-
Quran 30:27 – Recreation Is Easier For Him
Ar-Rum – 30:27
Arabic
وَهُوَ ٱلَّذِى يَبۡدَؤُاْ ٱلۡخَلۡقَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدُهُۥ وَهُوَ أَهۡوَنُ عَلَيۡهِۚ وَلَهُ ٱلۡمَثَلُ ٱلۡأَعۡلَىٰ فِى ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضِۚ وَهُوَ ٱلۡعَزِيزُ ٱلۡحَكِيمُ
Doesn’t this imply that somehow the first creation was difficult in some way?
-
39 Replies
-
Quran 30:27 – Recreation Is Easier For Him
updated 1 year ago
4 Members
·
39
Replies
-
What’s being said in the Quran 30:27 is from the perspective of people. Some would criticize that how is it possible for us to be recreated after we’re long dead. In 30:27 God is appealing to their own intellect in response to their criticism. It’s always harder to create something anew – not recreating it once it already exists.
-
That logic makes sense. But this wording doesn’t necessarily ensue that. Rather it says easier FOR HIM. Why would we take any other understanding than this literal one?
-
There’s no need to take any other logic. Just our own perspective in interpreting the words has to be aligned with the context.
-
So in reality it’s not easier for him. Just that their denying it is illogical right?
-
I will only comment on what it means. There’s no need to form any conjectures regarding whether or not it’s easier for Him in terms of kilojoules of energy He used up the first time around versus the next time around.
-
No but we should think about that too because in the apparent meaning it implies more kilojoules were used. And that wouldn’t make sense for God- for whom all things require no effort
-
No, there’s no reason to project our own thinking upon God’s word. What’s being said there is for a reason. Both the reason and the response are crystal clear. Any guesses we make in terms of what can’t possibly be known (matters related to the reality of God, afterlife, etc.) drive us away from what we’re supposed to learn from the God’s message.
If we start venturing in that direction, it doesn’t take much before we come up with elaborate theories about God, life, religion and everything else in between. Before we know it, we’re erroneously proving our beliefs from unrelated verses in the Quran itself, and are completely convinced of our beliefs. In reality they’re far from true, and are based on wrong assumptions and conjectures.
This line of inquiry of the Quran, or any other knowledge should be avoided. What’s paramount is that we know the boundaries of our knowledge and respect those boundaries. There’s a lot that we are yet to discover and learn within those boundaries – there’s no conceivable reason trying to step out.
-
That’s perfect for something like ثم على العرش استوى. That require a literary taste and study of the Quran’s stylistically. So where rising above the throne means being an active governor rather than physically rising- how can the words here refer only to point out the illogical arguments or thinking of the Quraysh. Because the words themselves here denote a physical movement/action and requiring energy. Unless I am wrong in my first premise that God doesnt require energy to do something
-
We have no evidence that God requires energy so stop right there – we have hit the boundary.
-
Ok we have hit the boundary. So how do we interpret this verse given this? If it refers to something about the being of God it’s just mutashabihaat right?
-
Yes that would be allegorical.
The context of the verse tells us how to interpret it. This entire chapter is providing evidences of God’s existence and His glory, providing empirical evidence, appealing to human faculties of reason and rationality, responding to criticism, motivating us to use our intellect, and reminding us of the day of judgement. The intent of the Author is crystal clear – that’s exactly what we should stick to.
-
-
Just a food for thought, 30:27 could be a subtle reference to second life being coming into existence in a flash of seconds as compared to billions of years for the first life as mentioned in 30:25.
-
I’m glad that there’s some food – @AhmadShoaib is making me use up all my calories!! 😂😂
-
How many kilojoules did I make you exert 🤣🤣🤣
-
Way too many!! But Insha’allah it will all be fruitful one day when you’re all grown up and make us all proud!
-
May Allah give us all the opportunity to please him.
Ameen
-
-
In recent Q&A Session with Ghamidi Sahab on Questions selected from ASK GHAMIDI Platform:
For answer to your question, please refer to the video below from 1:17:02 to 1:17:52
-
I saw Ghamidi sahab’s response snd even tafsir jalalayn says the same thing. My question is what indication is there in the ayah (30:27) that it is switching the perspective or bringing attention to a stupidity rather than giving a statement of reality?
Ar-Rum – 30:27
English – Tafsir Jalalayn
And He it is Who initiates the creation, of mankind, then brings it back, after their destruction, and that is [even] easier for Him, than the initiation — from the perspective of those addressed for whom to repeat something is easier than doing it for the first time — otherwise, in God’s case, exalted be He, both are just as easy. His is the loftiest description in the heavens and the earth, the most sublime attribute, namely that `there is no god except God’. And He is the Mighty, in His kingdom, the Wise, in His creation.
-
Shouldn’t the phrasing be- ‘what is their stupid denial, recreation should be easier for the one who has created the heavens and the Earth the first time’?
-
I think you answered it correctly yourself here:
-
Yes, that answer would be correct only if the wording allows (ensues) the interpretation of the phrasing I gave above
-
They used to believe in God as the creator of this world, so this wording is implied of course.
-
I mean does the wording support a change in perspective? Because the previous ayah and the rest of this ayah both point to realities of God
-
There is no need for the ayah to include this in the wording by explicit or implicit means because this fact already exists in the pretext of the Quran and also explicitly in many other occasions in the Quran.
-
Yes that fact does exist. But the point is that is the ayah relating to some mutashabihaat about his being that we shouldn’t chase- that somehow the first creation required x amount of effort and the second creation requires x-1 effort
-
Since we get a hint from some other places that second creation would be fast and abrupt so it could be a reference to that as well, but I think Ghamidi Sahab’s point is stronger that primary purpose is to tell them of their own stupidity or their own contradiction.
-
هَوْن : – سُهُولَة
– Absence of difficulty – easiness; facility; ease; simplicity; visibility; plainness; clearness
Some translate it as this is simple for him.
-
Is moderating AskGhamidi more easier/simpler for me now or before?
It is indeed more simpler/easier than before but this in no way implies that work that I do here now is in any way less or of a lower magnitude as before, in fact, it could be even more.
(This is just to understand the point, this has no direct correlation with God and His Might).
-
The magnitude of the the work here is not in question though, it is apparently directly to do with the ease/difficulty in executing it
-
But with the context it seems that most people think that ease or lack of difficulty is intended. And since it’s in the comparative form then it suggests that the first creation had some difficulty.
Unless the word means simplicity. Then that solves all issues, the first creation was a long period and was complicated, the second one was simpler and abrupt. But I’m not sure if that makes grammatical sense because of the word له
-
-
The point being that if you believe that I created AskGhamidi then should creating another similar platform or even better one be both easier and simpler for me or not? (from your perspective). When you know I already created one, then how come you deny that I cannot create a second one, in fact, from your perspective, since I have had already created one platform, you should actually find creation of a second platform by me more plausible/easier/simpler etc.
But this doesn’t necessarily imply that from my perspective its gonna be simpler/easier in execution for me because I might add even more sophistication into another platform.
-
Where does my perspective come into the ayah?
Imagine you said ‘how could you say making a better platform is harder? It’s actually easier for me’
Clearly you’re not referring to my perspective rather a reality about yourself
-
If I am teaching you a lesson or giving a sermon, then definitely I’ll be saying this from your perspective.
-
How does any situation change the exact wording of ‘it’s easier for me’ and it’s implication of relating directly to a reality about yourself?
-
I mean it all would fit perfectly if there was a ضرب الله مثلا and an example was given from our own experience. The tafsirs also add (from your experience) but I don’t see how the wording allows for that interpretation
-
Any ideas?
-
I actually exhausted all my metal resources in expressing this point. But as a principle, Language is always understood in terms of ‘nutq-o-bayan’ and not in terms of ‘mantaq’. The former takes precedence over the latter.
-
Definitely. I just don’t get how this usloob or usage of nutq o bayan in this case is implemented. Obviously the wording has to allow for a certain interpretation- and from the making a platform example above I don’t see how this verse relates to teaching a lesson from a perspective shift. Definitely language isn’t based purely on logic but we can’t just go against the clear wording because it may not make sense in our context. That being said of course I’m not well versed in Quranic Arabic and if the ‘take it from your own perspective’ is implied in brackets then i would be wrong
-
-
I totally hear you Ahmad. Thanks for belaboring the point 🙂
The logical fallacy of those questioning the Creator’s ability to re-create is pretty evident (أَفَعَيِينَا بِٱلْخَلْقِ ٱلْأَوَّلِ ۚ بَلْ هُمْ فِى لَبْسٍۢ مِّنْ خَلْقٍۢ جَدِيدٍۢ). The words of the ayah do underscore that absurdity, but I totally understand that’s not the point of your discussion.
The question is that strictly from a nutq-o-bayan perspective — no mantaq — does a sam’ee of the language understand that one is “easier” than the other for Allaah? And that’s where I hear you: it seems to be a possible nutq reading.
I wonder if from a nutq-o-bayan perspective, the ayah idiomatically translates as: “(if anything) it is even easier for Him”.
The latter kind of then shifts the perspective to that of other than Allaah. Kind of like in
لَخَلْقُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ أَكْبَرُ مِنْ خَلْقِ ٱلنَّاسِ وَلَـٰكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ ٱلنَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَLet me know what you think.
P.S. For some reason with my gulabi Arabic I’ve always translated hayan as trivial rather than easy. So, in my idiomatic translation, I’d read the ayah as “it even more trivial for him”. That translation kind of removes the problem.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
