verses 109-111 discuss the energetic vows made -without true intent– by such persons, and describe the inner turmoil -overturned state- of their “af’idah,” plural of fou’aad’ فؤاد-أفئدة-[3]… and their vision/sight, to which God leaves them in their طغيان/Ttughyaan .. in their ‘overbearing, in the now, EXCESS/Tyranny’!!
The word ‘Ttughyaan’ follows the noun-form Fa’laan, and is about dire excessiveness, [4] which when meted against others might be called ‘tyranny.’ Here it could be both, God knows best.
As for the ‘Fou’aad,’ it is mentioned here for the first time, and both Ali and Asad translate it as ‘heart.’ Although related to the ‘heart/mind,’ it is neither, or else the word ‘qalb’ would have been used.
This is an important word which will recur in future, so what is الفؤاد the ‘fou’aad?’
Qur’an SEARCH:
A search in ‘Tanzil’ shows us that it is mentioned in 15 verses in the Qur’an, and we realize that fou’aad’ is NOT an organ, having been mentioned several times after ‘hearing and sight’ -not ears and eyes (HQ67:23; 32:9; 23:78; 17:36; 16:78 in this last verse Ali translates it as ‘intelligence and affections,’ while Asad says ‘mind’).
Fou’aad is a FACULTY... but which?
CROSS-REFERENCE and Qur’anic CONTEXT:
We discover three verses which give us an important clue. Two of them they say that the Qur’an was delivered to the Messenger in a certain way so as to ‘stabilize/make firm’ his ‘fou’aad’ (HQ11:120; 25:32), and the third (HQ28:10) says that “…the fou’aad of the mother of Moses became ‘empty/void/blank,’ and she almost disclosed him (her infant Moses, floating away) had We not strengthened her qalb- heart/mind so that she’d be of Those with Inner Certainty من الموقنين- Min Al Muqineen. So the word is not heart/mind, as we can see from the use of qalb in the last part of the same verse… but her heart/mind needed to be strengthened so that her fou’aad would recover.
LINGUISTICS:
Our 1,000 year-old Lexicon tells us, the three-letter root-verb ‘Fa-a-da’ فأد- “indicates fever and high temperature,” and its verb is used as in, to ‘roast meat,’ the adjective ‘f’aeed’ meaning ‘roasted.’ Our second reference (Al Ragheb al Isfahani, mentioned above) says ‘Fou-aad’ is the ‘qalb’ in a condition of being aflame/ignited.”
IGNITED. What a word!
We do know that when we are thinking/perceiving, deliberating, rationalizing and deciding upon our actions we use a lot of energy; we consume hundreds of calories by being ‘ignited’ mentally even before we do anything physical (read here).
For now, I can think of no better English translation for this, than the concept of one’s perception of something, and how one relates to it: The process which causes a mental response and a physical reaction would be the faculty of perceiving, apprehending by means of the senses and the heart/mind as we reason and rationalize.
Perhaps we could refer to ‘fou-aad’ as ‘perception and rationalization’ for now.
So, to return to our verse 110 in today’s Reading, those people’s turmoil (their sight and perception being overturned) seems to be related to their hearing the Message again (and probably feeling its truth) but, in the heat of the moment, they responded/reacted negatively having already announced their disbelief the first time around. One of the reasons why they didn’t have faith and trust in God’s Signs even now, is their perception and rationalization as to why they shouldn’t, having been given that chance before.
4. Verse 111 states clearly that no matter what extraordinary evidence they would have witnessed, would not have mattered; they would never have attained faith and trust unless God Himself had willed it, meaning that the only way this would have happened is if they hadn’t been given. This means that the only way they would have attained faith is if faith had been imposed upon them by God, without the freedom to choose. Also, the reason why nothing would have changed their mind is that most of them are in ignorance.
Verse 112 provides solace to the Messenger in that every Prophet before him had enemies, deviants/ sheyateen of which some were familiar (Inss/people) and others unfamiliar (jinn/unseen), some bringing exclusive information to others يوحي in the form of ‘flowery discourse/ glittering half-truths’ (Ali/Asad). But here, Yusuf Ali mistakenly translates ‘nabi’ as ‘Messenger’ instead of Prophet (a HUGE difference we spoke about on Day 47. A Messenger, in his designation as the bearer of God’s Message, is above anything or anyone, with nothing impacting him as a Messenger in his delivery of God’s Message. A Prophet however, in his designation of prominence among others, necessarily interacts with them and is impacted as a human.
In Verse 113 we find the word ‘af’idah’ أفئدة again, plural of ‘fou’aad,’ about people who have no faith in the Hereafter, their perception and rationalization inclining (‘saghaa’ 2صغى ) towards such persons’ flowery discourse and deceit.
Here we see description of an amazing three-step process related to the impact of such deceitful discourse upon people:
First, people go through a mental inclination towards the deceitful discourse, then comes acceptance of it رضى /reDa and finally comes the committing, literally the ‘incorporating’[5] of whatever they incorporate INTO their Selves!!
(Ali’s translation is more coherent than Asad’swho referred the pronoun ( إليه /ilayhi) to God, rather than to the deceitful discourse).
5. Verse 114 starts with a question, then presents a statement, and ends with a command:
“Am I then to seek other than God as Judge, and it is He who sent down to you (pl.) the Compilation ‘explained in detail/ step by step’? (Ali/Asad) ‘explained in detail/ clearly spelling out the truth? (Ali/Asad) And those to whom we had bestowed the (earlier) Compilation know that it is being sent down in Truth, so be not among the Doubters.”
See Muhammad Asad’s note on Verse 115 which begins, “Truly and Justly has your Sustainer’s been fulfilled…” where he writes: “obviously refers to the Biblical Promise in Deuteronomy XVIII 15 and 18 that God would raise up a prophet ‘like unto Moses’ among the Arabs…”
6.Verse 116 tells us that if we were to obey most people on earth, we would stray away from God’s way. The verse also asserts that most people on earth follow Conjecture with regard to their faith (they have no proof), all they can do is guess. [6]
Dear Reader:
If not for the Arabi Qur’an, this might have been an assessment of us today! But through our knowledge of Arabic and our research we keep uncovering Qur’anic truths that are such well-structured proofs, that we find ourselves constantly growing in confidence and faith. The Arabi Qur’an, unlike any other Compilation, does not only withstand scrutiny, it corrects many commonly-held misconceptions; it will convince scrutinizers who study it with a truly open mind.
Enough said!
Our next Reading is from HQ6:117-132
Peace unto all!
[1] There has always been a discussion going on among exegetes as to what we call in English ‘God’s Will’ which actually refers to TWO different Arabic words: What God ‘yashaa2/يشاء’ versus what God ‘yureed/ يريد ’ This is a very difficult topic to navigate, but I’ll try from now on to provide the original Arabi word just so it is noted whenever one or the other appears in a verse.
InshaAllah by the end of our study we might have a clearer understanding of the distinction (there certainly IS a distinction, even in the way the two terms were originally used: In-shaa-Allah/إن شاء الله versus In-araada-Allahإن أراد الله/
[2] It is clear in this last verse that whoever wants/شاء/shaa2 to have faith and trust/ يؤمن/yu’min could do so, and whoever wants/شاء/ shaa2 to deny/يكفر /yakfur could do so as well.
[3] فأد: يدلُّ على حُمَّى وشِدّةِ حرارة. من ذلك: فأَدْتُ اللَّحمَ: شويته. وهذا فَئِيدٌ، أي مشويّ. والمِفْأد: السَّفُود. والمُفتأَد: الموضِع يُشوَى فيه.
الراغب الأصفهاني: فأد– الفؤاد كالقلب لكن يقال له فؤاد إذا اعتبر فيه معنى التفؤد، أي: التوقد.
[4] طَغَى:الطَّاءُ وَالْغَيْنُ وَالْحَرْفُ الْمُعْتَلُّ أَصْلٌ صَحِيحٌ مُنْقَاسٌ، وَهُوَ مُجَاوَزَةُ الْحَدِّ فِي الْعِصْيَانِ. يُقَالُ: هُوَ طَاغٍ. وَطَغَى السَّيْلُ، إِذَا جَاءَ بِمَاءٍ كَثِيرٍ. قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: {إِنَّا لَمَّا طَغَى الْمَاءُ} [الحاقة: 11] ، يُرِيدُ – وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ – خُرُوجَهُ عَنِ الْمِقْدَارِ. وَطَغَى الْبَحْرُ: هَاجَتْ أَمْوَاجُهُ. وَطَغَى الدَّمُ: تَبَيَّغَ. قَالَ الْخَلِيلُ: ” الطُّغْيَانُ وَالطُّغْوَانُ لُغَةٌ. وَالْفِعْلُ مِنْهُ طَغَيْتُ وَطَغَوْتُ.
(صغو/ي) يدلُّ على المَيْل، من ذلك قولُهم: صِغْو فلانٍ معك، أي ميلُه. وصَغتِ النجوم: مالت للغُيوب. وأصغى إليه، إِذا مال بسمعِهِ نحوَه. وأَصْغَيت الإِناءَ أَمَلْتُهُ. ومنه قولهم للذين يَميلون مع الرَّجُل من أصحابِهِ وذوي قُرْباه: صاغِيةٌ
[5] قَرَفَ: يَدُلُّ عَلَى مُخَالَطَةِ الشَّيْءِ وَالِالْتِبَاسِ بِهِ وَادِّرَاعِهِ. وَأَصْلُ ذَلِكَ الْقَرْفُ، وَهُوَ كُلُّ قَشْرٍ. وَمِنْهُ قِرْفُ الْخُبْزِ، وَسُمِّىَ قِرْفًا وَقَرْفًا لِأَنَّهُ لِبَاسُ مَا عَلَيْهِ.
[6] خَرَصَ: الْخَرْصُ، وَهُوَ حَزْرُ الشَّيْءِ، يُقَالُ خَرَصْتُ النَّخْلَ، إِذَا حَزَرْتَ ثَمَرَهُ. وَالْخَرَّاصُ: الْكَذَّابُ، وَهُوَ مِنْ هَذَا، لِأَنَّهُ يَقُولُ مَا لَا يَعْلَمُ وَلَا يَحُقُّ.