Moon

Scholarly Opinion of Quranic texts

" And he it is who has created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, each in an orbit floating". Quran (21:33)
Imam Ibn Kathir(rah) gives the classical interpretation of this as ayah as ".....the sun with it's own light and it's own path and orbit and allowed time, and the moon which shines with a different light and travels on a different path and it's own allowed time". (Vol 6 page 444)
"See you not how Allah has created the seven heavens in tiers?. And has made the moon a light therein, and made the sun a lamp?". Quran (71:15-16)
stations and positions for the moon, and he made it's(Moon's) light vary so that sometimes it increases until it reaches a maximum.....". (Vol 10 Page 185)

"It is he who made the sun a shining thing and the moon as a light...". (10:5)
Imam Ibn Kathir (Rah) says, "....He made the Ray's that come forth from the bright sun as a source of light, and made the beams that came forth from the moon as light. He made them of two different natures so they would not be confused with one another. Allah made the Dominion of the sun in the daytime and the moon in the night. He ordained phases for the moon, where it starts small then it's light increases until it completes a full moon....". ( Vol 4, Page 563-564)
Pay attention to the below statements in this fatwa of sheikh Saleh al-Munajjid's website: "Most scholars of Arabic language and tafseer do not agree that noor is a transient reflection of daw’ (light) and they do not accept that it is not an inherent characteristic; they say that this understanding is in fact taken from the philosophers who study astronomy and nature. From a linguistic and Qur’anic point of view, there is nothing to support this understanding. Therefore this specious argument is completely baseless, especially since many scholars of the Arabic language – such as Ibn as-Sikkeet – said that noor and diya’ are synonymous, and it is not known that there is any differentiation between them from a linguistic point of view.
The reason why the Qur’an uses the word diya’ when referring to the sun and noor when referring to the moon is by way of variety and eloquence, with the use of synonyms. This is common in Arabic, and the Qur’an was revealed in a clear Arabic tongue. Abu Bilaal al-‘Askari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:The difference between diya’ and noor: they are synonymous in linguistic terms. End quote from Mu‘jam al-Furooq al-Lughawiyyah (p. 332).

As-Samarqandi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Allah made the sun diya’ with heat, and the moon noor without heat. End quote from Bahr al-‘Uloom (2/104).
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The words diya’, noor and so on refer to something that produces light by itself, such as the sun and moon, and such as fire.

The Arabic word for moon is 'qamar' and the light described there is 'muneer' which is borrowed light, or 'noor' which is a reflection of light."
Let’s analyze
The word "muneer" is used 6 times in the Qur'an.
3:184 (Enlightening scripture ),
22:8 (Enlightening book ),
31:20 (Enlightening book ),
35:25 (Enlightening scripture ),
25:61(Luminous moon)
24:35 (Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth
(The Parable of His Light )
(God does guide whom He will to His Light)

We cannot claim that the word muneer or noor is used for reflected light as we see, it is used for the scriptures and for Allah as well. Also, Quran 33:46 , Prophet is regarded as Sirajum muneer , Which just makes it more confusing that if Allah is refered as noor in one place, and sun is refered as Siraaj elsewhere, then what can be derived. Nauzubillah its like referring to Prophet as source of light and Allah as reflection, Nauzubillah summa Nauzubillah. We must realize what happens when we try to interpret the true words of the Quran to fit in the modern masonic science, it’s a chaos. Quran does not have to prove itself to so called modern science. Not many know who came up first with the idea that the moon is the reflected light ? It was Aristotle, pioneering free masonic philosophers of his times 384-322 years Before Prophet Eesa PBUH,

How did Aristotelian philosophy enter the muslim world ?

"In Aristotle’s view, the philosopher is of a higher status than a prophet, because the prophet understands things by means of imagination whereas the philosopher understands things by means of reason and contemplation. In their view, imagination is of a lower status than contemplation. Al-Faraabi agreed with Aristotle in viewing the philosopher as being of higher status than a prophet.'... this is the touch stone of Sufism..that wilaya is higher status than Nubuwa... As explained by Shaikh Ul Islam Ibn taymiyyah) Imam al-Shaafa’i said: The people did not become ignorant and begin to differ until they abandoned Arabic terminology and adopted the terminology of Aristotle. Even though philosophy existed in the ancient civilizations of Egypt, India and Persia, it became most famous in Greece and became synonymous with that land, the reason being that the Greek philosophers were interested in transmitting it from the legacy of idolatrous peoples and the remnants of the divinely-revealed religions, benefiting from the scriptures of Ibraaheem and Moosa (peace be upon them) after the Greek victory over the Hebrews after the captivity in Babylon, and benefiting from the religion of Luqmaan the Wise. So there was a mixture of views that confirmed the divinity and Lordship of the Creator that was contaminated with idolatry. Therefore the Greek philosophy was in some ways a revival more than an innovation". This is what the modern speakers have done in interpreting the Quran deviating from the classical linguistic interpretation, and adopting a mutakallimoon approach...and millions are swayed

....."Ibn Rushd was infatuated with the thought of Aristotle to the extent that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said of him: He is one of the most adherent of people to the views of Aristotle. End quote from Bayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah (1/120). Ibn Rushd tried hard to explain Aristotelian thought and present it to the people in a new Arabic style. Whilst doing that, when he saw a contradiction between Aristotelian thought and the fundamentals of Islam, he would try to find a far-fetched interpretation that could lead to undermining and destroying Islam. It was as if Aristotelian philosophy was the counterpart of the teachings of Islam which came from the Lord of the Worlds and are embodied in the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It was on this basis that he wrote his famous book Fasl al-Maqaal fi Taqreer ma bayna ash-Sharee‘ah wa’l-Hikmah min al-Ittisaal (The Decisive Treatise, Determining the Nature of the Connection between Religion and Philosophy)". We perhaps see history repeating itself, where the role of Ibn Rushd is being played by Modern Interpretors...Allahu Musta'an...

Samuel Birley Rowbotham was an English inventor and writer, he wrote "lt has been shown that the Moon is not a reflector of the Sun's light, but is self-luminous. That the luminosity is confined to one-half its surface is sufficiently shown by the fact that at " New Moon" the whole circle or outline of the Moon is often distinctly visible ; but the darker outline is less, or the circle is smaller than the segment which is illuminated. From this it is easily seen that "New Moon," "Full Moon," and "Gibbous Moon" are but the Different proportions of the illuminated surfare which are presented to the observer on earth". (In the Book , Zetetic Astronomy by Samuel Robotham, Page 123,)
In 1965 this scientist R Foster said in an interview that the moon was in fact made of plasma, not rock, and that landing on it would not be possible. Mr Foster claimed that once his ‘profound and decisive’ investigations were proven, a complete re-investigation of the laws of nature would be necessary.