Can the Quran only be understood one way.

[darkskies]

Why? And what do you really mean by interpretation?

Because as a holy book, it's supposed to have messages for humanity right? If different interpretations are allowed I'm sure that would be disharmonious and not give justice to what was meant to be said.

By different interpretation I mean that the same sentences can be understood in different ways. Especially those with words that have multiple meanings, or poetic nature, or other grammatical ambiguity.

 

[firedragon]

By different interpretation I mean that the same sentences can be understood in different ways. Especially those with words that have multiple meanings, or poetic nature, or other grammatical ambiguity.

Please give an example.

 

[darkskies]

Please give an example.

Quran 51:47
Sahih International: And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
Yusuf Ali: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
Pickthall: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
Muhammad Sarwar: We have made the heavens with Our own hands and We expanded it.
Shakir: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample
Wahiduddin Khan: We built the universe with Our might, giving it its vast expanse

Does it say that Allah is the creator of the expanse or that Allah expands it?

This one stuck out because I've seen both arabic speakers and non-arabic speakers use the dictionaries to get varying results. I'm sorry I cannot reproduce them.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Who were chosen?

The chosen ones.

Usually self appointed, in my experience (this applies to pretty much all organised religions).

 

[firedragon]

Quran 51:47
Sahih International: And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
Yusuf Ali: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
Pickthall: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
Muhammad Sarwar: We have made the heavens with Our own hands and We expanded it.
Shakir: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample
Wahiduddin Khan: We built the universe with Our might, giving it its vast expanse

Does it say that Allah is the creator of the expanse or that Allah expands it?

This is not different interpretations. This is al tafsiru thajreejiu.

Its a little similar to trajectory hermeneutics but more like "through time and advancement you understand verses better". I mean this particular example you gave.

 

[darkskies]

This is not different interpretations. This is al tafsiru thajreejiu.

Its a little similar to trajectory hermeneutics but more like "through time and advancement you understand verses better". I mean this particular example you gave.

Ah, well yes...that can be said of many things as such.
But "understanding better" is just a change in your interpretation isn't it? See my definition up there.

 

[firedragon]

Ah, well yes...that can be said of many things as such.
But "understanding better" is just a change in your interpretation isn't it? See my definition up there.

True. It is definitely a change in interpretation. But this verse is not a good example to your case. I am not saying you are wrong. Definitely different people will interpret the same verse in different ways. But when ever we consider this, it has to be said and understood with specific verses and specific reasons. Otherwise they are just general statements.

In this case, it is not considered different interpretations. Through time and advancement some verses can be understood better. It is not "just a change in your interpretation". This is a very old understanding of interpretation and that's why I gave you the terminology for it.

I hope you understand.

 

[darkskies]

True. It is definitely a change in interpretation. But this verse is not a good example to your case. I am not saying you are wrong. Definitely different people will interpret the same verse in different ways. But when ever we consider this, it has to be said and understood with specific verses and specific reasons. Otherwise they are just general statements.

In this case, it is not considered different interpretations. Through time and advancement some verses can be understood better. It is not "just a change in your interpretation". This is a very old understanding of interpretation and that's why I gave you the terminology for it.

I hope you understand.

Alright.
There is one more thing in this verse, that some people take "heaven" or any related word to mean the universe as we know it right now.
What about that?

Edit: Nevermind, I understand now. It's the same thing in that case.
Thanks a lot. Semantics are basics, smh. I always mess up.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Is it possible to say that the quran can only be understood one way (literarly) or is it due to how a person practice what is written?

When Muhammad was teaching Islam(Quran) he asked his followers to go out to speak the truth and teach others about Islam. And when he died Some was Chosen by Muhammad to keep deliviering the message as Muhammad had done.

So is Islam the Quran, or is Islam the actual message that was given to Muhammad, and was give to others by the people who truly understood the meaning of the teaching also after Muhammad had passed away?

An excellent question. How do we know our understanding of the Quran is the right one?

Like the Bible there are verses that tell us that the interpretation of the Quran and Bible will be revealed.

Daniel was told to go his own way as the Book’s were sealed until the time of the end.

Sura 7:53

On the Day (of Judgment) when its interpretations will be revealed, those who had ignored its guidance will confess, saying, "The Messengers of our Lord had certainly come to us with the Truth.

As the true meaning of the Quran was not yet revealed, then even interpretations saying there would be no Prophet after Muhammad are very questionable. Who said that? That’s not what the Quran says.

Sura 89:22

“And thy Lord shall come and the angels rank on rank”.

I believe and trust fully in God and His Holy Word not any individual, not my own judgement. As Muslims have closed the door on another Prophet appearing after Muhammad, then they deprive themselves of ‘its interpretation’ which was promised.

Mullas are not infallible, I’m not infallible. So the only One that is always right is God and His Prophets. But if I say there are not going to be anymore Prophets then I am left to following error prone individuals for divine guidance.

But for me I don’t have this dilemma because for me, the Promised One has unsealed the meanings and interpretations of both the Bible and Quran. Others go from teacher to teacher, sect to sect trying to reconcile contradicting and opposing views.

The world is in a state of confusion not knowing where to obtain the real truth from. All we can do is mention is that those who hunger sincerely for truth will be guided to it.

Sura 29:69

We shall guide those who strive in Our cause to the paths leading straight to Us. Surely God is with those who do good.

 

[Spirit of Light]

An excellent question. How do we know our understanding of the Quran is the right one?

Like the Bible there are verses that tell us that the interpretation of the Quran and Bible will be revealed.

Daniel was told to go his own way as the Book’s were sealed until the time of the end.

Sura 7:53

On the Day (of Judgment) when its interpretations will be revealed, those who had ignored its guidance will confess, saying, "The Messengers of our Lord had certainly come to us with the Truth.

As the true meaning of the Quran was not yet revealed, then even interpretations saying there would be no Prophet after Muhammad are very questionable. Who said that? That’s not what the Quran says.

Sura 89:22

“And thy Lord shall come and the angels rank on rank”.

I believe and trust fully in God and His Holy Word not any individual, not my own judgement. As Muslims have closed the door on another Prophet appearing after Muhammad, then they deprive themselves of ‘its interpretation’ which was promised.

Mullas are not infallible, I’m not infallible. So the only One that is always right is God and His Prophets. But if I say there are not going to be anymore Prophets then I am left to following error prone individuals for divine guidance.

But for me I don’t have this dilemma because for me, the Promised One has unsealed the meanings and interpretations of both the Bible and Quran. Others go from teacher to teacher, sect to sect trying to reconcile contradicting and opposing views.

The world is in a state of confusion not knowing where to obtain the real truth from. All we can do is mention is that those who hunger sincerely for truth will be guided to it.

Sura 29:69

We shall guide those who strive in Our cause to the paths leading straight to Us. Surely God is with those who do good.

@loverofhumanity Thank you for your reply I find much of your answer to have value in it.
I believe that monstly all muslim would answer that Muhammad was the last Prophet, but who know for sure. In the last week or so i have been looking in to the connection between Sufism and Baha`i especially the connection between Bahai`u`llah and Sufi order and there was a good part of connection and they discusses openly with each others as far as i can understand
This might explain my own understanding of Baha`i path as a good path

 

[Augustus]

Can you give some specific examples?

For the point being made, it doesn't really matter what the specific examples are tbh, as you know, they are generally minor. However, if the 1st order meaning/literal denotation is not agreed exactly upon in a singular form, then why should nth order meanings/exegetical interpretations exist in a single form?

Just like 'orthodox' interpretations of the text, 'orthodox' readings of the literal text took centuries to emerge rather than being apparent from the earliest days.

Some examples though:

• (Q. 7:57) wa-huwa ‿lladhī yursilu ‿r-rīḥa/‿r-riyāḥa nushuran/nushran/ nashran.2 All Readers read nushuran or nushran or nashran (to bring forth clouds) except A, who read bushran (to bring good tidings). Al-Ṭabarī com- mented that although the meaning of the verse was still convincing, he preferred to not adopt it for its deviation from the majority of the other Readers.3
  
  
• – (Q. 6:94) laqad taqaṭṭaʿa baynakum.4 All Readers read taqaṭṭaʿa baynukum except N, K, and A → Ḥafṣ, who read baynakum. The variance is the differ- ence of a case ending but between understanding bayn either as an adverb (bayna; amongst you) or a noun (al-bayn; connection, relationship).5

– (Q. 43:19) ع�ى�د� is a very interesting case of disconnected variants. A, AA, H, and K read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum ʿibādu ‿r-raḥmāni (and they have made the angels, who are themselves servants of the All-merciful ...). On the other hand, IK, N, and IA read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum ʿinda ‿r-raḥmāni (and they have made the angels, who are in the company of/with the All-merciful ...).

S Nasser - The 2nd canonisation of the Quran

 

[Fool]

Is it possible to say that the quran can only be understood one way (literarly) or is it due to how a person practice what is written?

When Muhammad was teaching Islam(Quran) he asked his followers to go out to speak the truth and teach others about Islam. And when he died Some was Chosen by Muhammad to keep deliviering the message as Muhammad had done.

So is Islam the Quran, or is Islam the actual message that was given to Muhammad, and was give to others by the people who truly understood the meaning of the teaching also after Muhammad had passed away?

i seriously doubt the speaker wanted it to be understood in multiple ways.

 

[Spirit of Light]

i seriously doubt the speaker wanted it to be understood in multiple ways.

Muhammad told the quran as he was given it, But for us who follow the teaching, would it not be "normal" to see a bit different understanding from each practitioner ? as human beings we think somewhat different and even when reading the same text, we will have different understanding of what it actually means, if we not take every word 100% literarlly or?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Can The Quran Only Be Understood One Way.

Considering the many different denominations within islam and the widely different schools of thought in the world concerning islam, I think it's safe to say that it can be understood in any number of ways.

I present all the different schools of thought / denominations as evidence of this.

 

[Shakeel]

Muhammad told the quran as he was given it, But for us who follow the teaching, would it not be "normal" to see a bit different understanding from each practitioner ? as human beings we think somewhat different and even when reading the same text, we will have different understanding of what it actually means, if we not take every word 100% literarlly or?

Who told you not to take them literally?

 

[Shakeel]

Because as a holy book, it's supposed to have messages for humanity right? If different interpretations are allowed I'm sure that would be disharmonious and not give justice to what was meant to be said.

By different interpretation I mean that the same sentences can be understood in different ways. Especially those with words that have multiple meanings, or poetic nature, or other grammatical ambiguity.

No, because the different meanings do not contradict each other. They cannot contradict each other.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Who told you not to take them literally?

Nobody. it was a question about if those who follow after Muhammad would when reading the teaching not gain their own understanding of the text and this understanding change according to the more wisdom the person gain through cultivating the teaching.

When i ask a question it does not mean I personally hold one of the answers, or that i am only seeing the answer can be given one way. I ask questions in RF to gain understanding of what others think. I do not do it to disprove them or approve what they say. Discussion can lead to new understanding.

 

[Shakeel]

Nobody. it was a question about if those who follow after Muhammad would when reading the teaching not gain their own understanding of the text and this understanding change according to the more wisdom the person gain through cultivating the teaching.

When i ask a question it does not mean I personally hold one of the answers, or that i am only seeing the answer can be given one way. I ask questions in RF to gain understanding of what others think. I do not do it to disprove them or approve what they say. Discussion can lead to new understanding.

You have made it very clear you don't interpret the Qur'an literally and also that you don't interpret it by yourself, but your teacher "guides" you. I.e. tells you what it says and makes you think it was your idea.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You have made it very clear you don't interpret the Qur'an literally and also that you don't interpret it by yourself, but your teacher "guides" you. I.e. tells you what it says and makes you think it was your idea.

I have discussions with my teacher about my understanding of all the sufi teachings yes. But the question in RF is purly made by me, i do not have my teacher next to me when i write in RF.

Its ok if you read every word and interpret them 100% as they are written in the quran, i do not say you do wrong. many do it. But the question is, is that the only way someone can or should understand the Quran. or is it hidden teaching behind the words.

so feel free to answer the question in this post or in the OP

 

[firedragon]

For the point being made, it doesn't really matter what the specific examples are tbh, as you know, they are generally minor. However, if the 1st order meaning/literal denotation is not agreed exactly upon in a singular form, then why should nth order meanings/exegetical interpretations exist in a single form?

Just like 'orthodox' interpretations of the text, 'orthodox' readings of the literal text took centuries to emerge rather than being apparent from the earliest days.

Some examples though:

• (Q. 7:57) wa-huwa ‿lladhī yursilu ‿r-rīḥa/‿r-riyāḥa nushuran/nushran/ nashran.2 All Readers read nushuran or nushran or nashran (to bring forth clouds) except A, who read bushran (to bring good tidings). Al-Ṭabarī com- mented that although the meaning of the verse was still convincing, he preferred to not adopt it for its deviation from the majority of the other Readers.3
  
  
• – (Q. 6:94) laqad taqaṭṭaʿa baynakum.4 All Readers read taqaṭṭaʿa baynukum except N, K, and A → Ḥafṣ, who read baynakum. The variance is the differ- ence of a case ending but between understanding bayn either as an adverb (bayna; amongst you) or a noun (al-bayn; connection, relationship).5

– (Q. 43:19) ع�ى�د� is a very interesting case of disconnected variants. A, AA, H, and K read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum ʿibādu ‿r-raḥmāni (and they have made the angels, who are themselves servants of the All-merciful ...). On the other hand, IK, N, and IA read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum ʿinda ‿r-raḥmāni (and they have made the angels, who are in the company of/with the All-merciful ...).

S Nasser - The 2nd canonisation of the Quran

I asked for examples to understand what you mean by saying different ways of reading the Qur'an. Since people here make a lot of general comments it is imperative to get an example, as you would note throughout this very thread. Your example here is speaking about essentials of Qiraat. Thats exactly what you have shown above. But you have taken the transmission of it from someone who is criticising the chains of narration, not the different "Ways of reading the Quran" based on ahadith. This is hadith. But, thanks for giving your example so that I understand what you mean now. You are analysing hadith. Also, especially considering your second example, it is neglecting other narrations while considering Ibn Shihab who was thoroughly condemned to be a captain of thathlees by Imam Malik Ibn Anas, while it seems like the 3rd example seems to be taking Maliks Golden Chain. I would like to know who's work this is nevertheless.

What do you mean with "orthodox reading of the Quran emerged centuries later"? Is it with the emergence of the amdhwajibs and nokth etc? You are right that there are different ways of reading the Quran. But how do you say that the orthodox reading emerged centuries later? Based on hadith like above?