i would like to thank spidergoat for allowing me the extra two days, his gesture is much appreciated...as i have just learnt that the guy behind the desk who i had a shouting match with is not actually the supervising manager(as they turned out to look alike when i googled the latter), i guess now my heartbeat is low enough for me to post before the five days limit runs out, the sharp email his boss will be receiving can wait, as my problem with this formal debate is not affording just any time, but time enough for some concentration.
now, to the matters at hand, i will summarize what spider said the way i understood it, and he may correct me if i'm wrong, i also can't help noticing that his reply was kind of hasty, as i'll address afterwards.
intro:
-mohammad's language is poetic, and uses metaphors.
-arabs+ middle east+ crossroads of the world= arabs are cleverer than usually accredited for.
main points:
-fishermen noticing darkness of the sea.
-the passage is literary flourish.
-albeit mohammad -pbuh- not living near the ocean:
a-hearing the tale from fishermen.
b-the darkness can be that of a moonless night and not of a sea.
-components for the scientific gear were available at mohammad's time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alright! let's start:
-mohammad's language is poetic, and uses metaphors.
that's right, and i might generalize by saying:
i think any language can be poetic, i believe especially arabic, because of it's complex structures.
metaphors are normally used in poems and such literature, while one may classify the quran as literacy, he has to admit that it's of a whole new level(but that's not our topic).
-arabs+ middle east+ crossroads of the world= arabs are cleverer than usually accredited for.
that's true at places, but not others.
you may even say that mekkah was the religious and literary and a somewhat commercial crossroads of the arabian peninsula too, and muhammad DID work as a merchant, but still your statement needs to be constrained by knowledge of how things were there.
main points:
-fishermen noticing darkness of the sea.
yup, they'd start from the white sandy beaches, to the sky blue shallow waters, to the dark blue waters..but they're fishermen, not oceanologists, and if oceanologists noticed that-or heard fishermen talk about it, they'd write it down and it'll be recorded as science, so when is the first recording of such fact or theory?
also, it makes sense that if mohammad heard it from fishermen others are bound to hear it too, or hear him hearing it{?!}
-the passage is literary flourish.
this topic is too vast to be discussed thoroughly.
but first, please check this out, and take notice of the shakespear example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphors
and i'll try to take the arabic side and get straight to the point:
metaphors like the one in this verse work like this; you have a literary image, a description of a happening, an experience you're trying to convey through your words.
many times, that experience is novel to the average reader, and so, to pull the reader closer to understanding what you mean, you use a happening from the real world, one easily visualized, which has in common your message.
like one of my topmost favorites, of a medieval poet(
bashar ibnu burd) visualizing a battle:
كـــأن مثار النقع فوق رؤوسنا واسيافنا ليل تهاوى كـواكبه
pretty rough:[and the dust cloud raised by the battle combined with our swords is like a night whose stars are falling]
or one of many similar metaphors in the quran:
{The metaphor of those who take protectors besides Allah is that of a spider which builds itself a house; but no house is flimsier than a spider's house, if they only knew.} (Surat al-Ankabut, 41)
{The metaphor of those who reject their Lord is that their actions are like ashes scattered by strong winds on a stormy day. They have no power at all over anything they have earned. That is extreme misguidance.} (Surah Ibrahim, 18)
in short, a real, physical event is used to explain a "bit" far fetched or obscure one.
which one would be the one attempted to be explained? which one would be obscure? which one is being explained and clarified? which one is in question, which is the matter being discussed?
{
Or (the Unbelievers' state) is like the depths of darkness in a vast deep ocean, overwhelmed with billow topped by billow, topped by (dark) clouds: depths of darkness, one above another: if a man stretches out his hands, he can hardly see it! for any to whom Allah giveth not light, there is no light! }
and the seas example is actually the second one, as you can see it even starts with "or", the first one is:
وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَعْمَالُهُمْ كَسَرَابٍ بِقِيعَةٍ يَحْسَبُهُ الظَّمْآنُ مَاء حَتَّى إِذَا جَاءهُ لَمْ يَجِدْهُ شَيْئًا وَوَجَدَ اللَّهَ عِندَهُ فَوَفَّاهُ حِسَابَهُ وَاللَّهُ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ
{But the Unbelievers,- their deeds are like a mirage in sandy deserts, which the man parched with thirst mistakes for water; until when he comes up to it, he finds it to be nothing: But he finds Allah (ever) with him, and Allah will pay him his account: and Allah is swift in taking account. } then comes the "or like" and then the deep sea metaphor.
and so, the state being explained is the state of the unbeliever, which is as you said:"(waves on top of waves) representing the bombardment with doubts and confusion", which is being explained by the tangable example of being so deep in the sea you can't even see your outstretched hand, separated from light by waves upon waves topped by clouds, utter darkness and hopelessness.
now what's the funny thing?
what the heck kinda explanatory essense would people of that time benefit from something they don't even know exist? how can you explain something hard to understand with something people don't know exist? what will be in the imagination cloud of a desert bedwen when he reads that? "waves upon waves"? "being so deep in water you can't see a thing"?
did the metaphor serve it's purpose?
that's where the eternal universality of the quran comes in...IMO.
-albeit mohammad -pbuh- not living near the ocean:
a-hearing the tale from fishermen.
guess i discussed this before.
b-the darkness can bee that of a moonless night and not of a sea.
the verse clearly states "ocean/sea".
but actually, when looking up the "tafseer" of this verse by an old islamic scholar-who apparently doesn't know much about oceanology
- he said that one of the darknesses was the darkness of the night.. i checked the explanations of other scholars, each had his own version of the details, kinda expected as they were no scientists, but just in case you got wondering(as i did), they say the same thing about other religious conclusions. they leave the science to the scientists.
-components for the scientific gear were available at mohammad's time.
as i mentioned and referenced, that disk is called the secchi disk, the components you mentioned were:
1. rope
2. a disk of wood or stone
3. paint (optional)
you forgot:
4.sea.
5.boat and sea deep enough to reach that dark depth.
6-scientific mind.
as for the sea, didn't we assume mohammad didn't even
see a sea? and that is as far as a right assumption can go, if you want me to support that by giving references and examples of the HUGE details preserved of every detail of mohammad's -pbuh- life, i will.
you know, i can even give show you that "strange" people he meet and talk to, his personal life, sickness, sayings and habits, jokes and quarrels, all preserved with different categorized levels of credibility, all to the last detail, i've come across a "specialist" in that (the sirah) and he said he's sure mohammad being near a sea is not mentioned.
also, is the red sea or arabian gulf deep enough? do fishermen fish in such deep waters(in case they exist)?
lastly, and most importantly; science was never a strong point of mohammad, neither was poetry or magic (of which he was accused of after his prophecy).
before his "prophecy", muhammad was known for somethings, he was called the "truthful and trustworthy", so that when he turned out (he came from a direction they agreed whoever comes from )to be the one to decide for who to replace the black stone in the ka'ba, after the tribe leaders almost started a bloodbath for that honor. by then he was 25 years old.
he also used to go "meditate" for days in a cave in a mountain on the outskirts of mekkah, i guess otherwise he was your average sheep herder, later a merchant...
i don't know where oceanology comes through this, while for me there is an almost 1-2%(practically negligible) that mohammad could have had a normal source for his accurate description of deep sea darkness(which i believe we can appreciate more than the old muslims), but the waves upon waves, i really do see it irrefutable, there's just no way he or ANYONE else could know that cold water is of lower density than hot water, so that the sea is actually of two layers, separated by a surface which has waves identical to surface waves, they can break just like surface ones, yet they are invisible(not waves converging from different directions as you said, check the wiki).
that separating surface, is full of "dust" of hanging living organisms, those make the third level of darkness, the second is not the surface of the sea, but surface "waves", waves make the angle between the sun rays and the water surface further away(bigger) than 90, hence less penetration(opposed to a smooth water surface), mohammad must have had some serious mathematical and physical knowledge in optics and thermal transfer to conclude such piece of information logically and without even seeing an ocean. the clouds (first level) are obvious of course
-darkness in deep waters.(maybe/very improbable)
-internal waves.(still immpossible IMO)
-the levels of darkness.(also pretty immpossible to know, but correlation in the verse not so definite like the other two)
i wanted to keep this short and concise, sorry for not doing so.(actually doing the opposite)
