Is there Ijma on Earth being stationary

Unspecified

Brother

#16 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 10:37

Yasin wrote:

View original post

Please read again what i said.
It is not that I don't deem myself in a position to understand the word (Look back at the definition i gave in previous reply). I never said anything about not being qualified to understand the word. Where did you get this from brother? What I said is what reason do i have to INTERPRET this word based on my level of understanding when scholars of past have done so. My job is not define this word in order to offer tawil for the verse. For that i need proof. The scholars have defined what the verse means. There is an Ijma.

This boils down to simple fact "Do i have a reason to follow my understanding of this issue over the scholars' understanding of this issue?" I think not.
These are the rules that you would be very much aware of.
1) Can i interpret the Quran without scholarly qualification?
2)Can i offer tawil for the particular verse "without" proof?
3)Can i contradict Ijma or consensus?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Informative x 2

saa10245

London

27,560

Brother

9,601

#17 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 10:39

Quote:

The thing i am looking for whether such an Ijma about the stationary nature of the earth exists or not. If it does, there's no need to offer tawil. The door for tawil is shut. One cannot go against an Ijma as far as i am aware.

I don't think there is any ijma on the matter at all. Some Ulama of the past had their opinions, but that would not make it ijma.

There was a recent Scholar from the Middle East who also made some silly comments about the Earth, the Sun and so on. He was rejected by everyone. So much so that it was publicised on the news and MS :) This guy, Sheikh Bandar al-Khaibari, even said that the Earth was stationary!

if there was ijma on it, then why did the Muslim world ridicule him?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

Unspecified

Brother

#18 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 10:42

abu mohammed wrote:

View original post

Let's not be that hasty brother. i have seen a lot of scholars quote that there IS an ijma on this.I am trying to find it and i will post it here as well..

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

saa10245

London

27,560

Brother

9,601

#19 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 10:55

Is It Obligatory to Believe That the Earth Is Stationary and That the Sun Orbits Around It?

Answered according to Hanafi Fiqh by Seekersguidance.org

Answered by Ustadh Salman Younas

Question: Recently I read that it is obligatory for Muslims to believe that the earth is stationary and that the sun orbits around it. Can you tell me what belief we should have?

Answer: assalamu `alaykum

It is known that the earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

The Qur’an was not revealed as a book of science. Nor was the sunna primarily interested in elucidating points of scientific fact. Rather, the point of both of these sources is to instruct humans regarding the manner in which they should live in order to recognize God and attain to felicity. In other words, the Qur’an and sunna are sources of guidance: “Indeed, this Qur’an guides to the straightest way and gives glad tidings to the believers,” (17:9) and “A book we have sent down to you so you may bring forth mankind from darkness to light.” (14:1).

From this perspective, references to the earth, sun, stars, the moon, and other celestial objects within the primary sources is primarily for the purpose of drawing the attention of human beings towards the creation of God. It is through reflecting on these created things that humans are able to recognize the existence and power of God: “Indeed, in the alternation of the night and day and in what God has created within the heavens and the earth are signs for those who are pious.” (10:9)

Science & Scripture

With this in mind, the basic principle is that whenever a literal or outward reading of a verse of the Qur’an or an authentic saying of the Prophet seems to contradict a decisively established point of fact, then that verse or saying is interpreted in a manner that accords to this established point of fact.

Take the following verse: “The sun and the moon follow exact courses.” (55:5). One interpretation given for this verse by classical exegetes is that the sun and moon actually move in an orbit around the earth. In his commentary, Imam Alusi (d. 1317/1854) states that some philosophers in his time argued that it was the sun that was stationary and the earth that revolved around it. Imam Alusi comments on the position of these philosopher by stating:

“We have heard that they altered their position again by stating that the sun moves around another star. This indicates that their initial position [regarding the sun being stationary] lacks clear evidence… and we stick to the literal purport of the texts so long as there is no decisive evidence contrary to it. If such evidence exists, then we resort to interpretation, and there is great scope for this.” [Ruh al-Ma`ani]

There are a number of critical points that the above statement demonstrates.

(a) despite holding a contrary position, Imam Alusi acknowledges that if the evidence of those who state the sun is stationary is established, then that is the position that will be adopted.

(b) that the primary texts themselves allow for a sufficient scope of interpretation that would allow for such a position.

In other words, there is nothing decisive in the meaning indicated by such verses that would prevent us from understanding them in a manner that corresponds to contemporary scientific evidence. This evidence, as we now know, establishes in a convincing fashion that the earth rotates around the sun. In so far as the prerogative to determine the movement of celestial bodies belongs to those in the fields of astronomy, cosmology, etc., those in the field of religious scholarship are required to submit to their opinions on these issues.

How Do We Interpret These Verses

Keeping the above mind, there are a number of ways to interpret verses that seemingly indicate the movement of the sun:

(a) Looking at it from the perspective of the purpose of the Qur’an as a book of guidance calling upon creation to reflect, these verses are simply describing celestial bodies as they appear to the onlooker. This is a powerful method of making man reflect in so far as it appeals to his or her actual experience of these celestial bodies. It describes the celestial in a manner that people were accustomed to and described it in a language they understood.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+4 -0Like x 1Winner x 1Informative x 2

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

London

27,560

Brother

9,601

#20 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 10:58

The BEST response of the Earth being stationary.

Answered according to Hanafi Fiqh by Muftionline.co.za
Q: How can I make clear to a non-Muslim that the earth is a stationary place according to the word of Allah and because the modern science has proved that the earth rotates around the sun as well as around its axis.

Bismillaah

A: The Qur’aan does not speak about this. Don’t take the trouble of forcing the meaning out of the Qur’aan.

And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

Answered by:

Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

report post quote code quick quote reply

+3 -0Like x 2Informative x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

6,700

Brother

944

#21 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 11:31

This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Agree x 1

I am not a Mufti

Unspecified

Brother

#22 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 11:38

Yasin wrote:

View original post

Quote:

But a flat planet goes against every observation and many verses.

When was i talking about a flat planet? I was talking about the earth being stationary as per the traditional scholars and there being an IJMA over this. It may seem or appear to be a non-issue for you, but that is completely fine, for me it isn't. That's why i posted something that was relevant to the topic at hand.

It's not "convulsing" but it is moving. In reality you've posted a non-issue
I have no idea what you did there. If the traditional scholars of the past reached a decision that the earth is stationary,based on Quran and hadith AND IF there is an Ijma as i have heard, there is absolutely no need to indulge in tawil to offer a meaning different from them, as that would entail going against consensus.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

saa10245

Unspecified

Brother

#23 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 11:59

This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1

saa10245

6,700

Brother

944

#24 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 12:20

saa10245 wrote:

View original post

Stationary planet*

I typed flat planet accidentally due to the topic.

It's a non-issue to me because none of what you posted shows any Ijmaa' on a stationary planet.

And past interpretations with "wallahu a'lam" due to lack of advancements was already covered in a previous post. Beyond this I recommend you speak to a local scholar with basic understanding of science if you have further doubts.

Forums have a tendency to assist in taking things out of context which you're doing regularly on this topic. Half the things you're saying now are just implications and assumptions which i can pm to you later as I don't want this thread derailed. Also as this is off-topic you can start a new thread about it if it is still an issue to you.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Agree x 1Informative x 1

I am not a Mufti

Unspecified

Brother

#25 [Permalink] Posted on 19th February 2019 12:28

Yasin wrote:

View original post

It's a non-issue to me because none of what you posted shows any Ijmaa' on a stationary planet.
I said i have been told by great number of scholars that there is an ijma. If i find one i will post it here.
And past interpretations with "wallahu a'lam" due to lack of advancements was already covered in a previous post.
This is something i disagree with generally. After reading in detail i have found that, if there IS such an IJMA about this issue, "lack of advancements" or "science being at its infancy" is an irrelvant issue because at the end of the day scholars establish an ijma based on Qati'yy evidences from the Quran and hadith and NOT due to the norms of the society and how modern that society is in terms of science.

Jazak Allah.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Facepalm x 1

saa10245

6,700

Brother

944

#26 [Permalink] Posted on 20th February 2019 11:24

The thread has been split for you so you're no longer off-topic.

Since you didn't reply to my PM I assume you want me to clarify this here.

saa10245 wrote:

View original post

"saa10245 wrote:

This is something i disagree with generally. After reading in detail i have found that, if there IS such an IJMA about this issue....

Once you provide this currently non-existent Ijmaa then you can disagree and agree with whatever you wish to your hearts content. Until then, everything else is pointless so I'll report my own posts to not have this thread congested with non-issues.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

I am not a Mufti

Unspecified

811

Brother

1,555

#27 [Permalink] Posted on 20th February 2019 12:23

saa10245 wrote:

I said i have been told by great number of scholars that there is an ijma. If i find one i will post it here.

So you prefer to cause Fitnah first. You like to argue things when you are in your own words NOT QUALIFIED to do and then when you're backed against the wall you say you will post it IF you find it. IFFFFF????

Wow

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -0Disagree x 1

Stuck fast to the truth

BOYCOTT IzraHell | InMinds

Unspecified

Brother

#28 [Permalink] Posted on 20th February 2019 16:02

Quote:

This. Jazak Allah. I have consulted some senior Ulema about this who said "That an Ijma exists among traditional scholars". I am waiting for a reply in sha Allah as soon as i get it in sha Allah you will see it posted here.

Quote:

So you prefer to cause Fitnah first. You like to argue things when you are in your own words NOT QUALIFIED to do and then when you're backed against the wall you say you will post it IF you find it. IFFFFF????

Wow

This is an accusation and you have made it on more than 3 occasions. First by saying i am ignoring brothers' replies when i explicitly told you i have contacted senior ulema about this, then by saying i am trolling and now saying i am spreading fitna.
Is it a fitna when i say i have heard from scholars about this Ijma and my intention is to "play safe with words while talking about this issue until we have this proof of ijma on our hands" My intention is not to cause a fitna.

Quote:

when you're backed against the wall you say you will post it IF you find it.

What wall? I made it clear in the very first post when i talked about the alleged Ijma that

Quote:

The scholars made an Ijma pertaining to this.The ijma of this ummah is infalliable. The ijma on this issue is based on Quran and the hadith. Such an Ijma cannot be called to be incorrect. It is impossible that all mujtahids agreed on certain tafsir of the verse. The point i am making is to search whether such an ijma exists or not. And i am looking for it.Some scholars do err in their declaration of ijma.

The thing i am looking for whether such an Ijma about the stationary nature of the earth exists or not. If it does, there's no need to offer tawil. The door for tawil is shut. One cannot go against an Ijma as far as i am aware.

Let's not be that hasty brother. i have seen a lot of scholars quote that there IS an ijma on this.I am trying to find it and i will post it here as well..

Fear Allah سبحانه وتعالى. Your claims are baseless.

Quote:

You like to argue things when you are in your own words NOT QUALIFIED to do

I said i am not qualified to interpret Quran on my own or offer tawil because that requires scholarly qualification. What you are stating is a logical fallacy. Just because i am not qualified to interpret Quran on my own, how does that make me not qualified to tell others what scholars have told regarding the rules of Quranic interpretation and Tawil?
How does not being qualified to do one task (due to reasons stated by scholars) equates to not being qualified to do any task i.e. telling others what the scholars have stated regarding the rules?

Jazak Allah

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Agree x 1

saa10245

Unspecified

Brother

#29 [Permalink] Posted on 9th July 2021 03:17

This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+0 -1Dislike x 1

muhammadwaseem

6,700

Brother

944

#30 [Permalink] Posted on 9th July 2021 11:57

Yasin wrote:

View original post

Yasin wrote:

Thread locked. It's clear there's no ijma. No need to spread false information. He's had over 2 years to provide this huge list of scholars.

There is no Ijmaa' that the Earth is stationary. It goes against verses and scientific observations.

report post quote code quick quote reply

No post ratings

I am not a Mufti

Is there Ijma on Earth being stationary

Font Size

Font Weight