Here is a question, at night do we see the stars itself or we see positions of these stars occupied some time ago, since it takes light alot of time to arrive from where the star was , such that until it's light arrives to us it would have changed it's position or gone out of existence?

Yes. Because light takes so much time to travel, you are seeing an image of something that happened or was there in the past and not in real time.

How long ago it was all depends on how far they are.

Amazing isn't it? :)

Yes it's amazing, is it scientifically proven?

Yup,

and the constellations, they only appear the way we recognize them from our solar system. Go somewhere else in the cosmos and you wouldn't see them.

Yes it's amazing, is it scientifically proven?
Most probably. But if you use the law of light travel, it becomes pretty obvious.

Indeed, and you won't believe it if I told you that this is stated in the holy Quran, amazing.

Indeed, and you won't believe it if I told you that this is stated in the holy Quran, amazing.

As long as it is stated clearly and not metaphorically, and was documented prior to others developing/suggesting the idea, I'd love for you to show me.

Thanks.

056.075
YUSUFALI: Furthermore I call to witness the setting of the Stars,-
PICKTHAL: Nay, I swear by the places of the stars -
SHAKIR: But nay! I swear by the falling of stars;

056.076
YUSUFALI: And that is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew,-
PICKTHAL: And lo! that verily is a tremendous oath, if ye but knew -
SHAKIR: And most surely it is a very great oath if you only knew;

In verse 56:75 the arabic word used is 'mawaqi' which means in arabic positions or places. Allah swears by the positions of the stars and not the stars itself in this verse.

????

So it's all in the interpretation?

????

So it's all in the interpretation?

What do you mean, I have posted the verse above?

In verse 56:75 the arabic word used is 'mawaqi' which means in arabic positions or places. Allah swears by the positions of the stars and not the stars itself in this verse.

I see Stars setting - which they don't do.

I see Stars falling - which they don't do.

I see positions of the stars - those are just as seen from Earth.


So, in summary, there is nothing exciting about those Quran verses other than to suggest the author had a 7th century understanding of the heavens.

What do you mean, I have posted the verse above?
when I posted that, you posted only the verses, not the explanation of them. And yes. It is all in the interpretation, because the fact that stars move does not prove the light travel law, and how WE see the stars some time later because of light travel.


It was an interesting thread while it lasted.

I see Stars setting - which they don't do.

I see Stars falling - which they don't do.

I see positions of the stars - those are just as seen from Earth.


So, in summary, there is nothing exciting about those Quran verses other than to suggest the author had a 7th century understanding of the heavens.

Don't concentrate on the translation, the actual word in arabic is positions. So that means we see the positions of the stars. How hard it's to understand that?

Don't concentrate on the translation, the actual word in arabic is positions. So that means we see the positions of the stars. How hard it's to understand that?


Mr. IceTea,

Mariners/seafarers, fishermen, Eskimos, and the many island peoples of the Pacific have been navigating using the positions of the stars for many thousands of years.

That's way before the Quran was written.

How hard is it to understand that?

planet there's one thing you have to understand, is that when God swears by something in the Holy Quraan... For most of people that time, the positions of the stars seemed something normal! did they know how far they are from earth ? I don't think so! did they know that these are actually similar to the sun but in other systems ? nope i dont think so.. So God in that verse swears by the positions of the stars, by how far the stars are from earth, and the following verse proves so too, he says "and it is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew" why did he say the 2nd verse? because people back then didn't know anything about the positions of the stars, as in the far distance between the stars and earth!

indeed it is a great thing for those who are willing to understand

Actually BrAiKi it is well documented that the Mayan civilization knew the answers to your questions.

really?! can you provide a link please ? it will be cool to read about it :D

but I think you got my point which is that it's too much knowledge for an arab back in that time

planet there's one thing you have to understand, is that when God swears by something in the Holy Quraan... For most of people that time, the positions of the stars seemed something normal! did they know how far they are from earth ? I don't think so! did they know that these are actually similar to the sun but in other systems ? nope i dont think so.. So God in that verse swears by the positions of the stars, by how far the stars are from earth, and the following verse proves so too, he says "and it is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew" why did he say the 2nd verse? because people back then didn't know anything about the positions of the stars, as in the far distance between the stars and earth!

indeed it is a great thing for those who are willing to understand
but braiki, with all due respect, it doesn't point to the distance between the stars and the earth, or the speed of light - the topic of the thread.

Also, the Egyptians where astronomers unlike anything during their time. They built the pyramids according to the stars.

I'm not trying to debunk the verse, or the book. I'm debunking what Ice tea thinks it proves.

thats how it seems to me:
"Furthermore I call to witness the setting of the Stars
And that is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew"

the word is mawaqii`, means location, or position, if you're talking that something's location is a big thing but most of people (in that time) don't know it, what I explained is what anyone would conclude, unless you see it in another way? share with me if not here, by pm, its always good to learn

planet there's one thing you have to understand, is that when God swears by something in the Holy Quraan... For most of people that time, the positions of the stars seemed something normal! did they know how far they are from earth ? I don't think so! did they know that these are actually similar to the sun but in other systems ? nope i dont think so.. So God in that verse swears by the positions of the stars, by how far the stars are from earth, and the following verse proves so too, he says "and it is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew" why did he say the 2nd verse? because people back then didn't know anything about the positions of the stars, as in the far distance between the stars and earth!

You are not making your point.

There's nothing about distance in the second verse - more an exclamation of what a big deal it is to be swearing by the stars. Show me a declared distance of a star in the Quran that matches the currently accepted distance ! Just saying stars are far away isn't any kind of proof.

I swear by Betelgeuse and Sirius that the Greeks knew that the Sun and Moon were far away, and since one can easily observe the Moon covering the stars at night, they must have concluded that the stars were even further away.

http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses//astro201/aristarchus.htm

So, try again.

yeah its only a big deal because the locations of the stars is something great! lol I don't know how to make it more simple..
you can see that way if you wish to, I am satisfied with the way I see, I read the verse in Arabic & understand its meaning - Thank God Almighty the One n Only God :D

yeah its only a big deal because the locations of the stars is something great!


Is a specific location for any star given ?

If not, it is a general statement that was common knowledge by people before the Quran was written.

Navigation by the stars works in desert and ocean - aided in the northern hemisphere by the Nothern Star. It shouldn't be too surprising that Arabs figured out how to navigate a long, long time ago by using the positions of the stars.

Quran tells us nothing about THIS world that wasn't already known. It may be correct about the next world, but ... I don't see how.

yeah its only a big deal because the locations of the stars is something great! lol I don't know how to make it more simple..
you can see that way if you wish to, I am satisfied with the way I see, I read the verse in Arabic & understand its meaning - Thank God Almighty the One n Only God :D
But what do you mean with the location of the stars? (the position of a celestial body is different, depending on where you are looking at it from.)

How does this have anything to do with post #1?

And if the Quran was for then AND now, (and forever), how does the second verse apply? We have realised many things in 1400 years, and God knows how many more we will be discovering in the near future.

Doesn't the second verse become obsolete, once people understand the non-understandable?

I also read somewhere that some of the stars we see are actually dead and no longer exist but we can still see their light because it takes so much time to travel. I find that really amazing.

I also read somewhere that some of the stars we see are actually dead and no longer exist but we can still see their light because it takes so much time to travel. I find that really amazing.

Agreed.

The nearest star other than the Sun is Proxima Centauri. If it changed dramatically today - went supernova, it would be over 4 years before we knew about it.

Mr. IceTea,

Mariners/seafarers, fishermen, Eskimos, and the many island peoples of the Pacific have been navigating using the positions of the stars for many thousands of years.

That's way before the Quran was written.

How hard is it to understand that?

At that time they wouldn't know that they are using or seeing a light of a position of a star but a star itself.

BTW, this fact known to God before even the creation of the whole universe.

Quran tells us nothing about THIS world that wasn't already known. It may be correct about the next world, but ... I don't see how.


The holy Quran is not a book of science, God mentioned in it some facts and signs and ask humans to look around them and discover the universe.

Doesn't the second verse become obsolete, once people understand the non-understandable?

No it doesn't because there are facts in the universe that will not change, the sun rises from the east, the rotation of the moon and earth, etc.

The stars created for three reasons:

1. To decorate the earth heaven (even this is amazing below verse not saying heavens but the nearest heaven, because there are seven heavens).
2. To guide people through the darkness of the land and the sea.
3. To shoot the devils (shya6een).


And indeed We have adorned the nearest heaven with lamps, and We have made such lamps (as) missiles to drive away the Shayâtin (devils), and have prepared for them the torment of the blazing Fire.

It is He Who has set the stars for you, so that you may guide your course with their help through the darkness of the land and the sea. We have (indeed) explained in detail Our Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, Revelations, etc.) for people who know.

again planet I'll quote to you the same verse:
"Furthermore I call to witness the setting of the Stars
And that is indeed a mighty adjuration if ye but knew".
The second part obviously says that the first part is talking about something the Arabs, if not the whole world, didn't know..

NB: didn't greek think that earth is flat ? :XD:

*Moved from General Discussion Sabla*

NB: didn't greek think that earth is flat ?

No, it was pretty much widely accepted in Classical Greece that the Earth was circular/spherical.

At that time they wouldn't know that they are using or seeing a light of a position of a star but a star itself.

BTW, this fact known to God before even the creation of the whole universe.
How do you know that the stars that they saw for navigational purposes are not there still?

And we do actually SEE the stars. The image we see are of the stars.

If I showed you a photo of yourself taken yesterday, it's still you in the picture, no?

The image is not in present time because it takes so long to reach our eyes, but it is none the less an image of a star (or rather the light that bounces off it), irrelevant whether or not the star still exists today or not.

My opinion is you are reading too much into a verse.

I could tell you "I am thirsty - you have no idea how huge the statement I just made is."

Then you can think a little and if you try hard enough, you could probably come up with tens of explanations as to what I meant by "I am thirsty" ... probably anything but the fact that I desire a drink of water.

This is how different islamic schools of thought break up verses and derive different meanings from them, imo.

I think, Braiki and Ice Tea, that I see what you are saying. The truth is that there is something that seems a bit out of the ordinary about the speech in that sentence that highlights something by an oath on something mysterious that didn't seem to have such significance back then but has a certain scientific significance now.

This is a deep reading of the text which is almost mystical and I respect it. But it doesn't strike an outsider as significant in the same way as it does a believer. It's an arguable point and it builds on the sensibility of faith.

I am a believer in Belief, so I feel I can understand where you are coming from in the way you read these texts and I think it's legitimate given the words. But I don't think it has the power of simple obvious prophecy like it would if it said, "If you only knew that they stars that you see are not where you see them anymore!" That would seem much more unarguable from a non-believer's point of view.

For a believer, even Muslims, I think the secret is having an open heart and being guided by the power of the text. Things are clear if you are receptive, a believer would say. And with justice.

But for a non-believer, unfortunately, it doesn't feel quite that way.

Next you will be telling us that meteors and asteroids and shooting stars are actually missiles that Allah shoots throws at naughty jinns who are eavesdropping on our conversations !

How do you know that the stars that they saw for navigational purposes are not there still?

And we do actually SEE the stars. The image we see are of the stars.

If I showed you a photo of yourself taken yesterday, it's still you in the picture, no?

The image is not in present time because it takes so long to reach our eyes, but it is none the less an image of a star (or rather the light that bounces off it), irrelevant whether or not the star still exists today or not.

My opinion is you are reading too much into a verse.

I could tell you "I am thirsty - you have no idea how huge the statement I just made is."

Then you can think a little and if you try hard enough, you could probably come up with tens of explanations as to what I meant by "I am thirsty" ... probably anything but the fact that I desire a drink of water.

This is how different islamic schools of thought break up verses and derive different meanings from them, imo.


I THINK, Fengy--though I am not sure--that this interpretation is based on a reading by Dr. Naik.

If you don't know who Dr. Naik is--or Ahmad Deedat--you are missing seminal people and events in popular Islam and in the relation of popular Islam to Western culture and to Christianity in the modern West.

Don't worry: 99.999% of Westerners have never heard of these guys. But they have made a huge difference in the Muslim mentality and missionary endeavor over the last two or three decades.

wudjab, I don't see how are the clips that you shared related to the topic itself

I had to remove them

That was not at all a surprise.

Now you can also edit out the comments referring to Dr. Naik from Jeff's post above.

Thanks.

Well, I don't mind if Hitman removes my comments.

Let me explain why I put them there.

The original post in this thread is about a claim that the Quran contains a passage which miraculously refers to a modern scientific discovery that could not have been known at the time the Quran was put down on paper.

This is not a single claim about the Quran. There are many claims of miraculous references to science in the Quran which one hears nowadays and I think that they go back to Dr. Naik, who has been a tremedously effective spokesman for this approach.

So, to evaluate the first post in the thread and the subsequent discussion, I think it's helpful for those who are not intimately familiar with today's Islamic religious culture to become familiar with Dr. Naik, whose achievement is more than notable. I'm not saying anything for or against him here, just that those who want to know more about this scientific reading of the Quran should go to him.

I don't know what Wudjab posted, but if a mod feels that my bringing up Dr. Naik is not relevant to the discussion, then I'm happy to have them remove my comments.

I THINK, Fengy--though I am not sure--that this interpretation is based on a reading by Dr. Naik.

If you don't know who Dr. Naik is--or Ahmad Deedat--you are missing seminal people and events in popular Islam and in the relation of popular Islam to Western culture and to Christianity in the modern West.

Don't worry: 99.999% of Westerners have never heard of these guys. But they have made a huge difference in the Muslim mentality and missionary endeavor over the last two or three decades.
that's the whole problem.

There is one book and a thousand people interpreting it and reading "between the lines". There is no single authority which looks over who is saying what.

Have you forgotten the halal saga? Just one phrase and people in here weren't agreeing on what it REALLY means. Even on searching, different people derive different interpretations of it.

So, can you see why I am always sceptic? It's like the 'treasure' at the end of a rainbow. It would be lovely to believe it was real, but some just don't make any sense of it.

I THINK, Fengy--though I am not sure--that this interpretation is based on a reading by Dr. Naik.

If you don't know who Dr. Naik is--or Ahmad Deedat--you are missing seminal people and events in popular Islam and in the relation of popular Islam to Western culture and to Christianity in the modern West.

Don't worry: 99.999% of Westerners have never heard of these guys. But they have made a huge difference in the Muslim mentality and missionary endeavor over the last two or three decades.
that's the whole problem.

There is one book and a thousand people interpreting it and reading "between the lines". There is no single authority which looks over who is saying what.

Have you forgotten the halal saga? Just one phrase and people in here weren't agreeing on what it REALLY means. Even on searching, different people derive different interpretations of it.

So, can you see why I am always sceptic? It's like the 'treasure' at the end of a rainbow. It would be lovely to believe it was real, but some just don't make any sense of it.

btw, I know who Dr. Naik, of "Every muslim should be a terrorist" fame, is.. ;)

Sure, I see what you are talking about and it's understandable. I am a person who naturally has a very skeptical mind. And I am certainly skeptical of Dr. Naik!

But in the end, I think total skepticism is less reasonable even than naive belief. Despite all the difficulties with superstition and lack of clarity and disagreement over things, I think believers see the truth about life much more clearly than others.

So, in the end, I'm on the side of believers and sacred texts and miracles and against the skeptics and empiricists and materialists. I'd rather have Muslims being a bit naive about the Quran text than to lose all faith in God and become systematic doubters who devote their ENTIRE lives to "having fun" and think of human beings a clouds of atoms and "bomb delivery mechanisms", as one materialist Sabla member recently put it.

But in the end, I think total skepticism is less reasonable even than naive belief. Despite all the difficulties with superstition and lack of clarity and disagreement over things, I think believers see the truth about life much more clearly than others..

Right, so maybe cutting the still beating hearts out of virgins DOES help bring in the rain clouds. Your position is that you respect the person who does that more than the one who isn't convinced that demons cause disease and suspects unsanitary habits.



So, in the end, I'm on the side of believers and sacred texts and miracles and ...

... mermaids, leprechauns, cyclops, minotaur, lilliputians, Santa's elves, and fairy grandmothers.



[those who]think of human beings a clouds of atoms ..., as one materialist Sabla member recently put it.

Some of those clouds appear to be a bit more dense than others.

that's the whole problem.

There is one book and a thousand people interpreting it and reading "between the lines". There is no single authority which looks over who is saying what.



Ask any 10 years old arabic child and he will tell you the meaning of the arabic word in that verse means positions or places. End of story!

Ask any 10 years old arabic child and he will tell you the meaning of the arabic word in that verse means positions or places. End of story!

I don't think Fengy is denying that the word is positions or places. I think, and Fengy correct me if I am wrong, that she is saying that there is too much being read into the word positions. And I tend to agree.

For me stars do not have a position per say (except for their orbital positions), as they are constantly on the move at extremely high speeds but so are we, so they appear to be static in relation to the Earth. Kind of like the minute hand of a good clock, when we watch it we don't see the slight and constant increments it makes, look away for 2 minutes and we then can see that it has moved. With stars we have to look away for centuries to see that they have moved.

Now if the oath said by the movement of the stars I would have been flabbergasted, because back in antiquity the stars were considered to be in fixed positions.

As for how we see stars, we are seeing them as they appeared in the past. We see the sun 9 minutes in the past.

Ask any 10 years old arabic child and he will tell you the meaning of the arabic word in that verse means positions or places. End of story!

Now are you sure it's as simple as that?

Let's look at the three translations that you yourself, Ice Tea, gave us:

YUSUFALI: Furthermore I call to witness the setting of the Stars,-
PICKTHAL: Nay, I swear by the places of the stars -
SHAKIR: But nay! I swear by the falling of stars;

Now, you bolded the words originally, not me, Ice Tea. And you can see that of three translators, only one used the word 'places', which is similar to 'positions.' The others use 'falling' and 'setting'.

Why, if the translation is so simple?

Here's my request. Does anyone have a dictionary of classical Arabic? (One that is more than ten years old would be better...) Can you type out (and translate if it's in Modern Arabic instead of English) what the complete entry is for this word?

OK, let's take a look at a Muslim commentary on this verse:

NAY, I call to witness the coming-down in parts [of this Quran] (25)

25 - Or: �the setting [or �orbiting�] of the stars�. The term mawqi (of which mawaqie is the plural) denotes the �time [or �place� or �manner�] at which something comes down�. Although many of the commentators think that the phrase mawaqi an-nujum relates to the break-up of the stars at the Last Hour, Ibn Abbas, lkrimah and As-Suddi were definitely of the opinion, strongly supported by the subsequent verses, that this phrase refers to the step-by-step revelation - or �coming-down in parts (nujum )� - of the Quran (cf. Tabari and lbn Kathir; see also note on 53: 1). By �calling to witness� the gradual manner of its revelation, the Quran points implicitly to the astounding fact that it has remained free of all inconsistencies and inner contradictions (cf. 4: 82 and the corresponding note) despite all the dramatic changes in the Prophet�s life during the twenty-three years of the �unfolding� of the divine writ: and this explains, too, the subsequent parenthetic clause (verse 76).

http://www.kuran.gen.tr/?kid=33&sid=53&x=s_main&y=s_middle

Now, as you can see, this commentator, Muhammad Esed, says that the word 'mawaqie' (the plural of 'mawqi') does not mean 'positions', but rather, 'the time or place or manner at which something comes down.' That explains why two of the translations which you yourself provided, Ice Tea, don't have 'places', but rather 'falling' and 'setting.'

And, interestingly, the ancient commentators think that the reason that this oath is considered 'so great, if you only knew', as the next verse says, is that it relates to the breaking up of the stars at the last days when God judges the world. This has nothing to do with modern science.

In fact, in this commentary, the scholar favors a translation of 'nujum' that doesn't even have it as 'stars' but rather as 'parts' and believes it's not talking about stars at all, but rather about the fact that the Quran was revealed in parts, not all at once. And he cites three scholars in his support!

So, Dr. Naik might be right about this verse, but I think it's not as simple as you are saying.

Another question, Ice Tea.

Isn't it true that, as they say, "the gates of ijtihad are closed"? Isn't it true that there can't be new interpretations of the Quran, but that the consensus of the ancient scholars must be followed in all things?

I am not a Muslim, but that is what I have heard.

Now, if that's true, you would have to find this interpretation about the "positions of the stars" in the ancient scholars, wouldn't you, or else it's not valid?

Jeff & planEt, your posts discussing suicide bombings have been moved to the following thread: Suicide Bombing (http://www.englishsabla.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45141)

Jeff & planEt, your posts discussing suicide bombings have been moved to the following thread: Suicide Bombing (http://www.englishsabla.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45141)

Ah, I was wondering what the "Edited by Hitman" stuff was about.

Ask any 10 years old arabic child and he will tell you the meaning of the arabic word in that verse means positions or places. End of story!

Do you also consult these children in your understanding of astronomy ?


The Position of the stars AS SEEN FROM EARTH - hardly a shocking concept.

Try reading 'A Brief History of Time' by Stephen Hawking...
It's really a lovely book, simplifying the ideas of astrophysics for the layman!