You make great points.

We have to remember that Allah showed how even such paradigms as thinking that space and time are absolute has been shown to be false assumptions (Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity which has proven to be true in experiments).

Therefore while we should be very hesitant to oppose any views taken by the consensus of great past scholars, we cannot assume them to be true.

Moreover, we must remember that a lot of views of past scholars were based partly on their use of hadiths. Even though those hadiths are understood to be authentic, they need not necessarily be so.

I am not a perennialist and I strongly disagree with perennialism.

However, this does not make anything black or white.

Allah (swt) knows everyone’s background to the full extent and all will be judged with justice. Only Allah knows the full story.

Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

Yes, there are known metaphors in the Arabic language, however there is no way to interpret the ayat on who exactly gets to Jannah metaphorically. It is clear only Muslims may enter Jannah.

“’The second opinion is the exact opposite of the first: prohibiting taqlīd and requiring ijtihād for all people. Those who hold this position obligate every Muslim to take their legal rulings directly from the Qur’an and Sunnah. They fiercely reject the following of the four madhāhib’

There are other perspectives among the scholars, of course, as that article shows. I simply point out that it is an acceptable perspective, and one that I follow.”

Okay then, Islam becomes 1.7 billion sects, everyone has a different interpretation, everyone makes takfir of each other, the end.

“it can’t be assumed that orthodoxy is already correct”

“You must adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs who come after me. Adhere to it and cling to it strongly, and beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation (bid’ah) and every innovation is a going astray.” Narrated by Abu Dawud

Abu Amir al- Hawdhani said, “Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with him) stood among us and said, ‘Beware! The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood among us and said’: ‘Beware! The People of the Book before (you) were split up into 72 sects, and this community will be split up into 73, seventy-two of them will go to Hell and one of them will go to Paradise, and it is the majority group.” Narrated by Abu Dawud

It CAN be safely assumed that orthodoxy is correct. In fact, in Islam, it already is.

Re-reading the comments, I see that Seymour is talking about the word “seal” instead of “metaphor.” Technically, he’s correct, but if it’s not a metaphor, then someone needs to explain what the Arabic means so that it is clear that it’s not a metaphor. And why would translators choose a metaphor when literal meanings would suffice?

Even so, metaphor is a normal occurrence in language. And there are quite a few instances in the Quran. Here’s just one more:
17:24 – And, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: “My Lord! bestow on them thy Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood.”
Again, it would be odd for the translator to choose the metaphor of “wing” if a more literal word was available.

Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

I agree with Seymour.

If the Arabic has a different understanding of metaphor, I’d certainly be interested in learning about it. However, my point was simply, How can someone be accused of accusing Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of lying if that person were to take a metaphorical position of interpretation? And I was using the English understanding of metaphor to make that point.

Also, I also see some verses as clear and unambiguous. That’s not the point. Rather, to seek truth, we must always question what we believe and why, and do our best to understand the Quran and Sunnah, not blindly follow scholars. Elsewhere on this site (see http://www.virtualmosque.com/islam-studies/islamic-law/taqlid-and-following-a-madhhab-between-absolutism-and-negligence/), the position of Ibn Hazm is mentioned:

“The second opinion is the exact opposite of the first: prohibiting taqlīd and requiring ijtihād for all people. Those who hold this position obligate every Muslim to take their legal rulings directly from the Qur’an and Sunnah. They fiercely reject the following of the four madhāhib”

There are other perspectives among the scholars, of course, as that article shows. I simply point out that it is an acceptable perspective, and one that I follow.

@Abdul Sattar,
I am aware of the orthodox perspective of Christianity. My point was simply that the logic of relying upon a “collective” of opinion is not valid. The goal is to determine the truth of something by examining the evidence and reasons to support it. The fact that a great number of people believe something is irrelevant, as can be seen in the case of Christianity.

I completely agree that anything that Ghazzali has to say is important: He was a great scholar, and he sincerely followed the path of Allah. My point was that even what he says must be examined, and I gave an example of that.

@Abu Hunain
“the core set of beliefs (qati’) were taught and transmitted from him in a clear unambiguous way which is not subject to reinterpretation.”

For me, that is following the traditions of men, not the Quran of Allah nor the sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh). That is, men are fallible, and it’s my responsibility to learn as much as I can and to act according to my understanding. Don’t misunderstand me. It’s important to get the understanding of scholars on any point in Islam. That’s a part of learning and being open to truth. As I noted above, I find certain verses and hadiths as clear and unambiguous. But to assume that my understanding of those verses is correct, for me, is a dogmatic arrogance instead of the required humility that is open to truth. That doesn’t mean that someone shouldn’t think that they’re right; it means that the door to the possibility of being wrong should always be left open.

You can’t really assert that the term is a metaphor unless you’re using the Arabic definition for the Arabic word which probably has different connotations than the English word ‘seal.’