Ulil-Amr (another analysis)

[Link]

To give a analysis on the verses leading up to Ulil-Amr which is one of the main reasons I believe in Imammate of the family of Mohammad.
 
First it reminds of a people who were entrusted with the revelation of God but then disobeyed God's Messengers. The question really is how did this happen? If we do a study of what happened in Bani-Israel, they gave equal authority or even more authority to their scholars with the Prophets. The scholars hence then lead them astray despite the clear proofs of miracles as well as scriptures from God.
 
Then it emphasizes a certain people attribute purity to themselves from them and this is sufficient as a lie against God. The lie is that they are claiming to be his representatives who due to their purity and sincerity have reached a level where they can represent God and his Prophets.
 
It emphasizes in this context that God doesn't forgive associating with him. Then it reminds us there is a portion from the people give a portion of the book that believe in the Jibt and Taghut, and say these people are more guided then those who believe.
 
Then it says "do they have a share in the mulk", I would translate it here as in "authority", because they weren't claiming to have a share in God's kingdom or control of the heavens and the earth or anything like that. What they there claiming was that they were leaders that ought to be followed with respect to the guidance.   So here it is posing a good question do they share in the authority?
 
But what is the true authority? "Or do they envy the people for what God has given them out of his grace? So we gave the family of Abraham, the book, and the wisdom, and gave them a great authority"
 
Here what is the great authority the family of Abraham was given? They were Prophets and hence obedience to them was obedience to God.  They were to be followed so that God is followed spiritually socially and politically.
 
But it being in contrast to the authority scholars was claiming, it's saying, do you claim you been given the same authority that the family of Abraham was given?
 
Then it talks about "So of them is who believed in it and of them is who turned away from it, and hell is sufficient as a burning", so the authority of the family of Abraham was not something that can be turned away from.
 
Those they were envying to me were obviously a chosen family like the family of Abraham or else the comparison would be misleading,  and they had similar authority.
 
Then the Quran says "Indeed those who disbelieve in our Ayat...", in Quran Jesus and Mary are said t to be an "Ayah" and hence with flow, although this includes Quran is primarily about those given authority of God.
 
"And as for those who believe..." ie. it can be seen that faith includes faith in all of God's Ayat, because that is way to submit to him and follow him.
 
Then it says "God commands you to give the trust to it's owners...", it can be said, that leadership itself a trust and we ought to give it to people who God appoints as opposed to making fallible people into leaders. "and that when you judge between people, you judge by justice", the justice is by applying what God and his Messenger teach, the Quran and Sunnah, as the next verses would indicate.
 
And in this flow, in this context, after emphasizing the false authority some people of the book were claiming in leadership over people, and compares to the authority they were claiming to that of the family of Abraham and that being really the authority those who they were envying were given, and emphasizes on reward and punishment with regards to believing or disbelieving in this authority...
 
It emphasizes all with this flow:
 
O you who believe, obey God and obey the Messenger and those who possess the authority from you: therefore if you dispute in a thing, refer it to God and the Messenger, if you believe in God and the last day, this is better and best in the end.
 
 
I would understand people saying the above verse is ambiguous in itself, but given the talk above, giving the context, given the flow, and given what the whole of Quran has said regarding leadership and authority, it no doubt refers to those who God has chosen for himself, those leaders who were never unjust and guide by God's authority/command.

[Farid]

Welcome back to the boards.

Just a general note, you will want to keep posts simple if you want to reach readers. There aren't many philosophical types like yourself around here.

Other than that, do enjoy your time here.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Part 1: A multi-angular refutation of Shiite views on Ulil-Amr(4:59)
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/part-1-a-multi-angular-refutation-of-shiite-views-on-ulil-amr459/


Part 2: A multi-angular refutation of Shiite views on Ulil-Amr.
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/part-2-a-multi-angular-refutation-of-shiite-views-on-ulil-amr/

[Link]

To simplify:

Contrast of authority of people claiming to be sources of guidance to their people with the authority of the family of Abraham and those envied. The contrast is made to emphasize the authority is in God's hands and he gives it to who he pleases (ie. the likes of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc). And the contrast is made to say you se that very leadership Jewish and Christian scholars claim to have, it in fact is God's authority by which he vests in his chosen ones and links obedience to himself.

Comparison of the authority of the family of Abraham is made with that of the Ulil-Amr and envied people by flow, and emphasis on punishment with turning away from this authority and God's Ayat, shows this is a divinely appointed institution.

At the end the truth stands clear from error.

[Farid]

Bro Noor, it is always preferred to engage in a conversation than to send a link to an article.

[Ibn Yahya]

To simplify:

Contrast of authority of people claiming to be sources of guidance to their people with the authority of the family of Abraham and those envied. The contrast is made to emphasize the authority is in God's hands and he gives it to who he pleases (ie. the likes of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc). And the contrast is made to say you se that very leadership Jewish and Christian scholars claim to have, it in fact is God's authority by which he vests in his chosen ones and links obedience to himself.

Comparison of the authority of the family of Abraham is made with that of the Ulil-Amr and envied people by flow, and emphasis on punishment with turning away from this authority and God's Ayat, shows this is a divinely appointed institution.

At the end the truth stands clear from error.

Yes but Akhi the rest of this verse tells us to refer to Allaah as his messenger and those who hold authority doesnt really just refer to the family of Abraham because we don't see a verse specifically connecting them to that phrase or the word 'amr for that matter. Nor does the context seem to show any particular connection to praising the family of Abraham.

Another thing the whole of the Quraysh is 'Aal Ibrahim so I don't see much of a connection.

[Link]

Yes but Akhi the rest of this verse tells us to refer to Allaah as his messenger and those who hold authority doesnt really just refer to the family of Abraham because we don't see a verse specifically connecting them to that phrase or the word 'amr for that matter. Nor does the context seem to show any particular connection to praising the family of Abraham.

Another thing the whole of the Quraysh is 'Aal Ibrahim so I don't see much of a connection.

What's the type of authority being discussed in your opinion?  The word "Amr" can mean affair, and the word "mulk" can mean kingdom, but we see them together and in context of the topic at hand, it's referring to Authority.

For example Jewish scholars weren't claiming they have the kingdom of God or control over the heavens and the earth, but rather they should be referred to in matters of guidance because they were "authorities" over what God has revealed.

So for example our Imams emphasize the verse "do they have a share in the mulk", refers to the Imammate (Leadership) and Succession.

The mulk here then means Authority.

The next verse then links the issue of that authority with the family of Abraham. It's saying, do you envy these people for the very same authority you accept in the family of Abraham?

To say as many Sunni tafsirs have said that mulk here refers to the kingdom of Sulaiman or Dawood or Yusuf, is missing the point of contrast.

The contrast is saying that very authority you are claiming, do you really have a share in it, or do you envy the people for what God has given them out of his grace while acknowledging that very authority in the family of Abraham.

It's saying that authority was so great that believing it lead to paradise while disbelieving it lead to hell, because it was linked to obedience to God.

It was in light of that and warning not to disbelieve in God's Ayat in that context, that God then says to obey the Ulil-Amr.

And before that emphasizes obedience to himself to show that it's really about obeying God.

So the type of authority here is not about governors or anything like that, the context is about guidance on behalf of God and who should obey and follow with respect to submitting to God.

People of the book scholars were for example claiming this position although none of them taught they were appointed by God or that they were infallible sources, they made their collective leadership among the people such that it was a binding authority.

And we see this how bani-Israel disobeyed the Prophets, they followed their clergy class, rather then seeking the truth and reflecting over the clear proofs of God in his scriptures revealed as well as the divine miracles.







 

[Hani]

What is meant by great kingdom can be the kingdom of Dawud (as) and Sulayman (as). Allah combined both prophet-hood and kingdom for Sulayman and Dawud (as) and they are those who were given a great kingdom from Aal-Ibrahim (as). Of course in this sense Yunus (as) or Ayyub (as) are not from those who were given a great kingdom from Aal-Ibrahim (as).

The great kingdom can also mean the dominion as in they are to be obeyed at all times and their obedience is that of God, this exceeds a normal authority or kingdom and is a thing only prophets are blessed with.

Now let's take a look at the three things that God bestowed upon those men from Aal-Ibrahim to find out who is being talked about.

{Or do they envy people for what Allah has given them of His bounty? But we had already given the family of Abraham the Scripture and wisdom and conferred upon them a great kingdom.}

Let's see what your own Imam says in Tafsir al-`Ayyashi:

تفسير العياشي عن حمران عن الباقر عليه السلام { فقد آتينا آل إبراهيم الكتاب } قال: النبوة, { والحكمة } قال: الفهم والقضاء, { وملكاً عظيماً } قال: الطاعة

[Himran bin A`yun from al-Baqir (as): {The Scripture} The prophet-hood. {And wisdom} The understanding and judgement. {Great kingdom} The obedience.]

Now these three things are specific properties that distinguish prophets from normal folks, scholars or kings. A prophet is one who possesses the book of God, he possesses great wisdom and his dominion is great in that he must be obeyed by all whether scholars or kings since he is God's direct representative. These are things that would make all men jealous and envious and it may lead some to falsely claim that they're prophets (such as what happened during our Nabi's life).

Therefore, some men believed in Ibrahim's (as) prophet-hood and that of his children and others disbelieved due to envy and jealousy.

Here's the thing, no matter how you twist and turn, the verse has no mention of a great kingdom given to Aal-Muhammad (saw). Therefore, you're an innovator if anything since you aren't following the verses rather you're coming up with your own new laws. If what you're saying at the end of the day had any shred of truth the verse would have easily said "Obey Allah and obey his prophet and those in authority from Aal-Muhammad" rather it says "Those in authority from among you" which encompasses all those placed in authority by the Prophet (saw) during his life as well as those who assumed authority after him. As opposed to you folks we don't believe Allah is powerless and scared nor does he practice Taqiyyah so as to make things so unclear.

Next your Imams contradict your interpretation about this verse:

{Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing.}

Then it says "God commands you to give the trust to it's owners...", it can be said, that leadership itself a trust and we ought to give it to people who God appoints as opposed to making fallible people into leaders. "and that when you judge between people, you judge by justice", the justice is by applying what God and his Messenger teach, the Quran and Sunnah, as the next verses would indicate.

في الكافي وغيره في عدة روايات أن الخطاب إلى الأئمة عليهم السلام أمر كل منهم أن يؤدي إلى الإمام الذي بعده ويوصي إليه ثم هي جارية في سائر الأمانات.

In al-Kafi and other narrations it is reported that those being addressed are the Imams (as), each of them was ordered to give the trust to the Imam that succeeds him...

وفيه وفي العياشي عن الباقر عليه الصلاة والسلام ايانا عنى أن يؤدي الإِمام الأول إلى الذي بعده العلم والكتب والسلاح.

And in al-`Ayyashi from al-Baqi (as): "We are the ones meant here, each Imam must entrust his knowledge and books to the succeeding Imam."

We on the other hand say that the verse is a general ruling that has nothing to do with the gibberish attributed to your Imams by some liars in Qum or Kufah.

In the books of Ahlul-Sunnah we find that `Ali ibn abi Talib states that this verse is addressing those in authority and advising them, he says:

حق على الإِمام أن يحكم بما أنزل الله وأن يؤدي الأمانة فإذا فعل ذلك فحق على الناس أن يسمعوا له وأن يطيعوا وأن يجيبوا إذا دعوا

[It is the leader's duty to rule by that which Allah has revealed and to render the trusts to whom they are due, if he does so then it is the people's duty to listen and obey his requests.]

This matches the following verse perfectly which orders us to obey Allah, his prophet and the ones in authority as long as they obey Allah and his prophet. The judge between us if we differ is the Qur'an and Sunnah.

[Link]

Given the context that "Do they have a share in the mulk", I don't think kingdom of Sulaiman and Dawood is even a possibility.

Rather it's about emphasizing the true authority.

The line "so of them is who believed in it" obviously refers to the authority of the family of Abraham, because that is the whole topic. "Do they have share in the mulk" and then "and verily we gave the family of Abraham a great mulk", is referring to one issue.

And those people having a portion of the book are not being asked if they have worldly kingdom of Kings, they are being asked if they have share in the authority in general. And it's showing they would not give atom's worth of value if they were given such authority.

The line "so if you dispute in a thing refer it to God and the Messenger" is an important line, in that it shows Quran and Sunnah is suppose to be the judgement. But who do people take authorities regarding that? Scholars. While Quran is showing people aren't authorities except those who God appoints.

That is why it picked the people of the book, because if anyone would of have had authority before Mohammad, it would their scholars, because they were entrusted with teaching the revelation of God. But it's showing they don't and it is making the issue clear so that we are guided regarding this issue.

Ulil-Amr are obvious ways to refer back to Quran and Sunnah, and that is why it's emphasized "therefore if you dispute in a thing refer it to God and the Messenger", in context of the obedience to the Ulil-Amr, because they are extentions of the authority of Allah and his Messenger.

It's how revelation is going to be implemented by people, through obeying the Rasool and Ulil-Amr.

Lastly, why didn't say "from the family of Mohammad", that would leave room to assume there are Ulil-Amr outside of the family of Mohammad in this nation, that it's telling us to obey those who possess authority from the family of Mohammad, but it would also imply that the family of Mohammad in general doesn't have authority or it can be interpreted like that.

However, in this context, it's guiding all of humanity, including Sunnis and Shias regarding this issue....that apart from God's chosen ones who are compared to the family of Abraham, no one has this authority.

In other words, scholars don't have this authority, Marjaas don't have this authority....

It's warning humanity that yes God is making up a rope to stick to, a revelation to follow, but don't take authorities aside from those who God has appointed. Don't do the same mistakes of bani-Israel, and don't do the same mistakes of the Christians and the Jews.

Don't make normal people into that axis that you fully trust and follow. I am making that axis myself, I am making the handhold to stick to, so hold on to that, hold on to that rope...and you will be guided.

[Ibn Yahya]

What's the type of authority being discussed in your opinion?  The word "Amr" can mean affair, and the word "mulk" can mean kingdom, but we see them together and in context of the topic at hand, it's referring to Authority.

For example Jewish scholars weren't claiming they have the kingdom of God or control over the heavens and the earth, but rather they should be referred to in matters of guidance because they were "authorities" over what God has revealed.

So for example our Imams emphasize the verse "do they have a share in the mulk", refers to the Imammate (Leadership) and Succession.

The mulk here then means Authority.

The next verse then links the issue of that authority with the family of Abraham. It's saying, do you envy these people for the very same authority you accept in the family of Abraham?

To say as many Sunni tafsirs have said that mulk here refers to the kingdom of Sulaiman or Dawood or Yusuf, is missing the point of contrast.

The contrast is saying that very authority you are claiming, do you really have a share in it, or do you envy the people for what God has given them out of his grace while acknowledging that very authority in the family of Abraham.

It's saying that authority was so great that believing it lead to paradise while disbelieving it lead to hell, because it was linked to obedience to God.

It was in light of that and warning not to disbelieve in God's Ayat in that context, that God then says to obey the Ulil-Amr.

And before that emphasizes obedience to himself to show that it's really about obeying God.

So the type of authority here is not about governors or anything like that, the context is about guidance on behalf of God and who should obey and follow with respect to submitting to God.

People of the book scholars were for example claiming this position although none of them taught they were appointed by God or that they were infallible sources, they made their collective leadership among the people such that it was a binding authority.

And we see this how bani-Israel disobeyed the Prophets, they followed their clergy class, rather then seeking the truth and reflecting over the clear proofs of God in his scriptures revealed as well as the divine miracles.

Firstly its incorrect of you to quote those previous verses because the verse before it is about judgement:

"Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing."

and the verse after it is talking about legislation:

"Have you not seen those who claim to have believed in what was revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you? They wish to refer legislation to Taghut, while they were commanded to reject it; and Satan wishes to lead them far astray.

So this clearly illustrates that its talking about legal disputes with regards to state judgement and its sources of legislation. So your attempt to connect it to the verse about the great kingdom as a more spiritual meaning is false and I find your attempt as interpreting in a more metaphorical light quite lacking in evidence as there is nothing that really clearly connects it to a metephore. Rather its talking about how God bestowed on 'Aal Ibrahim a reward as 'Aal Ibrahim is also the whole of Bani Isra'il (and the whole of the Quraysh for that matter so the Ayat cannot be pinned to just 'Aal Muhammad) and this reward was the Kingdom of Israel. Your interpretation doesn't fit. The Qur'an Tafsir is like a jigsaw, it has to fit the verse, you can't force the piece in because to you it looks like it could fit.

[Link]

Salam

Verse 4:58 is emphasizing on one of the purposes God assigns the Prophets and chosen ones as leaders and guides. It's so judgement occurs between people by justice, while justice would be an obscure thing without revelation, a book from God, and appointed Guides.

As Hani showed, there is ahadith that states it is talking to Rasool and his successors, that God entrusts them to give the trusts to their owners....

This would go well with the subject because they have the right to say "so and so" is to be followed, so and so is your Master after me, so and so are appointed by God....

This is while the Jews and Christian leaders saying Mohammad and his family were not chosen by God,  didn't have such authority, because they had no share in the authority.

It's not to however neglect all the verses before. The verses before are all leading up to the Ulil-Amr and are obviously connected.

To disconnect them is to only to not want the Quran to explain itself.

[Link]

Regarding the family of Abraham being normal people or bani-Israel or Quraysh....

There is verse 3:33 which shows they are chosen in the same way Adam and Noah are chosen.  This supports that they people like Adam and Noah and chosen in that sense. That emphasis on Adam and Noah is to show they are chosen like they are chosen. The verses after also support that by emphasizing on how God purified Mariam and chose her, and chosen her above the women of the world.

There is also the verse in suratal Hud about the fact that Sarah should not wonder at being Isaac and Jacob, because it's the affair of God, and to emphasize on that says "God blessings and mercy is upon you o People of the House"....

This while normal people related by blood to Abraham should wonder if they are promised children in old age, and wonder at such an affair, but this giving of Isaac and after Isaac Jacob, was obviously of the affair of God.

And normal blessed people should wonder at that, so the blessings and mercy of God upon them, is such that all blessings found in the alive people were upon them.

And this would continue in Jacob then Joseph.   Auli-Ibrahim are obviously introduced in God's book to emphasize the concept of chosen family is not all that new. That a special meaning of family is given to certain chosen people who are joined in a cause with regards to a nation.

And God also out of his wisdom, made them related by blood, but the closest to Abraham were those who followed him and not necessarily those related by blood.

That is why it makes sense the chosen family of Abraham refers to specific people (Sarah and the Prophets from his seed that succeeded him in leading his nation).

[Ibn Yahya]

Regarding the family of Abraham being normal people or bani-Israel or Quraysh....

There is verse 3:33 which shows they are chosen in the same way Adam and Noah are chosen.  This supports that they people like Adam and Noah and chosen in that sense. That emphasis on Adam and Noah is to show they are chosen like they are chosen. The verses after also support that by emphasizing on how God purified Mariam and chose her, and chosen her above the women of the world.

There is also the verse in suratal Hud about the fact that Sarah should not wonder at being Isaac and Jacob, because it's the affair of God, and to emphasize on that says "God blessings and mercy is upon you o People of the House"....

This while normal people related by blood to Abraham should wonder if they are promised children in old age, and wonder at such an affair, but this giving of Isaac and after Isaac Jacob, was obviously of the affair of God.

And normal blessed people should wonder at that, so the blessings and mercy of God upon them, is such that all blessings found in the alive people were upon them.

And this would continue in Jacob then Joseph.   Auli-Ibrahim are obviously introduced in God's book to emphasize the concept of chosen family is not all that new. That a special meaning of family is given to certain chosen people who are joined in a cause with regards to a nation.

And God also out of his wisdom, made them related by blood, but the closest to Abraham were those who followed him and not necessarily those related by blood.

That is why it makes sense the chosen family of Abraham refers to specific people (Sarah and the Prophets from his seed that succeeded him in leading his nation).

If that were the case don't you think Allah (subhaanahu wa ta 'ala) would be more vivid instead of using a general term like 'Aal Ibrahim which with your logic would make sense because they were all chosen as people who would receive divine revelation:

"Have you not seen those who were given a portion of the Scripture, purchasing error [in exchange for it] and wishing you would lose the way?

in that verse its obvious that they aren't the line of Prophethood and their families and they are given the revelation while distorting it so its obvious that 'Aal Ibrahim as a whole was chosen to have the revelation revealed to. So your idea that its a specific family has no hard evidence to it.

[Link]

I'm trying to understand your point. Perhaps reword it.

I'm not sure what to make out of it.

[Ibn Yahya]

I'm trying to understand your point. Perhaps reword it.

I'm not sure what to make out of it.

I feel its quite clear. Its that nothing indicates that it was just the prophetic families who are chosen. Quite the opposite as I proved its rather the descendants as a whole.

[Link]

In Suratal Naml, what is your understanding of the servants of God that he has chosen?

When it says:

"Peace be upon the servants of God that he has chosen...."

Who are they?

[Ibn Yahya]

In Suratal Naml, what is your understanding of the servants of God that he has chosen?

When it says:

"Peace be upon the servants of God that he has chosen...."

Who are they?

You're missing the point. The point is none of these verses can be really connected to specifically Ahlulbayt. Especially not that verse, its talking about the Muwahid servants of Allah as in the same verse and the one coming after it the excelence of Tawhid and evil of Shirk. Allah as i proved chose to give a portion of the scripture to the corrupt of bani Isra'il, whats your point?

[Link]

When it says "And indeed they (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) were with us from the chosen, the selected"

What does it mean?

When you say "Al-Mustafa" regarding Mohammad [pbuh&hf], what does it mean to you?

[Abubakar]

I have to think and think and still not getting what brother "Link " is trying to put across.

If your religion requires such ambiguous "philosophy" before it can be understood, then I am sorry it doesn't make sense.

[Ibn Yahya]

When it says "And indeed they (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) were with us from the chosen, the selected"

What does it mean?

When you say "Al-Mustafa" regarding Mohammad [pbuh&hf], what does it mean to you?

They were selected for prophethood. My point is chosen is ambiguous.