Dear brother, I will take your post out of order to highlight something. First, your last observation and then to other ones.
You wrote: “These are just few thoughts I got after reading your reply. I respect your understanding but I cannot take it for granted as per 17:36. We all must use our God-gifted faculties of thinking and reflecting to verify all information before accepting it. I try my best to stay with Al-Quran without assuming anything.”
Adherence and deference to God-given faculties is an awesome idea, many of us profess but sadly don’t follow through. I am fully with you on this. I am not suggesting that you assume anything either, rather I am suggesting that before you discard or accept any understanding, old or new, you must view it from multiple angles, comparing, contrasting, etc. In doing so, we are often confronted with our inbuilt biases arrived at not only via our culture and upbringing but also through our education and other adult experiences, good or bad. One such example is our revulsion to all and/or something old, particularly related to some religious practices and understanding handed down to us. In our knee-jerk reactions, we don’t take time if such aspects are culturally driven or Quran-mandated or simply mixture of both. This needs careful attention to details and is time consuming. I just wish for myself as well as anyone else to be aware of such tendencies and biases within themselves.
Quran was not revealed and delivered in a vacuum, rather it came to a people with well-developed language with all its glory and subtleties. Words, phrases, and terminologies of Quran were well understood by its first recipients. Same is well recorded and preserved in so called classic lexicons. Each and every aspect of its revelation that need be practiced was practiced by a man, world may not see like of him again. Thus, before we redefine Quranic commands, words, phrases, and terminologies, we ought to be careful, very careful, else, we are falling in Satan’s trap.
You wrote: “ What I have humbly learned so far about Arabic is that it is a very structured and systematic language. The words are made from root letters. The roots have specific meanings and any word derived from a root reflects the original meanings of that root. So the point of consideration is that what are the root meanings of the root ص ل و”
In general I am with you on this. I may however differ in certain aspects. A word, a phrase from these root letters once coined, accepted and gains currency, people would know it as a separate word to represent what it was coined to represent. No one, except the linguists, cares any longer about the root letters. An example is the word “Lamaha = flesh” I wrote about earlier in response to Br. Jawaid’s comments. Ask any Arab as to what it means, they will tell you exactly what it means. Same is true for “Salat = prayers”. No, you cannot redefine it the way you want it, rather it is the way people understood it back then and now. It is a fact, languages also undergo slow evolution, thus, some subtle changes may occur over time. These changes can easily be detected via classic lexicons, historical writings, etc. Salat for example is well-defined within the pages of the Quran, well understood by the people then and now, completely agrees with lexicons, tasreef, context, etc. All other definitions I have seen so far fail in most if not all aspects.
You wrote: “With due apology 62:9 does not say (i) above. Why a fixed day? Why a day of week? Why not a day in a month or a year and so on ...and does not say (ii) above. Why loud voice? and does not say (iii) above if you meant specific words of azan.”
No apologies are needed. It is not good enough to say “This does not say” or things along such lines, rather one has to do a bit more to elaborate as to why it does not say so or does say so? Your questions are answered within the verse if you look carefully. I am re-posting the verse to comprehend it.
[62:9]: “O ye who believe! When the call is proclaimed/made for Salat/prayer on the day of gathering, hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah, and leave off business . That is best for you if ye but knew!”
1. In the above, when this verse was revealed, people knew exactly what is the day of assembly/gathering. It was not any day rather a fixed day, well-known to the people. Like, if we were to assemble/gather in some regular way at some place on say every Monday, only then the term “day of gathering” can be used and understood without ambiguity by anyone. However, if there are no set days or more than one days for the gathering, then, “day of gathering” is ambiguous and need be qualified.
2. The word “Aljumu’ate” above is defined by Lane p. 457 as: a state of union, congruity, congregation; companionship; fellowship; friendship; and amity, etc. From here, the phrase “Yaum Aljuma’te” or by usage “Aljuma’”, A well known day, the day of the congregation, i.e. Friday, formerly called the day of Al-Aruba called “yaum ul Juma’” because of the congregating of the people thereon… because Quraish used to gather themselves together …. Which was not called “al-Juma’ save since the coming of Al-Islam.” Thus, it was a well-known day for Quraish, and the people at large during that time. Hence, Quran referred to this well-known day of gathering, and then added something to it, i.e. do salat during such gathering.
Regarding in loud voice and wordings: “Nida=Call=proclamation, etc.” by very definition has to be loud else it will not reach the people. The purpose is to let the people in the area/city know that the time of congregational salat has come. Lane p.3030, “the word ‘Nidaan” signifies simply The raising the voice.” When you call people, you may say, hey, hello, whatever, these are words you are call them with. Thus, the loud/raised voice and the specific words that people will understand that this call is for Salat/prayers. This call now known as “Adhan.”
You wrote: “There is no yaum il jumma (a day of the week) but yaum il jumuaati which means day of gathering (Could be any day of gathering). The quote from Lughat ul Quran is not complete. It says further that it clarifies the purpose of gathering i.e. to gather for consultation supported by 42:38 So yaum il jumua before Quran was known as day of gathering for consultation as per Lughat ul Quran.”
I have already provided you above my understanding about a specific day of gathering and not any day of gathering. The quote from Lughat was not complete because it does not add anything to the discussion at this stage. It was only intended to convey how this day has come to be known as “al-Juma”.
Lane p. 457 states that “Ibn Lu-ei was the first who collected a congregation on the day of Al-aruba and he was the first to name it Al-Jumma’; for Quraish used to congregate to him on this day, and he used to preach to them, and to put them in mind of the mission of apostle of God, informing them he should be of his descendants and bidding them to follow him and believe in him. ….” And so on.
In Lughat it says: “Before Islam, Quraish used to gather in Dar-unnadwa (Qaumi Darul-Mushawarat) once a week on the day of Al-Aruba. Kab bin Lui named it Yaum ul Jumma…. From here the purpose of Juma’ is obvious, i.e. to get together for consultation as per 42:38…. In Salat to bow and prostrate in front of God is the physical manifestation of the fact that we have gathered together to obey the commands of God and that we gathered for this consultation…”
Quran is very clear, no ambiguities whatsoever provided we let Quran speak. In 62:9, God is stating this, “Nudiya Lisalati = call for prayers”, and not “Nudiya Shura beynahum = Call for consultation among them”. Further, 42:38 is appearing in a sequence of verses containing a number of commands or attributes of/for those who are believers, including four commands in 42:38 itself, namely, Those who (i) Hearken/respond to their Lord, (ii) And Stand for or establish prayers, (iii) And conduct their affairs by mutual consultation, and (iv) And spend out of what God gave them.” These all are distinct commands. In my view, the first one is defined by doing the other three. Consultation (iii) is not a mandatory requirement for Salat (ii), rather it is a command in itself, like spending in God’s way (iv) is not mandatory for consultation (iii). However, there are many instances in history in which consultations were carried out after Salat/prayer was over. In fact, prophet regularly consulted with his companions after salat gatherings.
You wrote: “Is it not your assumption Dwood Bhai? Quran does not say so.”
Your above short quip came to my observation that “Since 62:9 does not give any indication about the form of this call for salat, it left open a way for prophet to come up with the words for such a call and the mode/manner of delivering this call. …” If you elaborate a bit as to what I assumed then I may be able to respond else I am not sure exactly where are you going with this.
You wrote: “If I recall correctly it was suggested by companions to devise a way to call for prayer in competition with Jews and Christians. Was it in the exalted Prophet's time or later when those stories were written and linked to the exalted Prphet?”
As is evident in 62:9, there must be a call to alert people for prayer on the day of gathering. In order to implement this command, prophet must have consulted his companions. If prophet consulted with his companions, indeed he was within his right as directed by God to do so. If historians wrote something related to this, true or partially true, how does it impact negatively the verse 62:9?
If however you are of the opinion that present-day adhan and its wordings are not in line with Quran, present your evidence as to what it is and why?