4 ms·

The verse that entire Wikipedia page centers on is referring to a particular incident that occurred to the Prophet[1]. Furthermore, the verse is not referring t

by Cyph0n 10y ago

The verse that entire Wikipedia page centers on is referring to a particular incident that occurred to the Prophet[1]. Furthermore, the verse is not referring to blasphemers in any way. It's important to note that a large portion of verses in the Quran were revealed to the Prophet in response to a particular event that took place during his lifetime. Tafsir (exegesis) is the subfield of Islamic science that deals with figuring out the context of a particular verse. [1] Explanation of that verse (5:33): http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=33&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=73&t...

int_19h 10y ago
It's also important to note that such interpretation is subjective, and there are different schools of thought within Islam, that ascribe different contexts (and, consequently, different scopes) to the verses. Also, the mainstream consensus changes over time - there has been a fairly long period, for example, during which the Sword Verse was interpreted to imply that the Caliph does have the authority (and in some madhabs, the obligation) to wage offensive war against unbelievers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on_Jihad#Permission_for_warfare_according_to_Islamic_jurists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on...
duncan_bayne 10y ago
Yes. As with people arguing about the interpretation of other religious texts, though, the main issue is: what do the _majority_ of followers of the religion believe? Or, perhaps: do _enough_ followers of the religion believe the problematic interpretation? Had Al-Ghazali been less successful in his reactionary unwinding of the Islamic world's enlightenment, we'd probably be having a very different conversation now.

by Cyph0n 10y ago

int_19h 10y ago

It's also important to note that such interpretation is subjective, and there are different schools of thought within Islam, that ascribe different contexts (and, consequently, different scopes) to the verses. Also, the mainstream consensus changes over time - there has been a fairly long period, for example, during which the Sword Verse was interpreted to imply that the Caliph does have the authority (and in some madhabs, the obligation) to wage offensive war against unbelievers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on_Jihad#Permission_for_warfare_according_to_Islamic_jurists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_of_Islamic_scholars_on...

duncan_bayne 10y ago

Yes. As with people arguing about the interpretation of other religious texts, though, the main issue is: what do the _majority_ of followers of the religion believe? Or, perhaps: do _enough_ followers of the religion believe the problematic interpretation? Had Al-Ghazali been less successful in his reactionary unwinding of the Islamic world's enlightenment, we'd probably be having a very different conversation now.