Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Expose Iran

Who Are The Jinn?

Recommended Posts

Assalamo 'alaykom

 

I know a lot about the Jinn so Im not asking for the basics here. The problem is I have read a lot of contradictory statements about the Jinn, for example according to Tarikh Tabari the Jinn are a group of Angels who were in Paradise - but according to many scholars the Jinn are not Angels but are a different race of beings.

 

Where the Qur'an says that all Angels bowed except Iblis, some say this means Iblis was an Angel, others say it means he was a Jinn who counted as one of the Angels because he had reached their rank (in other words good Jinn can become Angels) and then there are also some who say he was not an Angel at all but the reason why the Qur'an says all Angels except Iblis is because he was simply among them (this third explanation is quite popular but in my opinion it doesn't make any sense).

 

Then according to Tafsir ibn Kathir the Jinn are the descendents of Iblis... I see a problem with this because how can the Jinn just be descendents of Iblis when the Qur'an says Iblis was one of the Jinn (implying that there were more). Also this is something that if it were true, the Qur'an would have stated it especially in refrence to the creation of the Jinn and rather than saying that the Jinn were created thus, it would have said Iblis was created thus and the Jinn descended from him. Of course it would make sense for the descendents of Iblis to be Jinn, but to say that all the Jinn are descendents of Iblis in my opinion does not fit in with the Qur'an very well.

 

Is there an authentic Hadith that would explain this issue better? Does anyone have actual proof to support one of the above claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Assalamo 'alaykom

 

I know a lot about the Jinn so Im not asking for the basics here. The problem is I have read a lot of contradictory statements about the Jinn, for example according to Tarikh Tabari the Jinn are a group of Angels who were in Paradise - but according to many scholars the Jinn are not Angels but are a different race of beings.

 

Where the Qur'an says that all Angels bowed except Iblis, some say this means Iblis was an Angel, others say it means he was a Jinn who counted as one of the Angels because he had reached their rank (in other words good Jinn can become Angels) and then there are also some who say he was not an Angel at all but the reason why the Qur'an says all Angels except Iblis is because he was simply among them (this third explanation is quite popular but in my opinion it doesn't make any sense).

 

Then according to Tafsir ibn Kathir the Jinn are the descendents of Iblis... I see a problem with this because how can the Jinn just be descendents of Iblis when the Qur'an says Iblis was one of the Jinn (implying that there were more). Also this is something that if it were true, the Qur'an would have stated it especially in refrence to the creation of the Jinn and rather than saying that the Jinn were created thus, it would have said Iblis was created thus and the Jinn descended from him. Of course it would make sense for the descendents of Iblis to be Jinn, but to say that all the Jinn are descendents of Iblis in my opinion does not fit in with the Qur'an very well.

 

Is there an authentic Hadith that would explain this issue better? Does anyone have actual proof to support one of the above claims?

Wa Salaam,

According to my understanding, Jinn is not an angel. Angels are made of light where as jinn are made from smokeless fire(as described in Surah Rahmaan"055.015 And He created Jinns from fire free of smoke"). Iblis was a jinn, he was one of the most pious jinns..he was raised to the heavens before Allah(SWT) created Adam(pbuh). Jinns exist like us, they can see us, but we cannot see them. they cause much mischief, like the humans are now, so Allah(swt) punished them by sending angels. They will be raised just like us on the day of judgment '055.039 On that Day no question will be asked of man and Jinn as to his sin.'. I don't not have a hadees to quote on this, but i will search for it and post it. Someone on the forum might have a deeper insight in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

In surat al Kahf (the Cave), Allah taala clearly states that Iblis was a jinn.

 

æóÅöÐú ÞõáúäóÇ áöáúãóáóÇÆößóÉö ÇÓúÌõÏõæÇ áöÂÏóãó ÝóÓóÌóÏõæÇ ÅöáøóÇ ÅöÈúáöíÓó ßóÇäó ãöäó ÇáúÌöäøö ÝóÝóÓóÞó Úóäú ÃóãúÑö ÑóÈøöåö ÃóÝóÊóÊøóÎöÐõæäóåõ æóÐõÑøöíøóÊóåõ ÃóæúáöíóÇÁ ãöä Ïõæäöí æóåõãú áóßõãú ÚóÏõæøñ ÈöÆúÓó áöáÙøóÇáöãöíäó ÈóÏóáðÇ {50}

[Yusufali 18:50] Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

I've never seen any scholar claim that Iblis became an Angel because of his rank. Both the second and third definition are the same. Iblis was among the Angels because of his rank. When Allah was addressing the Angels, He included Iblis because of the high status he had as a devoted creature to Allah.

 

Can you quote At-Tabari directly? I've noticed that in his work, he usually states the opinions of other scholars for the sake of recording history, even if he doesn't hold that opinion. I just want to see under what context he used the words.

 

Then according to Tafsir ibn Kathir the Jinn are the descendents of Iblis... I see a problem with this because how can the Jinn just be descendents of Iblis when the Qur'an says Iblis was one of the Jinn (implying that there were more).

 

A couple of things that come to mind.

 

1) Was Iblis the only Jinn at this period of time? If he were living at a time when he had descendants, it would be correct to address him as "one of the Jinn", even if he was the first of them.

2) Is "one of the Jinn" used as a description of a race, or description of a group of people? Ibn Kathir says it refers to his original nature, which is that of a Jinn. Even if he were the only Jinn at the time, it would still be correct to address him as "one of the Jinn". Think of it as "he belonged to the Jinn", and think of Jinn as describing a race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

assalamu alaikum,

 

Redeem I agree about your two points. ONE of the jinn, can very well be translated from Arabic to English as "he was OF the Jinn." Actually, now that I read the Arabic script again, it doesn't even use the word ONE.

 

Kana min aljinn, means he was FROM the jinn.

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
assalamu alaikum,

 

Redeem I agree about your two points. ONE of the jinn, can very well be translated from Arabic to English as "he was OF the Jinn." Actually, now that I read the Arabic script again, it doesn't even use the word ONE.

 

Kana min aljinn, means he was FROM the jinn.

 

Peace!

 

:sl:

 

Good find, sister. I didn't even think to check the Arabic words themselves, I only looked up Ibn Kathir's translation. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but the implication still is that there were more Jinn, or else wouldnt the Qur'an say "he was the father of the Jinn" instead of "he was of the Jinn"??? I really think that if Iblis was the father of all Jinn the Qur'an would have said so, instead of just saying he was of the Jinn.

 

As for Tarikh Tabari it is in volume 1 that says the Jinn are a group of Angels. I dont think this contradicts the verse about the Jinn being created from smokelss fire since this could simply mean that this group of Angels were created differently.

 

Regarding Iblis reaching the rank of Angels, the problem I have with this interpretation is that it brings to mind some questions... were other Angels also Jinn who reached the rank of Angels? But Most importantly the Qur'an also says that Iblis was a Kafir, so how could he have risen in rank so much to become an Angel if he was a Kafir?

And Angel is not a rank it is a race.

 

Is there no authentic Hadith that could explain all this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assalamu alaikum,

Just an FYI:

 

I never heard that he reached the rank of the Angels. What proof do we have to say that? Iblis was in a state of disbelief WHEN he refused to bow down to Adam Alaihee Alsalaam, not before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes but the implication still is that there were more Jinn, or else wouldnt the Qur'an say "he was the father of the Jinn" instead of "he was of the Jinn"??? I really think that if Iblis was the father of all Jinn the Qur'an would have said so, instead of just saying he was of the Jinn.

 

:sl:

 

Think of what you're saying. If the Qur'an had said "He was the father of the Jinn" and not "He was of the Jinn", do you realize that it would change everything? It would place emphasis on his status as the ancestor of the Jinn, and not his status AS a Jinn. The description is intended to make a distinction between the Angels and Iblis. Mentioning that he is the father of the Jinn is irrelevant and has no place in the story (at least not in that specific part).

 

It seems you ignored my comment above. "Jinn" is a race, to put it simply. Being of the Jinn means being of the Jinn race. It does not mean being a part of a group of Jinn in this context, which is how you're choosing to interpret this verse. There's always a reason for everything, and we should try to spot the nuances and intricacies, rather than taking things at face-value.

 

Regarding Iblis reaching the rank of Angels, the problem I have with this interpretation is that it brings to mind some questions... were other Angels also Jinn who reached the rank of Angels?

 

You misunderstood. Iblis did not rise so high that he became an Angel. It simply means that he was pious and devoted to Allah in the same way that the Angels were and when Allah was addressing the Angels, Iblis was given the honor of being included among those who were addressed.

 

But Most importantly the Qur'an also says that Iblis was a Kafir, so how could he have risen in rank so much to become an Angel if he was a Kafir?

And Angel is not a rank it is a race.

 

Sequence of events. Iblis used to worship Allah. He disobeyed Allah. He fell from grace.

 

Iblis never became an Angel. Angels are beings that are made of light, and they do not have free will. Jinn are made of fire and they have free will like we do. Iblis made the conscious effort, as a Jinn, to disobey Allah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:sl:

 

Think of what you're saying. If the Qur'an had said "He was the father of the Jinn" and not "He was of the Jinn", do you realize that it would change everything? It would place emphasis on his status as the ancestor of the Jinn, and not his status AS a Jinn.

 

wa 'alaykomoossalam

 

What about saying he was the the first Jinn?? Wouldnt that say both things?

 

There are just so many verses about the Jinn in the Qur'an that I cant understand why the Qur'an wouldnt say they are descendents of Iblis if indeed that was the case.

 

The Qur'an does say that Iblis has descendents, but does not say that his descendents are the Jinn, and certainly doesn't say that all the Jinn are his descendents.

 

It seems you ignored my comment above. "Jinn" is a race, to put it simply. Being of the Jinn means being of the Jinn race. It does not mean being a part of a group of Jinn in this context, which is how you're choosing to interpret this verse.

 

 

I didnt say part of a group of Jinn, I said that if Tabari's narration is correct it would mean the Jinn are part of a group of Angels - I am not saying that I believe this, Im just saying this is another possiblity. It fits in with the Qur'an referring to Iblis both as an Angel and as a Jinn.

 

Iblis never became an Angel. Angels are beings that are made of light, and they do not have free will. Jinn are made of fire and they have free will like we do. Iblis made the conscious effort, as a Jinn, to disobey Allah.

 

Yes but Im saying maybe the Jinn are a group of Angels that are different - like we say Lions are animals and so are rabbits, lions eat meat but rabbits dont, lions look different, act different but both lions and rabbits are animals.

 

By the way, this is another question I have. Where is the evidence that Angels dont have free will?? I know the Jinn do, but how do we know the Angels dont?

 

 

 

Iblis used to worship Allah. He disobeyed Allah. He fell from grace.

 

And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was one of the disbelievers . ( Surah al-Baqarah 34)

 

The Qur'an says he was one of the disbelievers in the same sense that the Qur'an says he was of the Jinn, in other words the Ayah doesn't say he became a disbeliever, the same way he didn't become a Jinn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iblis was in a state of disbelief WHEN he refused to bow down to Adam Alaihee Alsalaam, not before that.

 

 

And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was of the disbelievers . ( Surah al-Baqarah 34)

 

 

And when We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance but Iblis (did it not). He was of the jinn, so he transgressed the commandment of his Lord. What! would you then take him and his offspring for friends rather than Me, and they are your enemies? Evil is (this) change for the unjust. (Surah al-Kahf 50)

 

 

The Qur'an says he was one of the disbelievers in the same sense that the Qur'an says he was of the Jinn, in other words the Ayah doesn't say he became a disbeliever, the same way he didn't become a Jinn.

Edited by Expose Iran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres Tarikh Tabari:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_books.google(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/books?id=qIDZIep-GIQC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=tabari+iblis+angel+paradise&source=web&ots=BjogeaZLQt&sig=tLNokb-BpifPahKrTQj7hP1F9NA&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_books.google(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/books?id=qIDZIep-G...1&ct=result[/url]

 

It says also that Iblis was a disbeliever BEFORE he disobeyed Allah in regards to Adam.

 

And here is Iblis being from an ANGELIC TRIBE IF JINN according to Ibn Abbas (ra): (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_books.google(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/books?id=qIDZIep-GIQC&pg=PA16&lpg=PA15&ots=BjogeaZLQt&dq=tabari+iblis+angel+paradise&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html&sig=ACfU3U3BpI_WDWebYPvRIyTReU5gzUAFng"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_books.google(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/books?id=qIDZIep-G...RIyTReU5gzUAFng[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for lotz of info about jins. I want to add only one info about them. In this earth we , human can't see them, but they can see us. But in the heaven the fact will be reversed. i.e. we could see them but they won't be able to see us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wa 'alaykomoossalam

 

What about saying he was the the first Jinn?? Wouldnt that say both things?

 

:sl:

 

Why? What is the point in mentioning that he is the first Jinn, when the only point is to distinguish him from the Angels? It would be like saying "Those guys over there are white and that man next to them is the first African American man who traveled to space".

 

When you are describing race, you don't use occupation to describe it. And in the same way, when you are describing race you don't use ancestry to describe it. Saying "Iblis was the first Jinn" as a way of distinguishing him from the Angels is illogical. Being the first or last has no relevance and it would have made the Qur'an seem ridiculous.

 

The Qur'an does say that Iblis has descendents, but does not say that his descendents are the Jinn, and certainly doesn't say that all the Jinn are his descendents.

I didnt say part of a group of Jinn, I said that if Tabari's narration is correct it would mean the Jinn are part of a group of Angels - I am not saying that I believe this, Im just saying this is another possiblity. It fits in with the Qur'an referring to Iblis both as an Angel and as a Jinn.

 

Can you take a few moments to quote At-Tabari directly? The links you gave are to a book called "Prophets of Qur'an", written by someone named Brannon Wheeler. I'd like to see in what context HE wrote his words. The same goes for the quote from Ibn Abbas.

 

Yes but Im saying maybe the Jinn are a group of Angels that are different - like we say Lions are animals and so are rabbits, lions eat meat but rabbits dont, lions look different, act different but both lions and rabbits are animals.

 

Angels are made of light

Jinn are made of fire

Humans are made of clay

 

If anyone believes that Jinn are a group of Angels, then they might as well believe that humans are a group of Angels. Or that Angels are a group of Jinn. Or that Jinn are a group of humans. All of these would be equally wrong.

 

By the way, this is another question I have. Where is the evidence that Angels dont have free will?? I know the Jinn do, but how do we know the Angels dont?

And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was one of the disbelievers . ( Surah al-Baqarah 34)

 

The Qur'an says he was one of the disbelievers in the same sense that the Qur'an says he was of the Jinn, in other words the Ayah doesn't say he became a disbeliever, the same way he didn't become a Jinn.

 

I'll look around for proof of the Angels' nature when I get back from class later.

 

However, you say that the Qur'an says Iblis was a disbeliever "in the same sense" as the Qur'an said he was of the Jinn. Two questions.

 

1) Are you insisting that both verses were written in the same context and with the same intention?

2) What is your point you're trying to make? What do you hope to gain out of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? What is the point in mentioning that he is the first Jinn, when the only point is to distinguish him from the Angels? It would be like saying "Those guys over there are white and that man next to them is the first African American man who traveled to space".

 

When you are describing race, you don't use occupation to describe it. And in the same way, when you are describing race you don't use ancestry to describe it. Saying "Iblis was the first Jinn" as a way of distinguishing him from the Angels is illogical. Being the first or last has no relevance and it would have made the Qur'an seem ridiculous.

 

lol, it wouldnt be like saying first African American in space, it would be like just saying the first African American, and that statement would in fact be important.

 

The Qur'an tells us about the Jinn, and in another part tells us about the descendants of Iblis, but never says that the Jinn are his descendants, and if they were I dont see any reason why it would not be mentioned as such.

 

 

Can you take a few moments to quote At-Tabari directly? The links you gave are to a book called "Prophets of Qur'an", written by someone named Brannon Wheeler. I'd like to see in what context HE wrote his words. The same goes for the quote from Ibn Abbas.

 

 

Yes sorry I thought it was due to the similarity (anyway it quotes from Tabari) I dont have Tarikh Tabari with me right now but as I said it is in Volume 1 of the book. I dont know what you mean by context, he just mentions different narrations about different things, people and events.

 

 

As for the Jinn all being descendents of Iblis, this cant be true at all, I just noticed this after reading this Ayah again:

 

And when We said to the angels; "Prostrate to Adam." So they prostrated except Iblis. He was of the jinn; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord. Will you then take him (Iblis) and his offspring as protectors and helpers rather than Me while they are enemies to you? What an evil is the exchange for the Zalimun (surah al-Kahf 50)

 

According to this Ayah the descendents of Iblis are our enemies, but obviously not all the Jinn are our enemies (some are believers), so I just settled that issue for myself at least.

 

 

 

 

 

Angels are made of light

Jinn are made of fire

Humans are made of clay

 

Light and fire are not very different (fire produces light) but my point is just because they may be created differently doesnt mean they are not both Angels. For example the creation of Jesus (pbuh) was different from the rest of mankind but he was still a human.

 

Also there are plenty of narrations that say Iblis was an Angel, and while these narrations may seem to contradict the Qur'an we also have quite a few narrations that say he was both an Angel and a Jinn, and these as far as I know does not contradict the Qur'an.

 

And this Ayah:

 

And surely, We created you and then gave you shape, then We told the angels, "Prostrate to Adam", and they prostrated, except Iblis (Satan)

(Quran 7:11)

 

Allah says the Angels were told to prostrate, if Iblis was not an Angel then why would he have to prostrate when the Angels were only told to do so?

 

 

 

 

However, you say that the Qur'an says Iblis was a disbeliever "in the same sense" as the Qur'an said he was of the Jinn. Two questions.

 

1) Are you insisting that both verses were written in the same context and with the same intention?

 

Im saying both statements are made in a similar way. So to say that Iblis became a disbeliever right there and then would be like saying he became a Jinn right then - also Tabari's narration actually states that he was a disbeliever before and that Allah wanted to show that he was Kafir to the rest of the Angels.

 

 

2) What is your point you're trying to make? What do you hope to gain out of this?

 

 

I want to see if there is proof for any of these interpretations as I want to know which one is true. I couldnt find an answer in the authentic books and the narrations in the other books contradict eachother.

 

I always find myself learning more (even from myself) when discussing with others.

Edited by Expose Iran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok here directly from Tabari:

 

 

According to al-Qasim- alHusayn- Hajjaj- Ibn Jurayj- Salih, the mawla of al-Taw'amah and Sharik b Abir Namir, either one or both of them- Ibn `Abbas: There was an angelic tribe of jinn, and Iblis belonged to it. He governed all in between the heaven and the earth.

 

According to Musa b. Harun al-Hamdani- `Amr b. Hammad- Asbat- al-Suddi- Abu Malik and Abu Salih- Ibn `Abbas. Also (al-Suddi)- Murrah al-Hamdani- Ibn Mas'ud and some (other) companions of the Prophet: Iblis was ruler over the lower heaven. He belonged to a tribe of angels called jinn. They were called jinn because they were keepers of Paradise (al-jannah). In addition to being ruler, Iblis was a keeper (of Paradise).

 

According to al-Qasim b. al-Hasan- al-Husayn b. Dawud- Hajjaj- Ibn Jurayj- Ibn `Abbas: Iblis was one of the most nobles of angels and belonged to the most honored tribe among them. He was a keeper of Paradise. He had authority to rule over the lower heaven as well as earth.

 

According to `Abdan al-Marwazi- al-Husayn b. al-Faraj- Dahhak b. Muzahim, commenting on God's word: "They prostrated themselves, except Iblis. He was one of the jinn": Ibn `Abbas used to say: Iblis was one of the noblest angels and belonged to their most honored tribe. He was a keeper of Paradise, and his was the rule over the lower heaven as well as the earth.

 

According to Ibn Humayd- Salamah- Abu al-Azhar al-Mubarak b. Mujahid- Sharik b. `Abdallah b. Abi Namir- Salih, the mawla of al-Taw'amah- Ibn `Abbas: There is an angelic tribe called jinn. Iblis belonged to them. He used to rule all in between heaven and earth. Then he became disobedient, and God therefore transformed him into a stoned Satan.

 

According to al-Qasim- al-Husayn- Hajjaj- Ibn Jurayj, commenting on: "And whoever among them says: I am a god besides Him": Whichever angel says: "I am a god besides Him" calls to worship of himself, and only Iblis said that. Thus, this verse was revealed with reference to Iblis

 

Ibn Humayd gave us about the same account again, reporting from Salamah- Ibn Ishaq- Khallad b. `Ata'- Tawus or Abu al-Hajjaj Mujahid- Ibn `Abbas, and others. However, he said: (Iblis) was an angel named Azazil. He was one of the dwellers and cultivators on earth. The dwellers on earth from among the angel used to be called jinn."

 

One of the events that took place during the rule of the enemy of God while he was (still) obedient to God is what was mentioned to us on the authority of Ibn `Abbas in a report told us by Abu Kurayb- `Uthman b. Sa'id- Bishr b. `Umarah- Abu Rawq- al-Dahhak- Ibn `Abbas: Iblis belonged to a tribal group of angels called jinn. Among the angels it was they who were created from the fire of simoom. He continued. His name was al-Harith. He continued. He was one of the keepers of Paradise. He continued. All the angels except this tribal group were created from light. He continued. The jinn mentioned in the Qur'an were created "from a bright flame (marij) of fire"- (marij being) a tongue of fire blazing on its side(s and top). He continued. And He created man from clay. The first to dwell on earth were the jinn. They caused corruption on it and shed blood and killed each other. He continued. God sent Iblis to them with an army of angels. They were that tribal group called jinn. Iblis and those with him caused a bloodbath among them and eventually banished them to the islands in the oceans and the mountainsides. His success went to his head, and he said: I have done something nobody has ever done before. He continued. God was aware of how Iblis felt, but the angels who were with him were not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol, it wouldnt be like saying first African American in space, it would be like just saying the first African American, and that statement would in fact be important.

 

:sl:

 

You're confusing relevance and importance. Saying that someone is the first African American is no more relevant than saying that he is the first African American in space.

 

I'm sure that Ibn Kathir has his reasons for saying that Iblis was the ancestor of the Jinn. I'm going to do research on Monday night and get back to you on it. The same thing with Angels and free will, and At-Tabari.

 

As for the Jinn all being descendents of Iblis, this cant be true at all, I just noticed this after reading this Ayah again:

 

And when We said to the angels; "Prostrate to Adam." So they prostrated except Iblis. He was of the jinn; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord. Will you then take him (Iblis) and his offspring as protectors and helpers rather than Me while they are enemies to you? What an evil is the exchange for the Zalimun (surah al-Kahf 50)

 

According to this Ayah the descendents of Iblis are our enemies, but obviously not all the Jinn are our enemies (some are believers), so I just settled that issue for myself at least.

 

Brother, no offense, but you're reading exclusively. The verse indicates that the enemies of humans are Iblis's offspring. It does not state that the offspring are exclusively bad.

 

Even if Ibn Kathir, a devoted scholar and someone who spent a lifetime studying the Qur'an is wrong whereas you, a simple Muslim are right, this is not the verse that makes your argument.

 

Light and fire are not very different (fire produces light)

 

Firstly, "Nur" is not the light you and I see. Secondly, you are destroying your argument. If light is a part of fire, then you are saying the opposite of what you said earlier. You are saying Angels are a part of Jinn.

 

It's really peculiar that you're insisting that Angels are Jinn. Have you already made up your mind that they are? It's one thing to be seeking information, but a completely different thing if you're simply trying to prove a point.

Edited by Redeem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wa 'alaykomossalam

 

Brother, no offense, but you're reading exclusively. The verse indicates that the enemies of humans are Iblis's offspring. It does not state that the offspring are exclusively bad.

 

Actually I think it is quite clear, the verse is not saying that we must avoid just "some" or "most" of his descendants, it's obvious that the Ayah is saying they are all our enemies, no exceptions are made.

 

Firstly, "Nur" is not the light you and I see. Secondly, you are destroying your argument. If light is a part of fire, then you are saying the opposite of what you said earlier. You are saying Angels are a part of Jinn.

 

It's really peculiar that you're insisting that Angels are Jinn. Have you already made up your mind that they are? It's one thing to be seeking information, but a completely different thing if you're simply trying to prove a point.

 

Depends of what light we are talking about, the light of Allah or some other light. But anyway you ignored the important part of my argument (the part about Jesus) and just went after my short sentence.

 

I have not made my mind, but I do think the Angelic Jinn intepretation is more likely to be true as there seem to be more narrations in support of it and in my opinion it fits in much better with the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wa 'alaykomossalam

Actually I think it is quite clear, the verse is not saying that we must avoid just "some" or "most" of his descendants, it's obvious that the Ayah is saying they are all our enemies, no exceptions are made.

 

:sl:

 

Seems to me like you see things the way you want to. You're certainly doing a lot of reading between the lines.

 

But anyway you ignored the important part of my argument (the part about Jesus) and just went after my short sentence.

 

You want me to address what you consider to be the most important part of your argument? Okay.

 

Your analogy isn't consistent with the scenario. Jesus was human. He might have been different from the rest of us in the sense that he only had a mother, but he was considered human. He was never referred to by another race or description, nor did Allah state that he was created from something different from what humankind was. He shares ancestry with the rest of us. His ancestor is Adam. So no, your analogy doesn't fit your case.

 

It seems as though you've made up your mind as to what you want to believe. I certainly won't try to change your mind. If there's one thing I've learned, it's how futile that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your analogy isn't consistent with the scenario. Jesus was human. He might have been different from the rest of us in the sense that he only had a mother, but he was considered human. He was never referred to by another race or description, nor did Allah state that he was created from something different from what humankind was. He shares ancestry with the rest of us. His ancestor is Adam. So no, your analogy doesn't fit your case.

 

Yes Jesus was a human, but unlike other humans he was also a Prophet and the Messiah and his creation was different from other humans, also the creation of Adam was different from other humans.

 

 

 

 

Seems to me like you see things the way you want to. You're certainly doing a lot of reading between the lines.

 

It seems as though you've made up your mind as to what you want to believe. I certainly won't try to change your mind.

 

 

Seems to me like you see things the way you want to. You're certainly doing a lot of reading between the lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

Okay, brother. I'll reply back if you have any questions that I think I can answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:sl:

 

Okay, brother. I'll reply back if you have any questions that I think I can answer.

 

 

wa 'alaykomossalam

 

Im just asking if you can prove your position, if the evidence is just what you provided then I am not convinced by it.

 

By the way you were going to show evidence that Angels dont have free will.

 

I have looked into this myself and found "evidence" like these:

 

 

 

O you who believe! Ward off from yourselves and your families a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who disobey not, (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do that which they are commanded. (Quran 66:6)

 

To Him belongs whosoever is in the heavens and on earth. And those who are near Him (i.e. the angels) are not too proud to worship Him, nor are they weary (of His worship). They glorify His Praises night and day, (and) they never slacken (to do so). (Quran21:19-20)

 

 

 

However this does not prove that position because the first Ayah does not actually say Angels (Angels is written in the commentary by some translators but it's not in the Ayah), so it could refer to a specific group of Angels.

 

And the second Ayah is referring to the Angels who are appointed over Hell.

 

 

So this certainly doesnt prove that all Angels are obedient (and being obedient doesn't mean they dont have free will).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

And here I was trying to leave as diplomatically as possible.

 

I'm not here to prove anything to you, let's be clear on that. My experiences in the past few years have made me weary of approaching Muslims in such a way, and I've seen enough to know that proof can be subjective. The fact that you're interpreting verses in the manner you chose thus far has reinforced my belief.

 

You are ignoring linguistics. You are filling in what you perceive are gaps and reading between the lines. You are choosing to interpret things only on the basis that they back up your argument, and no amount of "proof" would mean anything. Because you would do the same thing yet again, and we would be arguing back and forth perpetually.

 

Also, in case you had forgotten, I told you that I would do research on Monday night. It is Sunday. I'm going to the Masjid for class tomorrow night, where I will have lots of scholarly writings at my disposal. Sometimes, the internet is not enough.

 

But I was mistaken about your intention. And I'm not going to allow myself to be sucked into one of these discussions again.

 

I'll leave you to your devices, and you leave me to mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×