The 6 days creation in Quran, must it be literal?

[Mystic]

From forty hadiths of Imam Khomeini:


Some gnostics have interpreted the six days as stages in the journey of the light of the sun of existence in the mirror of descent and ascent.

According to the creed of gnosis, the descending levels of existence until the lowest point-which is the plane of concealment of the sun of existence by curtains of finitude and differentiation (ta’ayyunat)--constitute the reality of the night of ordainment (laylat al-qadr) and the beginning of the day of resurrection is from the first stage of return of mulk to malakut and removal of the curtains of ta’ayyunat to the ultimate levels of manifestation and return, which is the complete appearance of the greatest resurrection (qiyamat al-kubra).

The six days in which the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed, culminating in the Throne of God, the Throne of the all-Beneficent, which is the ultimate end of Divine istawa, power, and dominance, are the sixfold ascending planes in the greater cosmos (‘alam al-kabir); and the Throne of God, which is the manifestation of the perfect dominance and ownership, is the plane of will and the all-beneficent sacred effusion (fayd al-muqaddas al-rahmani), which is its complete manifestation after elimination of the ta’ayyunat and completion of the creation of the heavens and the earths.

And until the existence of the heavens and the earth endures, their creation is not finished from the viewpoint of the people of gnosis, in accordance with the words “Everyday He is engaged in some work” (55:29) and as implied by the absence of repetition in revelation (tajalli). In the Greater Man (insan al-kabir) and the greater cosmos the sixfold planes and their seventh subtlety (latifah) is the Throne of the All-Beneficent, which is the plane of the real heart, and were it not for the fear of prolixity, we would have explained thoroughly the greater plausibility of this interpretation in comparison to other interpretations, although the knowledge of the Divine scripture is with God, the Exalted, and those who are its special addressees. We speak on the basis of probabilities and plausibilities following the infeasibility of the literal sense.



To those who emphasize it must be literal, what is your argument?  Are metaphors impossible for God to use and he shouldn't use them at all because they can be taken literally?

[FatAndFaithless]

I doubt you'll find many here who will argue for a literal Muslim creation myth.

Why couldn't God just be explicitly clear about what happened, instead of talking in a way which has caused such disagreement and conflict amongst his believers and others?

[The Grand Nudger]

So....to summarize "it couldn't have happened that way....but there must be some way in which can can continue to claim that it's totally true now that we know better".  

-that about right?

....faith sounds exhausting.

(also.....that was a hell of alot of gibberish to preface a very simple question..don't you think? Are all those words and sentences you used supposed to be taken metaphorically - or am I to take them literally?)

[Minimalist]

You really seem terribly impressed with this horseshit, M/K. 

I suspect you are about the only one here who is.

[robvalue]

What's 4.5 billion divided by 6?

[Mystic]

Actually, it had to be interpreted in a non-literal way if the Quran were not to contradict itself, because the verses describing the 6 day creation, show earth and food on it was before making of the 7 heavens, while we read in an obvious literal expression:

أَأَنْتُمْ أَشَدُّ خَلْقًا أَمِ السَّمَاءُ ۚ بَنَاهَا {27}
[Shakir 79:27] Are you the harder to create or the heaven? He made it.
رَفَعَ سَمْكَهَا فَسَوَّاهَا {28}
[Shakir 79:28] He raised high its height, then put it into a right good state.
وَأَغْطَشَ لَيْلَهَا وَأَخْرَجَ ضُحَاهَا {29}
[Shakir 79:29] And He made dark its night and brought out its light.
وَالْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ دَحَاهَا {30}
[Shakir 79:30] And the earth, He expanded it after that.
أَخْرَجَ مِنْهَا مَاءَهَا وَمَرْعَاهَا {31}
[Shakir 79:31] He brought forth from it its water and its pasturage.
وَالْجِبَالَ أَرْسَاهَا {32}
[Shakir 79:32] And the mountains, He made them firm,
مَتَاعًا لَكُمْ وَلِأَنْعَامِكُمْ {33}
[Shakir 79:33] A provision for you and for your cattle.


So one had to be about metaphorical reality and the other literal, and this was true when Quran was revealed as it is now with scientific knowledge.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why do you have to interpret the quran in a way that it doesn't seem, to you, to contradict itself?  Why is that a requirement in the first place?

[Mystic]

Why do you have to interpret the quran in a way that it doesn't seem, to you, to contradict itself?  Why is that a requirement in the first place?

If a verse can be interpreted in a way that doesn't contradict another, it obviously makes sense to give it the benefit of the doubt, and not say no the contradictory meaning was what was meant. To accuse of a contradiction only makes sense, if there is no possible reconciliation. 

[Surgenator]

So god, the most intelligent being possible, thought it was a good idea to use the word 'day' instead of 'step'? Because using the word 'step' is obviously more confusing than day.

Actually, it had to be interpreted in a non-literal way if the Quran were not to contradict itself, because the verses describing the 6 day creation, show earth and food on it was before making of the 7 heavens,  while we read in an obvious literal expression:

أَأَنْتُمْ أَشَدُّ خَلْقًا أَمِ السَّمَاءُ ۚ بَنَاهَا {27}
[Shakir 79:27] Are you the harder to create or the heaven? He made it.
رَفَعَ سَمْكَهَا فَسَوَّاهَا {28}
[Shakir 79:28] He raised high its height, then put it into a right good state.
وَأَغْطَشَ لَيْلَهَا وَأَخْرَجَ ضُحَاهَا {29}
[Shakir 79:29] And He made dark its night and brought out its light.
وَالْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ دَحَاهَا {30}
[Shakir 79:30] And the earth, He expanded it after that.
أَخْرَجَ مِنْهَا مَاءَهَا وَمَرْعَاهَا {31}
[Shakir 79:31] He brought forth from it its water and its pasturage.
وَالْجِبَالَ أَرْسَاهَا {32}
[Shakir 79:32] And the mountains, He made them firm,
مَتَاعًا لَكُمْ وَلِأَنْعَامِكُمْ {33}
[Shakir 79:33] A provision for you and for your cattle.


So one had to be about metaphorical reality and the other literal, and this was true when Quran was revealed as it is now with scientific knowledge.

(bold mine). How did you determine which part is metaphorical and which was literal? Because I'm pretty sure that people believed those passages were literal before science said something on the subject.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why do you have to interpret the quran in a way that it doesn't seem, to you, to contradict itself?  Why is that a requirement in the first place?

If a verse can be interpreted in a way that doesn't contradict another, it obviously makes sense to give it the benefit of the doubt, and not say no the contradictory meaning was what was meant. To accuse of a contradiction only makes sense, if there is no possible reconciliation. 

The benefit of the doubt..... of what?  Again...why is this a requirement to begin with?  

@Surg...Pretty sure people still do..lol. Why wouldn't they, eh?