Re: [IN URDU] Will History repeats itself ?
Assalamu Alaykum,
I have cut some of the parts to keep the quote short, I am going to address the rest.
First thing is that in the above interpretation, the claim is made that this is a vision, but there is no real reason provided how is it determined to be a vision. I read the reasoning, but to me it still does not provide how this verse is interpreted this way.
Let us look at the verse again and I will add the next verse with it for the context, I will also try to make a very detailed effort to explain it and why the argument offered is not applicable and how it does not apply to this verse.
“Or the like of him who passed by a town, and it had fallen down upon its roofs; he said: How will God give it life after its death (mautiha)? So God caused him to die (amata) for a hundred years, then raised him to life. He said, ‘How long have you tarried?’ He said, ‘I have tarried a day, or a part of a day.’ (God) said, 'Nay! you have tarried a hundred years; then look at your food and drink - years have not passed over it; and look at your donkey; and that We may make you a sign to men, and look at the bones, how We set them together, then clothed them with flesh; so when it became clear to him, he said, ‘I know that God has power over all things.’” (Al-Baqarah 2:259)
Here is the sequence: The first phrase used by the passing person is “How will God give it life after its death”. Essentially the person does not understand how can God raise the dead - he doubts it, or is confused about it.
Then God says that He caused him to die for a hundred years – very plain, simple, no confusion, it does not say God made it to appear. If you want to look at other verses, this is how Quran says that God made something to ‘appear’ a certain way:
“That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-” (An-Nisa 4:157)
This is how Quran says a vision was shown:
“And when We said to you: Surely your Lord encompasses men; and We did not make **the vision which We showed you **but a trial for men and the cursed tree in the Quran as well; and We cause them to fear, but it only adds to their great inordinacy.” (Bani Israel 17:60)
The word here used is “ru’ya” (vision) - Quran is very precise, no confusion. When it wants to explain something, it does it in plain Arabic. Now let us say God really wants to tell that He actually caused someone to die and raised it. How does He say?
“So God caused him to die (amata) for a hundred years, then raised him to life.”
To me, this is plain. It does not say “God showed him a vision of death for hundred years”, neither does it say “It was made to appear to him that he was dead for hundred years.”
It simply states what God actually did. I would like to repeat my question again, let us say we accept that was not real death, then how should have God really expressed that He caused the person to die for a hundred years?
Then follows this sequence:
“He said, ‘How long have you tarried?’ He said, ‘I have tarried a day, or a part of a day.’ (God) said, 'Nay! you have tarried a hundred years;”
The person here is saying that I have tarried for a day. In other words, he does not think he was dead for hundred years. But God’s response is very clear:
“Nay! you have tarried a hundred years”
This is really a reinforcement, “No, you were in that state for a hundred years” - if it were a vision, then how could he be in that state for a hundred years?
Given this, there is no way to take any other interpretation.
My question, which remains unanswered over and over again is this: If you think that God did not have this person dead for hundred years, how would he have expressed it to let us know that this person was actually dead for hundred years?
Best Wishes,
Omer Iqbal