Thank you Dawood Bhai for this detailed reply. I will try to present my point of view un yashaa Allah.
You said: 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. (unquote)
We can save us trouble if we stick to the message of the Quran by following the words used by our Creator. The words must be followed in the light of their root meanings and their usage in the context. We must not follow any meanings coming out of nowhere.
You said: 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.(unquote)
That is exactly what I believe. A well developed language cannot convey a word that is not understood by masses as per their usage. When people heard Salat or masjid-ul-haram or masjid-ul-aqsa they must have understood them otherwise message was not easy for them to follow. It is not redefining Quranic commands but to take them as is, without any distortion of meanings.
You wrote: 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. (unquote)
When you coin and accept a meaning that is where you make Quran "mahjoor" (25:30). You do not need to coin any meanings because the roots in Arabic have meanings enwrapped in it. Any word derived from a root reflects the meaning of that root. The root ص ل و has the meaning of following closely. There is no point in establishing any meanings ignoring the root meanings. If our starting point is not correct we can never get to correct conclusion.
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. (unquote)
It is simple to understand the words. When called to salat that time becomes time of gathering or day of gathering if we translate yaum as a day.
You wrote: 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. (unquote)
Quraish established a practice of getting together for consultation as per Lughat ul Quran. The identification of that day of gathering was consultation and not prayer. Thus Al-Aruba became yaum ul jumaati then Aljuma and then Friday - fixed for ritual prayer like jews and christians. Quran says Ibrahim AS was not a jew or a christian but a hanif muslim. (3:67)
You wrote: 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.” (unquote)
Yes Dawood bhai purpose is "to call people [to] the salat" and not "to know that the time of congregational salat has come". You see how leaving the original text conveys different meanings.
You wrote: Quran is very clear, no ambiguities whatsoever provided we let Quran speak. (unquote)
Yes Dawood bhai let the Quran speak without coined meanings.
You wrote: In 62:9, God is stating this, “Nudiya Lisalati = call for prayers”, and not “Nudiya Shura beynahum = Call for consultation among them”. (unquote)
Sorry to repeat but it is call "to the salat" and not for prayers. We must know what salat means as per root ص ل و.
You wrote: 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. (unquote)
Lets see what respected Dr Shabbir writes in QXP and find out if meaning of salat are as per root ص ل و.
They respond to their Lord by establishing Salaat, and conduct their affairs by mutual
consultation, and they keep open for the welfare of others what We have given
them. [Establishing Salaat = Establishing the System where following of the
Divine Commands is facilitated. Nafaq = Open-ended tunnel = No hoarding]
Hope it clarifies the root meaning.
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. (unquote)
I meant we must adhere to the words of Quran without assuming anything. The words of Quran might not be what we assume.
You wrote: 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?(unquote)
My point is that the term adhan or words used in adhan are not given in Quran, commanding us to call people for a fixed ritual on a fixed day at a fixed time.
Dawood bhai like I wrote in my previous post my purpose of posting anything is not to win or lose but to understand the words of Quran as is, without attributing any coined meanings to them.
May our Creator help us understand his Book.