Chapter 8
Conviction No. 3
“The Quran Does Not
Predict a Hereafter”
―The Quran does not talk about any kind of Life after death, or the Life of Aakhirat, but limits itself only to the physical life????
The learned translator further explains this theory by implying that the stage called “As-Saa'ah”, “Aakhirah”, “Qiyamah”, etc. is reached only in this very world when a Quranic society is established by defeating the ruling oppressive regimes. Maut (death) represents only a nation's decline in this very world, and Hayaat-ul-Aakhirat (the second/final phase of life), or Ba'that (resurrection) symbolizes a nation's rise, after their re-awakening, in the same physical world. Physical death of the human‘s animal organism is not mentioned in the Quran, therefore, reward and punishment, recompense, hell and paradise all are actualized within the parameters of this physical world. Please check his running translation of the Quran and writings on the forum on the subject of the Hereafter.
The above mentioned theory is also a personal derivation. We come to know through the Quran that :-
1. The Quran does call those dead too who are physically alive and walk around like other live ones, but their human capabilities have become dead. They can secure a new life through deliberations in the Quran.
2. Those nations are also defined by it as dead who have gone into decline. In case some of them still retain the capacity to regain a higher status, they can do so by adhering with the Divine Guidance. This is also called Life after Death.
3. The second round of LIFE, the Resurrection after man's physical death is also defined as Life after Death.
The learned translator supports the policy of absolute denial in respect of Point No. 3 above, in accordance with his purely materialistic convictions.
A copy/paste of his corresponding justification is presented here highlighting his materialist concept:-
“Now coming to verse 28 of sura Al-baqra :
(Arabic: KAYIFA TAKFUROONA BIL-LAAHI WA KUNTUM AMWAATAN, FA AHYAA-KUM, THUMMA YUMEETUKUM, THUMMA YUHYEEKUM, THUMMA ILAYIHI TURJA’OON)
Translation: How can You disbelieve In Allâh? Seeing that You were dead and He gave You life. Then He will give You death, Then again will bring You to life (on the Day of Resurrection) and Then unto Him You will return. (usual translation ).
This verse clearly says
!.., We were dead 2.., He gave us life
3.., He will make us dead again 4.., then again he will make us alive
5.., Then unto him we will return .
Except for the second and third stage all other stages can neither be confirmed by any observation supported by statistical evidences or by knowledge from the past .
Even second and third stage is controversial for some . If we are supposed to believe blindly then there is no point in going into all this cumbersome exercise. If we have to accept some faiths blindly then why not all of it .
I agree with Adnan M Khan that : “There is no one we know of who
has returned to us and told us about life after death “.
I am sure more than anything that , QURAN DOES’NT TALK OF THOSE THINGS WHICH CANT BE PROVED OR ARE BEYOND OUR COMPREHENSION OR UNDERSTANDING. 26.11.2010.“
The above is the AGENDA-based materialistic logic under which the learned translator does not believe in the Life-after-Death. The most interesting part of this belief lies in his contradictory verbal claims, just as of his close supporters, that “We do believe in Allah and Aakhirat, but Quran does not talk about that at all”. Nevertheless, the obvious, absolute viewpoint, which contradicts the verbal claims, is exposed on top, in the title of this Chapter. This, in fact, is his real conviction. Logically speaking too, since he identifies himself as a Quranist, and if according to him, a theory is not proved by Quranic text, why would he believe in that theory? But as we can see, the problem is of ambivalence, or reluctance. So, on a verbal level, we neither notice an unequivocal Denial, nor is there a clear and open stand. We only find a hotch potch or bad blend of two contradictory standpoints, namely, “though we do believe, but it is not confirmed by Quran”. However, this bi-directional attitude is so beautifully exposed by a Divine injunction in this way:-
Verse No.2/8: “WA MIN AN-NAASI MAN YAQOOLU AAMANNA BIL- LAAHI WA BIL-YOUMIL-AAKHIRI, WA MAA HUM BI-MOMINEEN”.
Translation: And there are some who DO SAY we have faith in Allah and in the Hereafter, BUT they actually are not among the Believers.
Here the ambivalence of the likes of our learned translator and his supporters is so perfectly exposed that a man‟s inner self experiences a state of ecstasy. And why not be it so? The Creator knows,,,,,, and it is only HIM Who is fully aware of the far reaches of His creation's mental depravity! Another important point here lies in the learned translator‟s deliberate efforts to twist the meanings of Eimaan (strong belief, faith) by referring to its Root a-m-n (aman – peace), according to his old routine. Kindly check the manipulation from his own writing copy/pasted below :-
“Dear Lucky Sahib, in the world of Mazhab, aamanu is translated in the meaning of “yaqeen”, whereas the Root of “aamanu” is “aman” whose definition is peace and tranquility; therefore, “Eimaan” would mean “the State of Peace”- - - - the State of Peace does not necessitate affiliation with a religion.” (Translated from Urdu).
Let us analyze this viewpoint. He translates “Aamanna” as “we became people of Peace”. Now looking purely from a grammatical point of view, we find here the verb “aamana” (past - believed) and the pronoun of the subject – faa'il - which is “naa”(hum – we). We have the subject and the object both. Also the verb is of a direct action “karna”, not of “hona” (i.e. "doing‟ by a subject, not "being‟). So we have the direct action by a subject. Moreover, the context too relates directly with the act of establishing faith in Allah. So by all accounts it is an act of “doing” something, not that of “being”. So “Amanna” is simply, “WE HAVE BELIEVED” OR "WE HAVE ESTABLISHED FAITH” – not that “WE HAVE BECOME …….PEACEFUL….or something like that.
The learned translator is working under a particular direction which compels him to try to make things difficult by twisting the justified meanings. “To believe in Allah” is the description that conforms to the rules of language here.
I apologize for describing this style of translation as wishful, as it stands too far from logic. To my meager knowledge, it stands unacceptable to the bulk of Muslims, or to any of the Quranic communities busy in research work throughout the globe. Nor can a definition, quite repugnant to standard literary style of narration, be taken for an appropriate expression. Allow me to submit here that the Root of “Eimaan” is undoubtedly “a-m-n”, but the word “Eimaan” derived therefrom describes not only a “state of peace”, but also means “to submit to the truth of something with full satisfaction of mind; to trust and have confidence” too. And “Momin” is the one who does “assure peace” to others but before that, “recognizes the truth in such a way that he should himself be contented and peaceful; have trust and confidence; gain absolute belief”. (translated from Allama Pervaiz‟ quote)
The above conforms with authentic Arabic lexicons too, which the learned translator is trying his best to ignore altogether. His current translations are trying to wipe out a legitimate meaning by incorporating an alternate meaning that most of the times proves not only inappropriate but ridiculous. Please check the Root List from Lane's Lexicon, where “aamanna” is translated as “we believed”; and, “Iimaan (n.): Faith; Belief”.
A comparison of the above lexical meanings with the learned translator's unique translations makes its ambiguities amply clear by painting the following ridiculous or illogical picture:-
“Eimaan billah” means, by him, “to become peaceful WITH ALLAH”; “Eimaan bil-Aakhirah” as “to become peaceful WITH THE AAKHIRAH”; “Eimaan bil-Malaaika” as “to become peaceful WITH THE MALAAIKA”; “Eimaan bil-Ghayib” as “to become peaceful WITH THE UNKNOWN, CONCEALED, ABSENT, DISTANT, etc”.
Can he not notice the ambiguity or a lack of coherence and smoothness so visible in his definition of Eimaan when applied in the above contexts? The way his translations under discussion have been coined by him, don‟t they tax the human understanding in a queer way? Isn‟t it manifestly "confusing‟?
The Readers can easily make their decisions.
Before proceeding with further discussion under this Chapter, kindly allow me to narrate here another divine injunction which absolutely is of a decisive nature:-
Verse 53/27-30: “INNAL-LAZEENA LAA YU‟MINOONA BIL-AAKHIRATI LA-YUSAMMOONA AL-MALAAIKATI TASMIYATIL UNSAA; WA MAA LA- HUM BI-HI „ILM; IN YATTABI‟OONA ILLA AZ-ZANN; WA INNA AZ- ZANNA LAA YUGHNEE MIN AL-HAQQA SHAYI‟AN; FA A‟RADH „AM-MAN TAWALLAA „AN ZIKRINAA WA LAM YURID ILLA AL-HAYAAT AD- DUNYA”.
Translation: Those who do not believe in the Hereafter, would sure attribute Malaaika with female names; But they do not possess knowledge; they follow nothing but assumption, while assumption versus reality is of no avail; therefore, turn away from those who turn their backs to our guidance and desire this worldly life alone. Their sum of knowledge is but meager…..
Dear Readers, this is another most pertinent and self explicit divine injunction. It comes to light from here that:-
- those who do not believe in the Hereafter are bereft of knowledge;
- they follow assumptions;
- they turn their backs on God‟s advice/injunctions;
- they take the worldly life as the ultimate;
- their sum of knowledge is worth nothing.
The above explanation brings us to this ultimate, decisive question:-
Are all these divine indictments, according to the contention of the learned translator, directed against those who just are not willing to believe in some phenomenon of change in the near future, within the parameters of this physical world and within the age span of this very short organic life of man?
This question is open to all friends having common sense. No clairvoyance, or extra sensory perception is required for an answer!
As the learned translator firmly holds the conviction that a mention of the Hereafter does not exist in the Quranic text, therefore, this humble one would stick to the Quranic texts only, to prove the presence of repeated and continuous mention of the Hereafter in the Quran in its orthodox meaning. The reality of the Hereafter, even otherwise, continues to exist within the human mind since the earliest stages of man‟s intellectual evolution. Human awareness has always recognized a second round of life, not only in a spiritual state but, at the same time, as a secondary physical round of life too. Thousands of years ago, the preservation of dead bodies, accompanied with the accessories of the physical life, was the embodiment of the belief in acquiring an assured resurrection.
Moreover, in the light of modern knowledge of today as well, there is no deficiency of authentic facts to prove the existence of a Hereafter. When a few months earlier, this humble student offered to post a thesis proving the existence of the Hereafter through Science, the learned translator regrettably displayed a show of narrow-mindedness, refusing directly to accept that, and putting a ban on such efforts on his "democratic Blog‟. Kindly have a look at a copy/paste:-
“My highly respected members,
I had requested that whosoever believes in Hereafter, or does not, whatever Verses he would post as references, it is my responsibility to present its simple translation, and after looking into its context,
Members will be requested to decide about the truth on the basis of
Quran.
But the discussion started taking up the subject of Science and of proving the Hereafter, or disproving it, through Science; and about the importance of Science.
I once again request that the discussion on the subject of proving
Hereafter be restricted to only Quran so that I may give answers from Quran. Thanks very much. Yours sincerely, Dr. Qamar Zaman –
30.5.2011. “
So this is the state of displeasure the learned translator displays about the proofs of Hereafter. However, for Readers‟ ease of reference, the thesis “Hereafter according to Science” is attached at the end of this Book as APPENDIX 2.
Let us now check carefully how he derives wishful results from the grammatical structures, in order to grant the Hereafter a worldly perspective. The terms used by Allah swt to define the Hereafter are scattered all over the Quran and are specifically represented in these words :-
“Al-Hayaat-ul-Aakhirah - Youm-ul-Aakhir - Daar-ul-Aakhirah – Aakhirah.”
And the compound which is used along with the above, for the purpose of “Comparison of Opposites” is : “Al-Hayaat-ud-Dunya”. The learned translator rejects the translation of Hayaat-ul-Aakhirah as the eternal or spiritual stage of life, and advances the argument against it from grammar that this term is a “Murakkab-e-Tauseefi”, where Hayaat is "mousoof‟ and Aakhirat its 'sift‟; therefore, its meaning should be “a nearby expected period, or an improved state of life” – in the same phenomenal world. For a comparison, he interprets the term “Al-Hayaat-ud-Dunya”, by virtue of being Murakkab-e- Tauseefi, as “a lower or inferior state of life”. Here he is monitored radically altering the meaning of the word “Dunya”. His stand is, that “Ad-Dunya being "Sift‟, would switch its meaning to "Adnaa‟. Obviously, the justification is weak, and exposes his concealed effort to make the accepted meaning of Dunya disappear from the scene, with the aim not to let a “comparison of opposites” take place. However, this humble one is of the view that, irrespective of being a "Murakkab-e-Tauseefi‟, its meaning would stay as “worldly life”, as the switching of Dunya's meaning to Adnaa is not supported by the rules of grammar and language. If at all a "lower level of life‟ was meant or emphasized here, this "Murakkab-e-Tauseefi‟ would have been quoted as “al-Hayaat-ul-Adnaa”. Don't we find at several places in the Quran the word “al-Adnaa” being used to define “lower” or “nearer”?
What is that particular rule of grammar which, according to him, alters the meaning of words in a "Murakkab-e-Tauseefi‟?
If the learned translator, who admittedly has a vast capability in Arabic grammar, can enlighten us on the respective grammar rules, full attention will be paid to his reflections. Some examples of "Murakkab- e-Tauseefi‟:-
Al-Muslim al-Saadiq = the true Muslim / al-Rajul al-Saaleh= the pious man / al-Masjid al-Kabeer = the big mosque / al-kitab al- sagheer = the small book / al-'amm al-ameen = the credible uncle.
On the same pattern, "al-hayaat-ud-dunya‟, as a rule, is "the worldly state of life‟ (the life of this world). Therefore, the learned translator's personal translation as “lower/inferior state of life” does not seem to hold validity. In comparison of the same worldly life Allah swt has mentioned "hayaat-ul-aakhirat‟, which under the rules of comparison, is supposed to be the opposite of the worldly life, i.e. non worldly, of a superior and finer nature, free from physical compulsions, a super- conscious or spiritual level of life.
Dear Readers, we have a large number of Verses dealing with Aakhirah, and to quote them would lengthen the thesis exorbitantly. Therefore, let us check only those places where Aakhirat is quoted in comparison of Hayaat-ud-Dunya. After we have reached the above conclusions, the following comparative study would easily discard the mutilation of the lexical meanings, and the AGENDA of learned translator would be sufficiently exposed.
Verse 86/2; “OOLAAIKAL-LAZEENA ASHTRAOU AL-HAYAAT-UD- DUNYA BIL-AAKHIRA; FA-LAA YUKHAFFAF „AN-HUM AL-'AZAABU WA LAA HUM YUNSAROON.”
Translation: These are the ones who have traded this worldly life in return for Aakhirat; hence the torment reserved for them will not become less severe, nor shall they be helped.
Now assuming for a minute that we change it into, according to the learned translator: “the ones who have traded the "lower state of life‟ in return for "a better round of life‟ within this world”……. Would that make sense? I hope you would agree that it won't!
Verse 2/200: “FA MIN-AN-NAASI MUN YAQOOLU RABBA-NA- AATINAA FID-DUNYA WA MAA LA-HU FIL-AAKHIRATI MIN KHALAAQ”.
Translation: Thus, there are those among people who say "O our Rabb, bless us within this world‟; but then, for such ones there is no share in the Aakhirat.
Can the learned translator twist this translation to represent his personal standpoint? Probably not!
Verse 11/15-16: “MAN KAANA YUREEDUL-HAYAATUD-DUNYA WA ZEENATA-HAA, NUWAFFI ILAYI-HIM A‟MAALA-HUM FEE-HAA WA HUM FEE-HA LAA YUBKHASOON; ULAA‟IKA ALLAZEENA LAYISA LA-HUM FIL- AAKHIRATI ILLAN-NAAR; WA HABATA MAA SANA‟OO FEE-HA WA BAATILA MAA KAANU YA‟MALOON”.
Translation: Those who seek this worldly life and its adornments, we in this respect, grant full reward for their efforts and in this they are not deprived at all…..these are the ones for whom nothing remains in the Aakhirat except fire; whatever they had acquired went waste, and whatever they worked for turned futile.
Can it be the description of another round of life within this world? Is there a guarantee of longevity of life for those who are addressed here? Would all of them continue living physically until they are sentenced to the punishment of fire in this world?
Verse 3/145: “WA MAN YURID THAWAAB-AD-DUNYA, NOO‟TI-HI MIN- HAA, WA MAN YURID THAWAAB-AL-AAKHIRATI, NOO‟TI-HI MIN-HAA”.
Translation: And whosoever desires the reward of this World, we give him thereof, and whosoever desires the reward of Aakhirat, we give him thereof.
Verse 4/77: “QUL MATAA‟-AD-DUNYA QALEELUN WAL AAKHIRATU KHAYIRUN LI-MAN-IT-TAQAA, WA LAA TUZLAMOONA FATEELA”.
Translation: Say that the possessions of this World are but of little substance, whereas the Aakhirat is much valuable for the one who is pious; and you will not be done injustice equal to the thread in a date seed.
What does our learned translator think here about “thawaab-ud- Dunya” and “Mataa-ud-Dunya” in the two verses above? Don't we notice “Murakkab-e-Tauseefi” here? And isn't the meaning of “Dunya” here the same “Dunya”? And under the rule of Comparison of Opposites, doesn't the term “Aakhirat” here mean “another or final life”?
Verse 8/67: “TUREEDOONA "ARADH-AD-DUNYA, WA-ALLAHU YUREED- UL-AAKHIRA. WA-LLAHU "AZEEZUN HAKEEM”.
Translation: You desire provision of this World whereas Allah prefers Aakhirat; And Allah is Dominant, Wise.
Can here “Provisions of this World” versus “Preference for Aakhirat” be taken for two different spells of the same life within this world? Can the learned translator apply his “own” meanings here?
Verse 9/38: “ARDHAYITUM BIL-HAYAAT-ID-DUNYA MIN AL-AAKHIRA; FA MAA MATAA'-UL-HAYAAT-ID-DUNYA FIL-AAKHIRATI ILLA QALEEL”.
Translation: You have consented to the life of this world in comparison with Aakhirat; nevertheless, the possessions of this world's life are meager in comparison with those of Hereafter.
Verse 87/16: “BALL TU'THIROON-AL-HAYAAT-AD-DUNYA WAL AAKHIRATU KHAYIRUN WA ABQAA”.
Translation: You rather prefer the life of this world, whereas Aakhirat is valuable and is “longer lasting”.
If Aakhirat too means the life of this world, then how can that be “longer lasting” (abqaa)? Physical life is never long lasting as we all know. Rather, the Hereafter alone can be long lasting where man transforms into a finer, eternal form of pure conscious energy as his inner self is already a self-conscious entity, whose real existence is consciousness. This statement is confirmed by the science of physics.
But, In case the learned translator contends that God is talking here about the chain of human generations, not about the lives of individuals, he is welcome to give supportive evidence from the Quran.
Dear Readers, we have such a large number of Verses dealing with this subject that the next ten pages would not suffice to accommodate all of them. This humble student only hopes that by the above mentioned material, the Quranic viewpoint, with due authority, has been seen with certainty. In all the Verses quoted, Aakhirat cannot possibly be taken for a second round of physical life within this world. In fact, these verses are clearly describing the essential phenomenon of the Hereafter, i.e. the eternal life that is to come after our physical life. Intentional falsification of their meanings can only be done under the dictates of a particular anti-Quran AGENDA.
Dear Readers, please note, at the end of the Chapter, how sarcastically Allah swt deals with deniers of the Hereafter:-
Verse: 29/6 and 37/23: “WA QALOO IN HIYA ILLA HAYATUNA AD- DUNYA WA MAA NAHNU BI-MAB‟OOTHEEN”.
Translation: And they say : There is nothing but the Life of this World for us; and we are not to be resurrected………
Verse 45/24: “WA QALOO MAA HIYA ILLA HAYATU-NA AD-DUNYA, NAMOOTU WA NAHYAA, WA MAA YUHLIKUNA ILLA AD-DAHR; WA MAA LA-HUM BI-ZAALIKA MIN ILM; IN HUM ILLA YAZUNNOON”.
Translation: And they say: There is no life for us except this Worldly life. We die and we take birth, and it is nothing but time that kills us. In fact, they possess no knowledge in this respect. They make only assumptions.
And after this Divine injunction, Readers, no doubt or ambiguity remains in acknowledging the fact that's so eloquently expressed by Iqbal like this :-
ZINDAGI KI AAG KA ANJAAM KHAKASTAR NAHIN
TOOTNA JIS KA MUQADDAR HO, YEH WO GOHAR NAHIN MAUT KAY HAATHON SE MIT SAKTA AGAR NAQSH-E-HAYAAT
'AAM YOON USS KO NAH KAR DAITA NIZAAM-E-KAAINAAT
MAUT TAJDEED-E-MAZAAQ-E-ZINDAGI KA NAAM HAY
KHWAB KAY PARDAY MEN BAIDAARI KA AIK PAIGHAM HAY
نہیںہرگوہو یہ ہورمقد کا جسٹناٹو
تئناکاؾنظا یتادکرنہ کوسا ںیوؾعا ہےؾپیغاکاکایرابیدمیںےدپرکےباخو
نہیںکسترخاؾنجااکاگآکیگیندز
تحیانقشِگراسکتامٹسےںتھوہاکےتمو ہےؾناکاگیندزؼامزیدتجدتمو
Before closing this Chapter, another big contradiction from the learned translator is copy/pasted below to show his dwindling faith and lack of coherence. You will find him, to your amazement, translating Dunya and Aakhira here in the orthodox sense again!
Please watch the Question made to him at the forum:-
QUESTION ID 715 :: Haqiqat e Malaika
A.O.A..Dear Dr sahib please explain ' MUSJAD-Y-AQSA'.If that was a ; ILME SAFER; then what was its logic. If according to Allama pervez that was about ;HIJRATY-MADINA; If so then what is your openion about. Thanks
Now part of his reply which relates directly to the subject of the Hereafter:-
“…….This is what history and archeology tells us. It has nothing to do with Quran Lets see what Quran says about Ibrahim and his Deen at different places
يِف ُهانْيَفَطْصا دَقَلوَ
ُوسَ
فْ َن َوفِ
مَ لاِإ َميىاَربإِ ةِ لَِّم عَ
َغْر
ْنمَ َو
نيِحلاصّلا َنمِ
َل ةَرخلآا يِف ُونَإَِو اَيْندُ لا
-130 andwho turns away from the deen of Ibrâhim except who befools himself? Truly, we chose Him In This world and Verily, In the Hereafter He will be among the righteous.(2-130)”.
Kindly check carefully both the underlined phrases in the above copy/paste, and see if you can have a clue about what the learned translator actually stands for. Should you be able to surmise something concrete, kindly do inform this humble student.