Br. Dawood you are completely missing 53:3.
QXP 53:3 Nor does he utter the Word out of his desire.
Abdullah Yusuf Ali – 53:3 Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire
Corpus.quran.com: 53:3 An not he speaks from the desire.
This Ayat is clearly referring to revealed words only, since those words can only be the words on which Prophet had no control – which must have been spoken without involvement of his own desire, wishes, emotions etc. All other words or talk, like his explanation about whole incident, upon which you have developed your argument, falls into “words spoken under his own desire”.
Further you are just insisting only on meaning of “Nataq” as human speech and completely ignoring the fact that that “Nataq” is further qualified as “not from the desire”. Therefore, the word “huwa” in 53:4 is referring to “yantiqu = his speech which was completely out of his desire” i.e. revealed words not to his normal speech”.
Br. Dawood: “There has to be a beginning for everything except God. Chap 53 is referring to such a beginning. The exalted prophet was a normal Joe, going about his business as usual. Let us assume, a verse or set of verses were suddenly revealed to him the first time. Immediate question is “what did he make of these verses coming to his head/heart without any context?” What would anyone think in such circumstances? Obviously, a sane person would reject such things coming to one’s mind. In order to fully appreciate the enormity of this encounter, the concept of God, Eman, etc., need be flushed out first before he could go out to deliver the message.”
“Now assume as you suggest, he got these verses, came running to deliver to others. Did he started repeating verses whoever met him? Or he began to inform them that “God is one, he is a messenger of God, he received these verses ….” Would they not ask him, tell us about this encounter, how things happened, etc. etc.? All of this indeed happened and verses 53:2-5 or so are witness to this.”
Due to these paragraphs I mentioned above that you have developed your argument, based upon your assumption or speculation on the whole phenomena of “Wahi” and its impact on Exalted Prophet, instead of, on clear text of Quran.
For the sake of argument, I accept your argument. But then question is why people will object on the explanation of his encounter and start labeling him, for at that time they must have heard of numerous strange and supernatural stories since their society was full of soothsayers, storytellers and fortunetellers. Therefore, it was not his explanation of his encounter, rather the “Word” itself that would have provoked those people, for those words were full of profound wisdom and truth, which were neither convenient nor in conformance to their belief system and practices.
Br. Dawood: “As per my understanding, only two encounters (the first-ever and one at other time) captured in chap 53 are mentioned in which prophet saw the angel Gabriel. It is obvious from other verses that Quran was brought to his heart in stages by angel Gabriel, but it is not mentioned if he saw the angel other times. So I restrict my understanding to only chap 53. If N2I indicates that angle Gabriel visited prophet, how does it negate these verses? It only strengthens the idea that yes, angel Gabriel visited him. How many times, I don’t have to speculate, 23000 or 23 or 10, 20, etc., does not matter in my calculation. There are indication in Quran however that God did reveal/inform him of certain things for his personal purposes, one such example is information given to him by God in 66:3. I don’t give much weight to hadeeth stuff unless it agrees with the Quran.”
I will not venture into phenomena of “Wahi”.
Your example of 66:3 to support your stand that God did reveal other matters besides Quran is based on literal understanding of “nabba-aniya” as “He has informed me….”. Such literal understanding of those Ayats which are not explicit commands, leads to confusion and ambiguity. I will stick to the rendition of Dr. Shabbir:
QXP 66:3 [Family life must be a relation of mutual trust. Now follows an example for the believers] When the Prophet said something to one of his wives in confidence, she divulged it (to another). And God made this known to him (through the other wife). He then informed her of part and let go a part. She asked him, 'Who informed you of this?' He said, 'The Knower, the Aware has informed me.'
Brother Dawood: “Now my two cents in response to your two cents. It is absurd at my part to speculate the reasons God did not provide minute details, yet I will speculate. Questions like this were perhaps raised during the time of prophet as well, to which God responded in 5:101-102.”
If ritual prayer is as essential to Deen of Allah as you claim, than any question on detail of Prayer could not be called as “unnecessary”. Asking about color of cow is unimportant and unnecessary question when command to sacrifice a cow was given, but how to pray, when to pray, what to pray cannot be bracketed under “unnecessary” question if the command is Pray 5 times day. So your reference to 5:101-102 in regard to prayer is irrelevant.
Br. Dawood:”Salat was never an issue until very recently, yet those who think prophet’s actions are not well preserved they may not follow them, yet they have no choice but to do two raka’t to comply with the mandated Salat, if they claim to follow the Quran”.
This argument is based on convenience not on undisputed historical fact. Dr. Shabbir has written about how the institution of 5 Prayers/day was established. There is a “Druz” sect who don’t believe in “5 Prayers/day”. Also, 99% of Muslims think that institution of Friday Prayer is continuing from the day of Exalted Prophet himself and the Surah Jummah is quoted to support this belief. But fact is, many main stream good history book on Banu Uammyah would confirm that Friday Prayer as institution was established during their period. Further, today people find hard to believe that just 90 years before there used to be 4 separate jamats for each prayer in Haram Sharif. Thanks to King Abdul Aziz who abolished this practice made it only 1 Jammat for each prayer.
So any prevailing practice in itself do not justify its validity and authenticity. If prophet’s action are as preserved as you claim, then how come there are more than 105 difference in Namaz; right from timings, to Niyat, to action, to content itself.
Finally IMHO, to justify Namaz (ritual Prayer) under the cover of Quranic Salat is an incorrect and misleading approach which dilute the message and purpose of mighty Quran.