Salaam,
I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween (http://s16.postimage.org/7g525pigh/dammahtain1.jpg) either two of them, as in Muhammed i.e., (http://s11.postimage.org/61fz5f1nz/Muhammed.png)
Other prophet's names used in AlQuraan are as:
اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ
اِسۡحٰقَ
اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ
ہٰرُوۡنَ
مُوۡسٰی
سُلَیۡمٰنَ
دَاوٗدَ
اَیُّوۡبَ
یُوۡسُفَ
یَعۡقُوۡبَ
اِلۡیَاسَ
زَکَرِیَّا
یَحۡیٰی
عِیۡسٰی
یُوۡنُسَ
Why not any name ends with tanween? Is Muhammed not a name? If it is a name then how about 6:114 and 6:139?
6:114 اَفَغَیۡرَ اللّٰہِ اَبۡتَغِیۡ حَکَمًا وَّ ہُوَ الَّذِیۡۤ اَنۡزَلَ اِلَیۡکُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ مُفَصَّلًا ؕ وَ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ اَنَّہٗ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکَ بِالۡحَقِّ فَلَا تَکُوۡنَنَّ مِنَ الۡمُمۡتَرِیۡنَ
6:114 Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
مُنَزَّلٌ is set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ so why don't they used it as a name? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=114) to see other translations of this aayat.
6:139 وَ قَالُوۡا مَا فِیۡ بُطُوۡنِ ہٰذِہِ الۡاَنۡعَامِ خَالِصَۃٌ لِّذُکُوۡرِنَا وَ مُحَرَّمٌ عَلٰۤی اَزۡوَاجِنَا ۚ وَ اِنۡ یَّکُنۡ مَّیۡتَۃً فَہُمۡ فِیۡہِ شُرَکَآءُ ؕ سَیَجۡزِیۡہِمۡ وَصۡفَہُمۡ ؕ اِنَّہٗ حَکِیۡمٌ عَلِیۡمٌ
6:139 And they say, "What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is dead, then all of them have shares therein." He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing.
مُحَرَّمٌ is also set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ, so why did they translate it and why not use as a name? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=139) to see other translations.
If we also translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, which is derived from the word حَمۡدُ, means praise and مُحَمَّدٌ means praised one.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ...
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah... [regular translation]
If we translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, 48:29 will be translated as "Praised one is the Messenger of Allah....", this means whoever is the Messenger of Allah is the praised one.
Fortunately or unfortunately I don't have any evidence, not a single aayat that says that AlQuraan was given to Muhammad. Why there is no such aayat if it was given to him?
All explanations, comments, suggestions, critics, advises, support are welcome.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salaam
In fact means some sense, by Quran teachings and applying it and studing carefully, any one of us can be Muhamed, and a Rasul of the Quran message. its the time you perfected youre deen and then you can pass to others..
Quran teach us..IMOP to be messangers ourselfs. no one of us being special than other..just deliverers of the mesage. inside our coomunities countries cityes neighboorhoods we (because we study and inherited Quran laws) must spread truth and be active as like a rassul in and to whoever sourounds us.
Maybe im just talking sh... but Allah knows best:)
Thanks mmkahn for youre great posts, youre a nice piece of this freeminds puzzle :) :sun:
Salaam to all, from GharbAlandalus
Quote from: NOMAD on September 18, 2012, 07:22:06 PM
Salaam
In fact means some sense, by Quran teachings and applying it and studing carefully, any one of us can be Muhamed, and a Rasul of the Quran message. its the time you perfected youre deen and then you can pass to others..
Quran teach us..IMOP to be messangers ourselfs. no one of us being special than other..just deliverers of the mesage. inside our coomunities countries cityes neighboorhoods we (because we study and inherited Quran laws) must spread truth and be active as like a rassul in and to whoever sourounds us.
Maybe im just talking sh... but Allah knows best:)
Thanks mmkahn for youre great posts, youre a nice piece of this freeminds puzzle :) :sun:
Salaam to all, from GharbAlandalus
Salaam brother,
I agree with you. And I also believe that making someone special is giving a place beside God which is clear shirk. Only Allah is special and all respect due to Him alone.
I am glad to know that you like my posts, thank you for taking your time to read them :)
May Allah protect us from all kind of Shirk and increase us in knowledge and keep us guiding to His only path :pr
mmKhan
33.40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
33.40 Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men, but is God?s Apostle and the Seal of all Prophets. And God has indeed full knowledge of everything.
My understanding of this matter, is that what God is telling us is the same thing He keeps telling: prophets are all one, praised, exalted, because of the divine light and message, humanity is one, praised, exalted, because of the divine light and message, the seal of the prophets is THE MESSAGE. There has only been one message from God, the same message all over and over, in one language or another, in one form or another, there is only one message coming from God: we are Hi, everything is His, and to Him everyone and everything shall return. The seal of Prophecy stated by the prophet who received the Qur'an is the seal of conformity to the Qur'an, of corresponding to the Qur'an.
muhammad, may be a name or not, it is grade a condition attained by submission and belonging in heart and mind to the rabb, may be it is a name or may it is not and what nomad says makes sense that we all receive a message personally when we dare and can attain to that blessing and exaltation. It is humanity's vocation to be exalted and be one with everything and everybody and with all the prophets.
One again, the message is the unity of God, the unity of everything. We are not loose, we are not lost, we are one.
Salaam
My understanding is that Muhammad is not a name but a title for people who deserves praise. This title is also used in the bible, where its been translated as 'lovely one'.
All prophets were Muhammad's and I agree with Nomad that every righteous person can also become a Muhammad.
Hadithers just altered the muhammad title by twisting it to mean a name of a particular person and created a whole cult around this non-exsisting person. They needed to create that person in order to have someone they could attribute all their nonsense to.
If the muhammad title wasnt found in the quran, they would simply just find another title which they could label as being a name.
For instance, God in Quran ask us to be truthfull(sadek).
1. --> Hadithers begin to claim that Sadek is the name of the messenger of Quran
2. They begin to say and write a lot of things which they claim Sadek said.
3. They make a new shahada which ends with: Sadekrasool Allah
And woula - Sadek is created. And by time, even his whole life is also created, where he was born in mekka and married 11 women, one of them being a litte child. In other words, my dear friend - we are talking about hadithers playing the game SIMS of the 8 century version!
In reality, we dont have any knowledge of what the name of the prophet who came with quran was. God choosed to hold his identity unknown, and call him 'oh prophet' in the quran.
Peace
what about in 61.6 ???
Quote from: Ayisha on September 19, 2012, 05:56:37 AM
what about in 61.6 ???
this is 61,6
And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be �most acclaimed.�� But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly magic�
what is it you dont understand in it?
Quote from: Ayisha on September 19, 2012, 05:56:37 AM
what about in 61.6 ???
Salaam,
61:6 وَ اِذۡ قَالَ عِیۡسَی ابۡنُ مَرۡیَمَ یٰبَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ اِنِّیۡ رَسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ اِلَیۡکُمۡ مُّصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَیۡنَ یَدَیَّ مِنَ التَّوۡرٰىۃِ وَ مُبَشِّرًۢا بِرَسُوۡلٍ یَّاۡتِیۡ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِی اسۡمُہٗۤ اَحۡمَدُ ؕ فَلَمَّا جَآءَہُمۡ بِالۡبَیِّنٰتِ قَالُوۡا ہٰذَا سِحۡرٌ مُّبِیۡنٌ61:6 And when Eisa, son of Maryam, said, "O sons of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."
اَحۡمَدُIf you notice this is also without tanween, unlike Muahmmed.
And also take a look at the ending part of Aayat "
But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, This is obvious magic."
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 06:17:56 AM
Salaam,
61:6 وَ اِذۡ قَالَ عِیۡسَی ابۡنُ مَرۡیَمَ یٰبَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ اِنِّیۡ رَسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ اِلَیۡکُمۡ مُّصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَیۡنَ یَدَیَّ مِنَ التَّوۡرٰىۃِ وَ مُبَشِّرًۢا بِرَسُوۡلٍ یَّاۡتِیۡ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِی اسۡمُہٗۤ اَحۡمَدُ ؕ فَلَمَّا جَآءَہُمۡ بِالۡبَیِّنٰتِ قَالُوۡا ہٰذَا سِحۡرٌ مُّبِیۡنٌ
61:6 And when Eisa, son of Maryam, said, "O sons of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."
اَحۡمَدُ
If you notice this is also without tanween, unlike Muahmmed.
And also take a look at the ending part of Aayat "But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, This is obvious magic."
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
but that one is saying it's a 'name' is what I mean. Is there something in Arabic grammar that says 'this is a NAME' of someone..............not sure what I'm trying to get across here, sorry.
I can see there is a difference in the word Muhammed to the others but don't know enough about the grammar and such to have a clue what tanween actually means or does to a word.
:peace:
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
If we also translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, which is derived from the word حَمۡدُ, means praise and مُحَمَّدٌ means praised one.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ...
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah... [regular translation]
If we translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, 48:29 will be translated as "Praised one is the Messenger of Allah....", this means whoever is the Messenger of Allah is the praised one.
Peace mmkhan,
That is imprecise; no "is" in the verse nor can praised one be substituted in the verses to make sense. Simply try it...
3:144 وما and not محمد Muhammad الا only رسول messenger
33:40 ما not كان is محمد Muhammad ابا father احد one من from رجالكم your men ولكن and nonetheless رسول messenger الله The God وخاتم and seal النبيين the prophets وكان and is الله The God بكل in every شيء a thing عليما Knowing
48:29 محمد Muhammad رسول messenger الله The God والذين and the ones who معه with him اشداء tough على on الكفار the disbelievers رحماء merciful (plural) بينهم among them
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
Fortunately or unfortunately I don't have any evidence, not a single aayat that says that AlQuraan was given to Muhammad. Why there is no such aayat if it was given to him?
47:2 والذين and the ones who امنوا believe وعملوا and do الصالحات the righteous works وامنوا and believe بما in what
نزل descended على on محمد Muhammad وهو and it الحق the truth من from ربهم their Lord كفر rids عنهم from them سيئاتهم their evil deeds واصلح and correct بالهم their condition
Qur'an is understood best via cross-reference and logical construct. Proof: بين between يديه His hands (i.e. directly from The God) transmission via Gabriel to messenger instructed to ?say?...
2:97 قل say من who كان is عدوا an enemy لجبريل to Gabriel فانه so indeed he
نزله descended it على over قلبك your heart باذن by permission الله The God مصدقا confirming لما to what بين between يديه His hands وهدى and guidance وبشرى and glad tidings للمؤمنين to the believers
3:1 الم
3:2 الله The God لا no اله deity الا only هو He الحي The Living القيوم The Sustainer of all
3:3 نزل descended عليك to you الكتاب the book بالحق in the truth مصدقا confirming لما to what بين between يديه His hands وانزل and descended التوراه the Taurat والانجيل and The Injeel
12:111 لقد truly كان is في in قصصهم their stories عبره a lesson لاولي for those الالباب the understanding ما not كان is حديثا narratives/hadith يفترى invented ولكن and nonetheless تصديق confirmation الذي the one that بين between يديه His hands وتفصيل and detailed explanation كل each شيء a thing وهدى and guidance ورحمه and mercy لقوم for people يؤمنون they believe
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
Salaam,
I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween (http://s16.postimage.org/7g525pigh/dammahtain1.jpg) either two of them, as in Muhammed i.e., (http://s11.postimage.org/61fz5f1nz/Muhammed.png)
Other prophet's names used in AlQuraan are as:
اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ
اِسۡحٰقَ
اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ
ہٰرُوۡنَ
مُوۡسٰی
سُلَیۡمٰنَ
دَاوٗدَ
اَیُّوۡبَ
یُوۡسُفَ
یَعۡقُوۡبَ
اِلۡیَاسَ
زَکَرِیَّا
یَحۡیٰی
عِیۡسٰی
یُوۡنُسَ
Why not any name ends with tanween? Is Muhammed not a name? If it is a name then how about 6:114 and 6:139?
6:114 اَفَغَیۡرَ اللّٰہِ اَبۡتَغِیۡ حَکَمًا وَّ ہُوَ الَّذِیۡۤ اَنۡزَلَ اِلَیۡکُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ مُفَصَّلًا ؕ وَ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ اَنَّہٗ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکَ بِالۡحَقِّ فَلَا تَکُوۡنَنَّ مِنَ الۡمُمۡتَرِیۡنَ
6:114 Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
مُنَزَّلٌ is set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ so why don't they used it as a name? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=114) to see other translations of this aayat.
6:139 وَ قَالُوۡا مَا فِیۡ بُطُوۡنِ ہٰذِہِ الۡاَنۡعَامِ خَالِصَۃٌ لِّذُکُوۡرِنَا وَ مُحَرَّمٌ عَلٰۤی اَزۡوَاجِنَا ۚ وَ اِنۡ یَّکُنۡ مَّیۡتَۃً فَہُمۡ فِیۡہِ شُرَکَآءُ ؕ سَیَجۡزِیۡہِمۡ وَصۡفَہُمۡ ؕ اِنَّہٗ حَکِیۡمٌ عَلِیۡمٌ
6:139 And they say, "What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is dead, then all of them have shares therein." He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing.
مُحَرَّمٌ is also set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ, so why did they translate it and why not use as a name? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=139) to see other translations.
If we also translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, which is derived from the word حَمۡدُ, means praise and مُحَمَّدٌ means praised one.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ...
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah... [regular translation]
If we translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, 48:29 will be translated as "Praised one is the Messenger of Allah....", this means whoever is the Messenger of Allah is the praised one.
Fortunately or unfortunately I don't have any evidence, not a single aayat that says that AlQuraan was given to Muhammad. Why there is no such aayat if it was given to him?
All explanations, comments, suggestions, critics, advises, support are welcome.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salamun alaika,
Problem will be resolved and confusion will go away InshaAllah the moment you find time to read in some gramar book about Tanween and its divisions.
Quote from: Maha on September 19, 2012, 05:44:26 AM
My understanding is that Muhammad is not a name but a title for people who deserves praise. This title is also used in the bible, where its been translated as 'lovely one'.
All prophets were Muhammad's and I agree with Nomad that every righteous person can also become a Muhammad.
Hadithers just altered the muhammad title by twisting it to mean a name of a particular person and created a whole cult around this non-exsisting person. They needed to create that person in order to have someone they could attribute all their nonsense to.
If the muhammad title wasnt found in the quran, they would simply just find another title which they could label as being a name.
For instance, God in Quran ask us to be truthfull(sadek).
1. --> Hadithers begin to claim that Sadek is the name of the messenger of Quran
2. They begin to say and write a lot of things which they claim Sadek said.
3. They make a new shahada which ends with: Sadekrasool Allah
And woula - Sadek is created. And by time, even his whole life is also created, where he was born in mekka and married 11 women, one of them being a litte child. In other words, my dear friend - we are talking about hadithers playing the game SIMS of the 8 century version!
In reality, we dont have any knowledge of what the name of the prophet who came with quran was. God choosed to hold his identity unknown, and call him 'oh prophet' in the quran.
Peace
Salaam,
Who are the hadithers?
RED: I don't think so.
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 06:17:56 AM
Salaam,
And also take a look at the ending part of Aayat "But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, This is obvious magic."
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salaam bro,
I took a look but I have no idea what exactly you want to show.
Can you point out which word(s) or explain further.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Bender on September 19, 2012, 07:33:43 AM
Salaam,
Who are the hadithers?
RED: I don't think so.
surah tahreem 1: O prophet
so yes i think so :o
Quote from: Maha on September 19, 2012, 07:40:26 AM
surah tahreem 1: O prophet
so yes i think so :o
Salaam,
So no :D , I don't think so :nope:
you didn't answer my first question, who do you mean with the hadithers?
Quote from: Bender on September 19, 2012, 07:44:31 AM
Salaam,
So no :D , I don't think so :nope:
you didn't answer my first question, who do you mean with the hadithers?
I dont understand what you mean brother. I just gave you a verse where the messenger is called ''oh prophet''.
By hadithers I mean the people who made up the hadith stuff.
Peace
Salaam
very interesting post
according to 61-6, it seems as if the name of the nabi was Ahmedou and was changed later to Muhammad, by dummy scholars..
Peace
Quote from: Bender on September 19, 2012, 07:36:39 AM
Salaam bro,
I took a look but I have no idea what exactly you want to show.
Can you point out which word(s) or explain further.
Salaam,
Bender
Salaam brother,
When he [Ahmed] CAME to them with clear evidences, they SAID, this is obvious magic. This means, Ahmed came already and he got answer from his people that was magic.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Maha on September 19, 2012, 08:49:35 AM
I dont understand what you mean brother. I just gave you a verse where the messenger is called ''oh prophet''.
By hadithers I mean the people who made up the hadith stuff.
Peace
Salaam sister,
The verse 66:1 is talking directly to the nabi at this moment, not a nabi from the past.
It's exactly the same as for example:
5:51 "...
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا "
or
10:23 "...
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ...."
There are hunderds of verses like this.
As per my current understanding when "ya-ayyuha..." is used then it's referring at the one who is present at the moment who fits the description after the word "ya-ayyuhaa", not someone from the past.
Please take a look at this verse to understand better:
12:88
فَلَمَّا دَخَلُوا عَلَيْهِ قَالُوا يَا أَيُّهَا الْعَزِيزُ مَسَّنَا وَأَهْلَنَا الضُّرُّ وَجِئْنَا بِبِضَاعَةٍ مُزْجَاةٍ فَأَوْفِ لَنَا الْكَيْلَ وَتَصَدَّقْ عَلَيْنَا ۖ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يَجْزِي الْمُتَصَدِّقِينَThey are talking directly to the one who at that moment fits the description of alaziez.
btw. The story of Yusuf and his brothers explains a lot for seekers of knowledge :yes
RED: ok, I misunderstood.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 11:16:48 AM
Salaam brother,
When he [Ahmed] CAME to them with clear evidences, they SAID, this is obvious magic. This means, Ahmed came already and he got answer from his people that was magic.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salaam brother,
:o
I think I see brackets :hypno:
:voodoo:
I am still not sure to who the "he" is referring. Is it to Ahmed or Isa :hmm
a request, please don't translate sihr with magic.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Bender on September 19, 2012, 12:13:31 PM
Salaam brother,
:o
I think I see brackets :hypno:
:voodoo:
I am still not sure to who the "he" is referring. Is it to Ahmed or Isa :hmm
a request, please don't translate sihr with magic.
Salaam,
Bender
Salaam Bender,
I think
he is referring to
Ahmed because of
falamma, where
Eisa already told directly to Bani Israel that
inni rasooluAllahi ilaikum so no need of saying
falamma again.
I have not translated
sihr to
magic, I have just copied
Sahih International translation and did not go into other details because don't want to deviate from the topic in hand.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Wow. Very interesting. I have some stuff to look into.
Thanks mmkhan, I truly love your posts!!
Quote from: noshirk on September 19, 2012, 11:08:16 AM
Salaam
very interesting post
according to 61-6, it seems as if the name of the nabi was Ahmedou and was changed later to Muhammad, by dummy scholars..
Peace
Salaam noshirk,
Thank you for your kind words. As we discussed in other replies, Ahmedu chapter is already over.
May Allah bless you and increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Indelwyn on September 19, 2012, 12:40:15 PM
Wow. Very interesting. I have some stuff to look into.
Thanks mmkhan, I truly love your posts!!
Salaam Indelwyn,
You are welcome and I am glad to know that you love my posts. :D
May Allah bless you and increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
I can't see why doubt the exisence of the prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed. I do not care what his name was or whether it was Ahmed or Muhammad or whatever. We do not strain at things being revealed to Musa, to 3isa or to any previous prophet mentionned int he Qur'an. It would be strange and contradictory that the Qur'an landed in our hands without ever there having been a prophet who received it and handed down.
I feel that there is too much obssession of hadiths and hadithists to the point of wanting to reflect our dislike for hadithism on the very person of the prophet who received the Qur'an. However, the feat of handing down the seal of prophecy should, I think elicit some thought of his significance, even if hadithists say nonsense about him. Musa did not hand down something equivalent to the Qur'an that has been preserved in its integrity uncorrupted, so why should we have the highest regard for Musa, but grudge Muhammad, or whatever the name, our consideration?
I think that all prophets should be considered as a unity, the riyalullah, and not grudge them our acknowledgement.
So, who is being called in the Qur'an khatam annabiyin? If the prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed is not Muhammadun, who is khatam annabiyin?
"33.40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
33.40 Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men, but is God?s Apostle and the Seal of all Prophets. And God has indeed full knowledge of everything."
Who is this person who is not the father of any of the "riyal" of those these words are addressed to?
I can't but feel that, indeed, the prophet to whom descended de Qur'an was Muhammadun, by name or by condition", and that he is the khatam an-nabiyin, which besides, confirms (the khatam) the essencial unity of prophethood and and all prophets.
Salaam
Quote from: Bender on September 19, 2012, 12:07:12 PM
Salaam sister,
The verse 66:1 is talking directly to the nabi at this moment, not a nabi from the past.
It's exactly the same as for example:
5:51 "... يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا "
or
10:23 "... يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ...."
There are hunderds of verses like this.
As per my current understanding when "ya-ayyuha..." is used then it's referring at the one who is present at the moment who fits the description after the word "ya-ayyuhaa", not someone from the past.
Please take a look at this verse to understand better:
12:88 فَلَمَّا دَخَلُوا عَلَيْهِ قَالُوا يَا أَيُّهَا الْعَزِيزُ مَسَّنَا وَأَهْلَنَا الضُّرُّ وَجِئْنَا بِبِضَاعَةٍ مُزْجَاةٍ فَأَوْفِ لَنَا الْكَيْلَ وَتَصَدَّقْ عَلَيْنَا ۖ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يَجْزِي الْمُتَصَدِّقِينَ
They are talking directly to the one who at that moment fits the description of alaziez.
btw. The story of Yusuf and his brothers explains a lot for seekers of knowledge :yes
RED: ok, I misunderstood.
Salaam,
Bender
thanks.. i never thought about that.. you are right, its in present tense not in past tense.. I stay corrected :)
huruf
QuoteSo, who is being called in the Qur'an khatam annabiyin? If the prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed is not Muhammadun, who is khatam annabiyin?
as I understood it, anyone can be khatam nabiy...
Quote from: huruf on September 19, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
So, who is being called in the Qur'an khatam annabiyin? If the prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed is not Muhammadun, who is khatam annabiyin?
"33.40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
33.40 Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men, but is God?s Apostle and the Seal of all Prophets. And God has indeed full knowledge of everything."
Who is this person who is not the father of any of the "riyal" of those these words are addressed to?
I can't but feel that, indeed, the prophet to whom descended de Qur'an was Muhammadun, by name or by condition", and that he is the khatam an-nabiyin, which besides, confirms (the khatam) the essencial unity of prophethood and and all prophets.
Salaam huruf,
You cannot prove that Muhammad [if any, not yet confirmed] was given AlQuraan. Please quote at least a single aayat mentioning it. If AlQuraan proves that a person called Muhammad is the Prophet, we [me and other here] don't have any problem in accepting it. Why should we have any problem to accept him? But I personally don't like to search for my parents Deen into AlQuraan and satisfy myself.
Now lets see how the aayat quoted above with the word Muhammadun can be translated, inshaAllah.
33:40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا33:40 Praised one is not the father of any of your men, but is Allah?s Messenger and holding the Seal of Prophets. And Allah has indeed full knowledge of everything.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=40) to see other translations of 33:40.
This aayat might be a criterion to recognize Allah's Messenger. Not sure though, Allah knows best. If you notice it says
رِّجَالِكُمْ means
of your men. If this aayat is referring to Muhammad who lived 1400 years back, then how Allah relates it to us by saying
Muhammed is not the father of any of YOUR men?خَاتَمَ does not mean end, but it is like a certificate or degree or seal confirming him of Prophets. If you take it end or final then please take a look at the following aayaats.
2:6 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا سَوَآءٌ عَلَیۡہِمۡ ءَاَنۡذَرۡتَہُمۡ اَمۡ لَمۡ تُنۡذِرۡہُمۡ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ 2:6 Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe.
2:7 خَتَمَ اللّٰہُ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ وَ عَلٰی سَمۡعِہِمۡ ؕ وَ عَلٰۤی اَبۡصَارِہِمۡ غِشَاوَۃٌ ۫ وَّ لَہُمۡ عَذَابٌ عَظِیۡمٌ[/color]
2:7 Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=6) to see other translations for 2:6 and click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=7) to see 2:7.
خَتَمَ is used to seal upon the hearts of kafirs.
4:137 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ ازۡدَادُوۡا کُفۡرًا لَّمۡ یَکُنِ اللّٰہُ لِیَغۡفِرَ لَہُمۡ وَ لَا لِیَہۡدِیَہُمۡ سَبِیۡلًا [/color]
4:137 Indeed, those who have believed
then disbelieved, then believed, then disbelieved, and then increased in disbelief - never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a way.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=137) to see other translations for 4:137.
Once those who disbelieved or became kafir how can they believe again when already their hearts has been sealed as per 2:7? This clearly shows that
خَتَمَ does not refers to end or finalizing but it simply means to show authorization.
Finally please check carefully 4:155
4:155 فَبِمَا نَقۡضِہِمۡ مِّیۡثَاقَہُمۡ وَ کُفۡرِہِمۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ وَ قَتۡلِہِمُ الۡاَنۡۢبِیَآءَ بِغَیۡرِ حَقٍّ وَّ قَوۡلِہِمۡ قُلُوۡبُنَا غُلۡفٌ ؕ بَلۡ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہَا بِکُفۡرِہِمۡ فَلَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا4:155 And for their breaking of the covenant and their disbelief in the signs of Allah and their killing of the prophets without right and their saying, "Our hearts are wrapped". Rather,
Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.
طَبَعَ also sealed? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=155) to see other translations or 4:155.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 12:41:24 PM
Thank you for your kind words. As we discussed in other replies, Ahmedu chapter is already over.
chapter is over ?
do you refer to this:
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 11:16:48 AM
When he [Ahmed] CAME to them with clear evidences, they SAID, this is obvious magic. This means, Ahmed came already and he got answer from his people that was magic.
61:6 And when Issa, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be AHMADU But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly Sihr/magic�
ISMUHU AHMADU means Ismuhu Ahmadu.
if Ahmadu is not MUHAMMAD, who is Ahmadu ?
Please note that this sentence have also sense
And when Issa, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be AHMADU. But when MUHAMMAD/AHMADU came many centuries after and when MUHAMMAD/AHMADU showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly Sihr/magic�
When we read the verses after:
61:7 And who is more evil than he who invents lies about God, while he is being invited to submission? And God does not guide the wicked people.
61:8 They want to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But God will continue with His light, even if the rejecters hate it.
61:9 He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the system of truth, so that it will expose all other systems, even if the polytheists hate it.
so Quran would be the sihr/magic.
it is not over for me
Peace.
Quote from: noshirk on September 19, 2012, 02:13:15 PM
chapter is over ?
do you refer to this:
Quote
When he [Ahmed] CAME to them with clear evidences, they SAID, this is obvious magic. This means, Ahmed came already and he got answer from his people that was magic.
Peace noshirk,
Yes, I was referring to that quote.
Quote
61:6 And when Issa, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be AHMADU But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly Sihr/magic�
ISMUHU AHMADU means Ismuhu Ahmadu.
if Ahmadu is not MUHAMMAD, who is Ahmadu ?
BTW,
ism does not mean
name. InshaAllah, I will write on it if my TheCreator permits me.
Quote
so Quran would be the sihr/magic.
it is not over for me
I did not understand this part. Can you please elaborate more. Thanks!
May Allah increase us in knowledge and keep us guiding to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Mazhar on September 19, 2012, 07:22:23 AM
Salamun alaika,
Problem will be resolved and confusion will go away InshaAllah the moment you find time to read in some gramar book about Tanween and its divisions.
Salaaman Mazhar,
I have given references of other instances and aayaats to show how Allah used words in AlQuraan. Grammar books could be wrong and misguiding in some places as it was made later. But the Book of Allah is perfect and set patterns and designs to guide those who don't have knowledge of grammar. This is how I believe AlQuraan guides alNaas [people] as per 2:185.
Please relate your understanding with aayaats or words of AlQuraan instead of grammar, so that it will be easy for us to understand what you wanted to say.
May Allah guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 02:34:06 PM
Salaaman Mazhar,
I have given references of other instances and aayaats to show how Allah used words in AlQuraan. Grammar books could be wrong and misguiding in some places as it was made later. But the Book of Allah is perfect and set patterns and designs to guide those who don't have knowledge of grammar. This is how I believe AlQuraan guides alNaas [people] as per 2:185.
Please relate your understanding with aayaats or words of AlQuraan instead of grammar, so that it will be easy for us to understand what you wanted to say.
May Allah guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salamun alaika,
Pl do not forget that the Arabic language was a living language when Qur'aan was revealed. Arabic language succeeds Qur'aan. And grammar is pen down for non-natives to facilitate them perceiving the text of that language.
One name is without tanween. Its pattern does not allow tanween. Tanween is a vowel-less consonant after a voweled consonant. Its presence on a Proper Noun shows that it is fully declinable. The other names you have mentioned for comparison are not fully declinable being of foreign origin.
Understanding a book of foreign language, one needs to first know the elementaries of the language in which the book is written.
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 12:39:16 PM
Salaam Bender,
I think he is referring to Ahmed because of falamma, where Eisa already told directly to Bani Israel that inni rasooluAllahi ilaikum so no need of saying falamma again .
Salaam brother,
RED: :&
BLUE: is there an other falamma in the ayaat :hmm
anyway i think i am going :offtopic: with this. sorry lets concentrate (=me) on the subject.
QuoteI have not translated sihr to magic, I have just copied Sahih International translation and did not go into other details because don't want to deviate from the topic in hand.
:handshake:
QuoteMay Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
Bender
Quote from: Maha on September 19, 2012, 12:54:24 PM
thanks.. i never thought about that.. you are right, its in present tense not in past tense.. I stay corrected :)
Salaam,
:handshake:
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 01:57:12 PM
SQuotealaam huruf,
You cannot prove that Muhammad [if any, not yet confirmed] was given AlQuraan. Please quote at least a single aayat mentioning it. If AlQuraan proves that a person called Muhammad is the Prophet, we [me and other here] don't have any problem in accepting it. Why should we have any problem to accept him? But I personally don't like to search for my parents Deen into AlQuraan and satisfy myself.
I did not pretend to prove anything. But the question is the Qur'an was revealed to someone, who was that someone. As I said, I do not care whether his name is Muhammad or Valentine, but who was he. He was someody, God names many of his prophets int he Qur'an.
As to the trasnlation that you put. Fine, I do not mind either way that you translate Muhammadun as praised one or leave it as Muhammad, is he or is he not the messenger to whom the Qur'an was given to transmit?
Now lets see how the aayat quoted above with the word Muhammadun can be translated, inshaAllah.
33:40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
33:40 Praised one is not the father of any of your men, but is Allah?s Messenger and holding the Seal of Prophets. And Allah has indeed full knowledge of everything.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=40) to see other translations of 33:40.
This aayat might be a criterion to recognize Allah's Messenger. Not sure though, Allah knows best. If you notice it says رِّجَالِكُمْ means of your men. If this aayat is referring to Muhammad who lived 1400 years back, then how Allah relates it to us by saying Muhammed is not the father of any of YOUR men?
Yes I notice what it says, but then to which presente day Prophet is God referring to if you say that God in that aya is addressing us? Who is that prophet of nowadays, acording to you, who is that khatam annabiyin that you say has to be of today because God is addressing us and therefore could not be of whatever number of years ago?
Quote
خَاتَمَ does not mean end, but it is like a certificate or degree or seal confirming him of Prophets. If you take it end or final then please take a look at the following aayaats.
2:6 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا سَوَآءٌ عَلَیۡہِمۡ ءَاَنۡذَرۡتَہُمۡ اَمۡ لَمۡ تُنۡذِرۡہُمۡ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ
2:6 Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe.
2:7 خَتَمَ اللّٰہُ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ وَ عَلٰی سَمۡعِہِمۡ ؕ وَ عَلٰۤی اَبۡصَارِہِمۡ غِشَاوَۃٌ ۫ وَّ لَہُمۡ عَذَابٌ عَظِیۡمٌ[/color]
2:7 Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=6) to see other translations for 2:6 and click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=7) to see 2:7.
خَتَمَ is used to seal upon the hearts of kafirs.
4:137 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ ازۡدَادُوۡا کُفۡرًا لَّمۡ یَکُنِ اللّٰہُ لِیَغۡفِرَ لَہُمۡ وَ لَا لِیَہۡدِیَہُمۡ سَبِیۡلًا [/color]
4:137 Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed, then disbelieved, and then increased in disbelief - never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a way.
Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=137) to see other translations for 4:137.
Once those who disbelieved or became kafir how can they believe again when already their hearts has been sealed as per 2:7? This clearly shows that خَتَمَ does not refers to end or finalizing but it simply means to show authorization.
Finally please check carefully 4:155
4:155 فَبِمَا نَقۡضِہِمۡ مِّیۡثَاقَہُمۡ وَ کُفۡرِہِمۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ وَ قَتۡلِہِمُ الۡاَنۡۢبِیَآءَ بِغَیۡرِ حَقٍّ وَّ قَوۡلِہِمۡ قُلُوۡبُنَا غُلۡفٌ ؕ بَلۡ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہَا بِکُفۡرِہِمۡ فَلَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا
4:155 And for their breaking of the covenant and their disbelief in the signs of Allah and their killing of the prophets without right and their saying, "Our hearts are wrapped". Rather, Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.
طَبَعَ also sealed? Please click here (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=155) to see other translations or 4:155.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
All this is well and good, but I can0t see why you are addressing all that o me. You must be thinking of somebody else, because I have not at all stated that Muhammad or whoever you say the Qur'an was revealed to was the end of pophets or anything like that.
You answer things I have not brought up and you do not answer the questions I have in fact asked, namely,
To whom was the Qur'an revealed and was charged with transmiting. Does que Qur'an itself adress that person or talk about him?
Salaam
I noticed too late that my previous message was quite messy with quotes and answers. I will try to put it anew clearly. The quotes are from brother MMkhan:
Quotealaam huruf,
You cannot prove that Muhammad [if any, not yet confirmed] was given AlQuraan. Please quote at least a single aayat mentioning it. If AlQuraan proves that a person called Muhammad is the Prophet, we [me and other here] don't have any problem in accepting it. Why should we have any problem to accept him? But I personally don't like to search for my parents Deen into AlQuraan and satisfy myself.
I did not pretend to prove anything. But the question is the Qur'an was revealed to someone, who was that someone? As I said, I do not care whether his name is Muhammad or Valentine, but who was he. He was somebody, God names many of his prophets int he Qur'an, why shouldn't He name the person who is being charged with the Qur'an?
As to the trasnlation that you put, fine, I do not mind either way that you translate Muhammadun as praised one or leave it as Muhammadun, the question is he or is he not the messenger to whom the Qur'an was given to transmit?
Quote
Now lets see how the aayat quoted above with the word Muhammadun can be translated, inshaAllah.
33:40 مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَـٰكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّـهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
33:40 Praised one is not the father of any of your men, but is Allah?s Messenger and holding the Seal of Prophets. And Allah has indeed full knowledge of everything.
Please click here to see other translations of 33:40.
This aayat might be a criterion to recognize Allah's Messenger. Not sure though, Allah knows best. If you notice it says رِّجَالِكُمْ means of your men. If this aayat is referring to Muhammad who lived 1400 years back, then how Allah relates it to us by saying Muhammed is not the father of any of YOUR men?
Yes I notice what it says, but then to which present day prophet is God referring to if you say that God in that aya is addressing us? Who is that prophet of nowadays, acording to you, who is khatam annabiyin that you say has to be of today because God is addressing us and therefore could not be of whatever number of years ago?
Quoteخَاتَمَ does not mean end, but it is like a certificate or degree or seal confirming him of Prophets. If you take it end or final then please take a look at the following aayaats.
2:6 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا سَوَآءٌ عَلَیۡہِمۡ ءَاَنۡذَرۡتَہُمۡ اَمۡ لَمۡ تُنۡذِرۡہُمۡ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ
2:6 Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe.
2:7 خَتَمَ اللّٰہُ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ وَ عَلٰی سَمۡعِہِمۡ ؕ وَ عَلٰۤی اَبۡصَارِہِمۡ غِشَاوَۃٌ ۫ وَّ لَہُمۡ عَذَابٌ عَظِیۡمٌ[/color]
2:7 Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.
Please click here to see other translations for 2:6 and click here to see 2:7.
خَتَمَ is used to seal upon the hearts of kafirs.
4:137 اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ ازۡدَادُوۡا کُفۡرًا لَّمۡ یَکُنِ اللّٰہُ لِیَغۡفِرَ لَہُمۡ وَ لَا لِیَہۡدِیَہُمۡ سَبِیۡلًا [/color]
4:137 Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed, then disbelieved, and then increased in disbelief - never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a way.
Please click here to see other translations for 4:137.
Once those who disbelieved or became kafir how can they believe again when already their hearts has been sealed as per 2:7? This clearly shows that خَتَمَ does not refers to end or finalizing but it simply means to show authorization.
Finally please check carefully 4:155
4:155 فَبِمَا نَقۡضِہِمۡ مِّیۡثَاقَہُمۡ وَ کُفۡرِہِمۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ وَ قَتۡلِہِمُ الۡاَنۡۢبِیَآءَ بِغَیۡرِ حَقٍّ وَّ قَوۡلِہِمۡ قُلُوۡبُنَا غُلۡفٌ ؕ بَلۡ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہَا بِکُفۡرِہِمۡ فَلَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا
4:155 And for their breaking of the covenant and their disbelief in the signs of Allah and their killing of the prophets without right and their saying, "Our hearts are wrapped". Rather, Allah has sealed them because of their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.
طَبَعَ also sealed? Please click here to see other translations or 4:155.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
All this is well and good, but I cannot see why you are addressing all this to me. You must be thinking of somebody else, because I have not at all stated that Muhammad or whoever you say the Qur'an was revealed to was the end of prophets or anything like that.
You answer things I have not brought up and you do not answer the questions I have in fact asked, namely:
To whom was the Qur'an revealed and was also charged with transmiting it. Does que Qur'an itself adress that person or talk about him?
Salaam
Salam
interesting article about this matter i found
http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Ahmad.pdf (http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Ahmad.pdf)
the author refers to various issues and allegations that were made on this topic. He looks - in contrast to the discussion here-at the former scriptures and lets stand the ism as name.
I also think that Muhammad can be understood as an adjective, but also as a possible name. Because, as others have noted, it is clear that the Koran was revealed to an apostle, a messenger, how he has now been called, is actually secondary.
Salam :)
Peace Brother MMK,
2: 144 [AND MUHAMMAD is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels? But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him]. ] Mohammed Asad
Kindly explain your theory with respect to the above ayat.
regards,
Quote from: noshirk on September 19, 2012, 02:13:15 PM
so Quran would be the sihr/magic.
it is not over for me
Quote from: mmkhan on September 19, 2012, 02:29:02 PM
I did not understand this part. Can you please elaborate more. Thanks!
Salaam mmkhan
to elaborate, i will give an oriented traduction of verses
61:6 And when Issa, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be AHMADU. But when AHMADU came many centuries after and when AHMADU showed them the Quran as clear proofs, they said: �This Quran is clearly Sihr/magic�
61:7 And who is more evil than he who invents lies about God, while he is being invited to submission? And God does not guide the wicked people.
61:8 They want to extinguish the light of God, the Quran brought by AHMADU, with their mouths. But God will continue with His light, even if the rejecters hate it.
61:9 He is the One who sent AHMADU as messenger with the guidance and the true system, at the top of all the religion of GOD, Wich is Millat Ibrahim, as Teached in the real torah and in the real injeel, even if the polytheists hate it.
Peace
Please mmkhan
I ask for your help on this thread
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604389.0
you seem to be a better linguist than me.
I want to know your opinion on the meaning of word Rabb
Peace
Quote from: huruf on September 20, 2012, 06:26:50 AM
I noticed too late that my previous message was quite messy with quotes and answers. I will try to put it anew clearly. The quotes are from brother MMkhan:
I did not pretend to prove anything. But the question is the Qur'an was revealed to someone, who was that someone? As I said, I do not care whether his name is Muhammad or Valentine, but who was he. He was somebody, God names many of his prophets int he Qur'an, why shouldn't He name the person who is being charged with the Qur'an?
As to the trasnlation that you put, fine, I do not mind either way that you translate Muhammadun as praised one or leave it as Muhammadun, the question is he or is he not the messenger to whom the Qur'an was given to transmit?
Salaam huruf,
Very sorry for late reply.
Red part: You said you don't care whatever his name is either Muhammad or Valentine. In the same sentence you repeated twice "who was that someone?" and "but who was he"?
Honestly, I don't know whom alQuraan was given and what is his name. And I don't feel it important until Allah mentioned it in AlQuraan for us to know.
Blue part: Whosoever transmits alQuraan is the messenger.
Quote
Yes I notice what it says, but then to which present day prophet is God referring to if you say that God in that aya is addressing us? Who is that prophet of nowadays, acording to you, who is khatam annabiyin that you say has to be of today because God is addressing us and therefore could not be of whatever number of years ago?
I was just forwarded what Allah has shown me i.e., Muhammadun is not referring to someone who lived 1400 years back. Who is that Allah referring to today, sorry, I don't know, if Allah informed me, I will surely love to share that with the permission of my TheCreator's permission.
Quote
All this is well and good, but I cannot see why you are addressing all this to me. You must be thinking of somebody else, because I have not at all stated that Muhammad or whoever you say the Qur'an was revealed to was the end of prophets or anything like that.
I was not thinking of anyone while replying to your post. Its gives me such impression when I read in your previous paragraph asking "who is khatam annabiyin". Sorry, if I misunderstood you.
Quote
You answer things I have not brought up and you do not answer the questions I have in fact asked, namely:
To whom was the Qur'an revealed and was also charged with transmiting it. Does que Qur'an itself adress that person or talk about him?
Salaam
You asked to whom was alQuraan REVEALED initially then you asked to whom it was GIVEN and now again to whom it was REVEALED. There is big difference between those two.
AlQuraan is still revealing and will reveal inshaAllah. But as I told you above, I don't know exactly to whom it was given.
If my answers are not clear to you, please do let me know, I will try to re-frame again, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mirjamnur on September 20, 2012, 09:38:22 AM
Salam
interesting article about this matter i found
http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Ahmad.pdf (http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Ahmad.pdf)
the author refers to various issues and allegations that were made on this topic. He looks - in contrast to the discussion here-at the former scriptures and lets stand the ism as name.
I also think that Muhammad can be understood as an adjective, but also as a possible name. Because, as others have noted, it is clear that the Koran was revealed to an apostle, a messenger, how he has now been called, is actually secondary.
Salam :)
Salaam MirJamnur,
I can only say now is
ithm or ism cannot be translated as name.Salaam,
mmKhan
Quote from: MASOOMboy on September 21, 2012, 01:34:19 PM
Peace Brother MMK,
2: 144 [AND MUHAMMAD is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels? But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him]. ] Mohammed Asad
Kindly explain your theory with respect to the above ayat.
regards,
Peace brother MasoomBoy,
Sorry for late reply bro. You are referring to 3:144 not 2:144. I will to explain it, inshaAllah.
3:144 وَ مَا مُحَمَّدٌ اِلَّا رَسُوۡلٌ ۚ قَدۡ خَلَتۡ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِ الرُّسُلُ ؕ اَفَا۠ئِنۡ مَّاتَ اَوۡ قُتِلَ انۡقَلَبۡتُمۡ عَلٰۤی اَعۡقَابِکُمۡ ؕ وَ مَنۡ یَّنۡقَلِبۡ عَلٰی عَقِبَیۡہِ فَلَنۡ یَّضُرَّ اللّٰہَ شَیۡئًا ؕ وَ سَیَجۡزِی اللّٰہُ الشّٰکِرِیۡنَ3:144 And praised one is not but a messenger. Indeed messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed,
would you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
How will YOU turn back on YOUR heels if one who lived 1400 years back die or killed? So, it is not referring to Muhammad who lived 1400 years back as they say.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: noshirk on September 22, 2012, 09:01:10 AM
Salaam mmkhan
to elaborate, i will give an oriented traduction of verses
61:6 And when Issa, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be AHMADU. But when AHMADU came many centuries after and when AHMADU showed them the Quran as clear proofs, they said: �This Quran is clearly Sihr/magic�
61:7 And who is more evil than he who invents lies about God, while he is being invited to submission? And God does not guide the wicked people.
61:8 They want to extinguish the light of God, the Quran brought by AHMADU, with their mouths. But God will continue with His light, even if the rejecters hate it.
61:9 He is the One who sent AHMADU as messenger with the guidance and the true system, at the top of all the religion of GOD, Wich is Millat Ibrahim, as Teached in the real torah and in the real injeel, even if the polytheists hate it.
Peace
Salaam noshirk,
Sorry for late reply bro.
Thank you are the aayaats. Do you mean to say that those whom Ahmadu came with alQuraan said [to alQuraan] that this is clear magic? If so, we may need more aayaats to support this. Because always, all aayaats supports each other.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: noshirk on September 22, 2012, 09:11:28 AM
Please mmkhan
I ask for your help on this thread
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604389.0
you seem to be a better linguist than me.
I want to know your opinion on the meaning of word Rabb
Peace
Peace noshirk,
Thank you for inviting me to your thread. I have responded there brother.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 22, 2012, 02:02:48 PM
If so, we may need more aayaats to support this. Because always, all aayaats supports each other.
Salaam Brother mmkhan
It is a very good remark.
Let see were the expression Sihr mubin appears (i found 8 verses):
Verses where sihr Mubin is quran:6:7 And if We had sent down to you a book already written on paper, and they touched it with their own hands, then those who have rejected would say: "This is but clear magic!"
10:76 So when the truth came to them from Us, they said: "This is clearly magic!"
34:43 And when Our clear revelations were recited to them, they said: �This is but a man who wants to turn you away from what your parents were worshiping.� And they also said: �This is nothing except a fabricated lie.� And those who disbelieved say of the truth when it has come to them: �This is nothing except evident magic!�
46:7 And when Our clear revelations are recited to them, those who rejected said of the truth that came to them: ?This is evidently magic!?
Verses where sihr mubin is ou could be not quran:37:15 And they said: ?This is nothing except evident magic!?
11:7 He is the One who has created the heavens and the earth in six days, and His Throne was upon the water; so as to test who from among you works the best. And when you say: "You will be resurrected after the death," those who have rejected say: "This i
27:13 So when Our signs came to them for all to see, they said: "This is clearly magic!"
Our verse ;) :61:6 And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be �most acclaimed.�� But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly magic�
Conclusion: So Sihr mubin is used by quran for quran.
Peace.
Quote from: noshirk on September 22, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Salaam Brother mmkhan
It is a very good remark.
Let see were the expression Sihr mubin appears (i found 8 verses):
Verses where sihr Mubin is quran:
6:7 And if We had sent down to you a book already written on paper, and they touched it with their own hands, then those who have rejected would say: "This is but clear magic!"
10:76 So when the truth came to them from Us, they said: "This is clearly magic!"
34:43 And when Our clear revelations were recited to them, they said: �This is but a man who wants to turn you away from what your parents were worshiping.� And they also said: �This is nothing except a fabricated lie.� And those who disbelieved say of the truth when it has come to them: �This is nothing except evident magic!�
46:7 And when Our clear revelations are recited to them, those who rejected said of the truth that came to them: ?This is evidently magic!?
Verses where sihr mubin is ou could be not quran:
37:15 And they said: ?This is nothing except evident magic!?
11:7 He is the One who has created the heavens and the earth in six days, and His Throne was upon the water; so as to test who from among you works the best. And when you say: "You will be resurrected after the death," those who have rejected say: "This i
27:13 So when Our signs came to them for all to see, they said: "This is clearly magic!"
Our verse ;) :
61:6 And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: �O children of Israel, I am a messenger of God to you, authenticating what is between my hands of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be �most acclaimed.�� But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said: �This is clearly magic�
Conclusion: So Sihr mubin is used by quran for quran.
Peace.
Peace noshirk,
Thank you for aayaats. I don't see any clear aayat referring to alQuraan with the mention of word alQuraan in it. Anyways, I need some time to study the aayaats you quoted, inshaAllah, I will get back to you on the same once I checked them.
Thanks again bro.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 22, 2012, 01:51:16 PM
Salaam MirJamnur,
I can only say now is ithm or ism cannot be translated as name.
Salaam,
mmKhan
Salam mmKhan
why? never??
thanks for clarification
Quote from: mirjamnur on September 23, 2012, 06:43:09 AM
Salam mmKhan
why? never??
thanks for clarification
Salaam mirjamnur,
22:78 وَ جَاہِدُوۡا فِی اللّٰہِ حَقَّ جِہَادِہٖ ؕ ہُوَ اجۡتَبٰىکُمۡ وَ مَا جَعَلَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ فِی الدِّیۡنِ مِنۡ حَرَجٍ ؕ مِلَّۃَ اَبِیۡکُمۡ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ ؕ ہُوَ سَمّٰىکُمُ الۡمُسۡلِمِیۡنَ ۬ۙ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ وَ فِیۡ ہٰذَا لِیَکُوۡنَ الرَّسُوۡلُ شَہِیۡدًا عَلَیۡکُمۡ وَ تَکُوۡنُوۡا شُہَدَآءَ عَلَی النَّاسِ ۚۖ فَاَقِیۡمُوا الصَّلٰوۃَ وَ اٰتُوا الزَّکٰوۃَ وَ اعۡتَصِمُوۡا بِاللّٰہِ ؕ ہُوَ مَوۡلٰىکُمۡ ۚ فَنِعۡمَ الۡمَوۡلٰی وَ نِعۡمَ النَّصِیۡرُ22:78 And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [It is] the religion of your father, Abraham.
Allah named you ?Muslims? before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper. - Sahih International
Let me ask you, what is your name? Do you say "Muslim"? If not, why? Don't you like the name given to you by Allah?19:7 یٰزَکَرِیَّاۤ اِنَّا نُبَشِّرُکَ بِغُلٰمِۣ اسۡمُہٗ یَحۡیٰی ۙ لَمۡ نَجۡعَلۡ لَّہٗ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ سَمِیًّا19:7 O Zakariya! surely We give you good news of a boy
whose name shall be Yahya: We have not made before anyone his equal.
How did Allah gave this name "Yahya"? Yahya means "will live". Please take a look at 8:42 for the word "Yahya".
There are many references to quote from. In short,
"ism" or "ithm" means "attribute" not "name". Ithms are all adjectives. You can also check 2:31-33.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 23, 2012, 03:31:55 PM
Salaam mirjamnur,
22:78 وَ جَاہِدُوۡا فِی اللّٰہِ حَقَّ جِہَادِہٖ ؕ ہُوَ اجۡتَبٰىکُمۡ وَ مَا جَعَلَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ فِی الدِّیۡنِ مِنۡ حَرَجٍ ؕ مِلَّۃَ اَبِیۡکُمۡ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ ؕ ہُوَ سَمّٰىکُمُ الۡمُسۡلِمِیۡنَ ۬ۙ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ وَ فِیۡ ہٰذَا لِیَکُوۡنَ الرَّسُوۡلُ شَہِیۡدًا عَلَیۡکُمۡ وَ تَکُوۡنُوۡا شُہَدَآءَ عَلَی النَّاسِ ۚۖ فَاَقِیۡمُوا الصَّلٰوۃَ وَ اٰتُوا الزَّکٰوۃَ وَ اعۡتَصِمُوۡا بِاللّٰہِ ؕ ہُوَ مَوۡلٰىکُمۡ ۚ فَنِعۡمَ الۡمَوۡلٰی وَ نِعۡمَ النَّصِیۡرُ
22:78 And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [It is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you ?Muslims? before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper. - Sahih International
Let me ask you, what is your name? Do you say "Muslim"? If not, why? Don't you like the name given to you by Allah?
19:7 یٰزَکَرِیَّاۤ اِنَّا نُبَشِّرُکَ بِغُلٰمِۣ اسۡمُہٗ یَحۡیٰی ۙ لَمۡ نَجۡعَلۡ لَّہٗ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ سَمِیًّا
19:7 O Zakariya! surely We give you good news of a boy whose name shall be Yahya: We have not made before anyone his equal.
How did Allah gave this name "Yahya"? Yahya means "will live". Please take a look at 8:42 for the word "Yahya".
There are many references to quote from. In short, "ism" or "ithm" means "attribute" not "name". Ithms are all adjectives. You can also check 2:31-33.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Salam mmkhan!
thanks for your detailed explanation. :)
for me every name also contains an attribute, for example
Simone (my name)
information: Meaning / translation
italy. Form of Simon, 'Simon' is of 'Simeon' is derived, in the New Testament is the original name of Simon the Apostle Peter, Simon is also the name of one of the 12 apostles, Simon the Zealot, in the Old Testament is one of the 12 sons of Jacob, Simeon and hence the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel
"He (God) has heard
or
mirjamWith its many variations of the name Miriam / Miriam / Mary is in the German language most common female first name. The meaning of the name however, is not fully understood. [1]
After older understanding - as well as in the Jewish tradition - the name is a noun form of the Hebrew names to me / mar for "bitter" and jam for "sea". He would be with "sea salt" to play well "marine myrrh" or "marine drop". This meaning may quietly resonates after the medieval name Stella Maris ("Star of the Sea") for Mary, the mother of Jesus.
More recent interpretations, however, see an originally Egyptian origin as Deriving mry ("loved"), possibly with the divine subject Amun: merit-amun, "Beloved of Amun".
In addition there are other theories: [2]
The Exalted, High as a participle of the verb stem rwm Hebrew for "to stand up, raise '
The Untamed Shrew or from the Hebrew verb stem mry for "unruly"
The (of God) Gift from the Hebrew verb stem rym "pay" for
The Fertile, from the Hebrew verb stem mry "be fruitful" for.
for me personally , the term NAME always contains an associated meaning- but of course we can find perhaps meaningless name, I do not know ... and normally we don't call us by i.e.
"ja, come here you standing up!" ;D
for this, you are clear right... :handshake:
Salam
Just saw this thread. Some time ago, I also wondered about the different endings/vocalisations of the prophtes mentioned in Qur'an. Actually, it's not only Muhammad that falls out of the rule but several more: Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Lut, Shu'ayb; all others are definite= without nunation/tanween. So maybe all undefinite names could be attributes while the others are proper names?
Quote from: Reee on December 31, 2012, 06:54:49 AM
Just saw this thread. Some time ago, I also wondered about the different endings/vocalisations of the prophtes mentioned in Qur'an. Actually, it's not only Muhammad that falls out of the rule but several more: Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Lut, Shu'ayb; all others are definite= without nunation/tanween. So maybe all undefinite names could be attributes while the others are proper names?
Salaam Reee,
Yes I agree. Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Lut, Shu3aib are also in question because in some places they are used with tanween. May Allah guide us and increase us in knowledge :pr
May Allah bless you,
mmKhan
How much excellent and valuable information one can find here in this Forum!
Thank you guys, you are amazing!
Peace,
ROOT:Hmd
[47:2] Those who believe and work righteousness, and believe in what was sent down to Muhammad?which is the truth from their Lord?He remits their sins, and blesses them with contentment.
Sahih International: And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad - and it is the truth from their Lord - He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.
[3:144] Muhammad was no more than a messenger like the messengers before him. Should he die or get killed, would you turn back on your heels? Anyone who turns back on his heels, does not hurt GOD in the least. GOD rewards those who are appreciative.
[33;40]Sahih International: Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
Sahih International: Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.[48:29]
I don't understand the confusion, help!
Peace
Peace be upon you all,
I am new to this forum and am genuinely baffled by this thread. When a translation from one language to another language is carried out, the words chosen reflect the style of the translator?s interpretation of the original meanings. Some may adopt a more ?literal? style of translation or some try to bring out the ?flavour? of the text, but in all this ? names are NEVER translated. So, why are you translating the name Mohammed?
If, for example, I know a man whose name is Hasan (which means beautiful), when I call him, I will say ?Hey Hasan, how are you??
I will not say ?Hey Beautiful, how are you??
So, Why are you translating names?
Peace.
Peace all,
It was interesting to read about your theories, personally I believe there was a Muhammad, but not like hadiths claim. And humans are known to beautify history, portraying it better than it was because they more or less idolized the prophet, making historical sources biased.
This was my view of what was discussed.
Another thing that came to mind when you wrote about Ahmed and Muhammad. In the Bible's OT we can read that Abraham's name was first Abram, but God said he was to be called Abraham after he had proven himself. I do not know if this has anything to do with the name confusion.
Anyway, the message of the Quran is more important than the messengers of old. God used these devotees as signs for mankind. It may be why God has not made their names proper, as the person behind the name was a sign to mankind.
Of course the Quran talks about a man living in the 7th century as you can see stories narrated with a good description of the events. Most likely was that man named Muhammad or Ahmed maybe first.
Like I said, his name is not important other than knowing of his existence as a sign and living up to the message both he and previous messengers delivered.
Most things written in hadith is just pure nonsense, especially regarding religious practice. They are probably fairy tales invented in the legend of prophet Muhammad, just as untrue things were attributed to Jesus and other messengers.
May God help us follow the light.
Quote from: FindingTheTruePath on January 05, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
Peace be upon you all,
I am new to this forum and am genuinely baffled by this thread. When a translation from one language to another language is carried out, the words chosen reflect the style of the translator?s interpretation of the original meanings. Some may adopt a more ?literal? style of translation or some try to bring out the ?flavour? of the text, but in all this ? names are NEVER translated. So, why are you translating the name Mohammed?
If, for example, I know a man whose name is Hasan (which means beautiful), when I call him, I will say ?Hey Hasan, how are you??
I will not say ?Hey Beautiful, how are you??
So, Why are you translating names?
Peace.
Peace fttp,
How do you know that "Muhammad" is the name, if you can prove it, I will not translate it again. To understand what I am saying, please go through my opening post of this thread, inshaAllah you will understand that "Muhammad" is not a name.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 06, 2013, 03:34:30 AM
Peace all,
It was interesting to read about your theories, personally I believe there was a Muhammad, but not like hadiths claim. And humans are known to beautify history, portraying it better than it was because they more or less idolized the prophet, making historical sources biased.
This was my view of what was discussed.
Peace MoF,
I respect your views :handshake:
Quote
Another thing that came to mind when you wrote about Ahmed and Muhammad. In the Bible's OT we can read that Abraham's name was first Abram, but God said he was to be called Abraham after he had proven himself. I do not know if this has anything to do with the name confusion.
21:59 قَالُوۡا مَنۡ فَعَلَ ہٰذَا بِاٰلِہَتِنَاۤ اِنَّہٗ لَمِنَ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ 21:59 They said, "Who has done this to our gods? Indeed, he is of the wrongdoers."
21:60 قَالُوۡا سَمِعۡنَا فَتًی یَّذۡکُرُہُمۡ یُقَالُ لَہٗۤ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمُ 21:60 They said, "We heard a young man mention them who is called Ibrahim."
As per these aayaats, Ibrahim was called Ibrahim since his teen age.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan,
Ok, so the OT is wrong on that matter too. See how little we can trust the Bible/Torah. And some people believe full out in Hadith.
Well, I stated that he was called Abram and thought it could be a link to this, but obviously this is not the case.
However, logically there was a prophet in the 7th century who delivered the Quran, but his name is not overly important. Although I doubt the prophet would be unknown/anonymous in the scripture.
We must follow his message, the Quran. Not man-made hadith which has been attributed to him and not follow our own conjecture or wishful thinking.
May God help us understand the truth
Peace mmkhan,
I never met a person that did not have a name, so who received the revelation? :nope:
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 06, 2013, 09:52:50 AM
Peace mmkhan,
Ok, so the OT is wrong on that matter too. See how little we can trust the Bible/Torah. And some people believe full out in Hadith.
Well, I stated that he was called Abram and thought it could be a link to this, but obviously this is not the case.
However, logically there was a prophet in the 7th century who delivered the Quran, but his name is not overly important. Although I doubt the prophet would be unknown/anonymous in the scripture.
We must follow his message, the Quran. Not man-made hadith which has been attributed to him and not follow our own conjecture or wishful thinking.
May God help us understand the truth
Peace bro,
Red: Can you please give me any aayat to prove your claim?
Blue: I totally agree with you on this.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
"Just saw this thread. Some time ago, I also wondered about the different endings/vocalisations of the prophtes mentioned in Qur'an. Actually, it's not only Muhammad that falls out of the rule but several more: Nuh, Hud, Saleh, Lut, Shu'ayb; all others are definite= without nunation/tanween. So maybe all undefinite names could be attributes while the others are proper names?"
Currently, I'm studing arabic language and I wanted to share the answer to the above question. The arabic male names end with nunation like Muhammad, Ali, Khalid, Yasir and non-arabic names end with damma. All the female names either arabic or non arabic end with damma. Like Amina, Fatima and Mariam. These are the arabic language rules.
I hope this was helpful!
Quote from: hawkninetynine on January 06, 2013, 09:54:00 AM
Peace mmkhan,
I never met a person that did not have a name, so who received the revelation? :nope:
Peace bro,
Red: Me too :P
Blue: Anyone, you, me or anyone else could. I think you wanted to ask, who brought alQuraan, if so, please take a look at
this (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604108.msg302100#msg302100), it may help you, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan,
So it was Musa who recieved the Quran's revelation, oh boy, so who was Muhammad?
:&
:confused:
Quote from: hawkninetynine on January 06, 2013, 11:05:25 AM
Peace mmkhan,
So it was Musa who recieved the Quran's revelation, oh boy, so who was Muhammad?
:&
:confused:
Peace Hawk,
Red: May be, not yet 100% sure though.
Blue: This was my question. :)
May Allah bless you,
mmKhan
Quote from: LuckyStar on January 06, 2013, 10:46:03 AM
Currently, I'm studing arabic language and I wanted to share the answer to the above question. The arabic male names end with nunation like Muhammad, Ali, Khalid, Yasir and non-arabic names end with damma. All the female names either arabic or non arabic end with damma. Like Amina, Fatima and Mariam. These are the arabic language rules.
I hope this was helpful!
Peace LuckyStar,
:welcome: to the forum.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge, but unfortunately, alQuraan does not support this [as far as I know].
May Allah bless you,
mmKhan
Whew! so you are not done yet, that's good. :yes
May Allah bless you also
Hawk
Peace,
Prove what? Do you mean the book was sent down by God without someone writing it down?
There are lots of verses hinting at that it was a prophet receiving the scripture, you can easily find it yourself.
Regarding 7th century, if you meant that, I am just following common understanding, even if it is wrong it is irrelevant as we have the Quran.
I just meant that there was a prophet living after Jesus who delivered the Quran. Otherwise who lived through the events described so well in the Quran and who was the one communicated through 2nd person singular.
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 06, 2013, 11:44:09 AM
Peace,
Prove what? Do you mean the book was sent down by God without someone writing it down?
There are lots of verses hinting at that it was a prophet receiving the scripture, you can easily find it yourself.
Regarding 7th century, if you meant that, I am just following common understanding, even if it is wrong it is irrelevant as we have the Quran.
I just meant that there was a prophet living after Jesus who delivered the Quran. Otherwise who lived through the events described so well in the Quran and who was the one communicated through 2nd person singular.
Peace,
Easy easy! Please take a look at the link given in reply#62, it may help you understand what I am saying, inshaAllah.
May Allah bless you,
mmKhan
Peace be upon you mmkhan,
So, let me get this right ? you are claiming that Muhammad is not a name, but a ?title? due to some grammatical anomaly for it to be a name?
As, posted by others, Muhammad is mentioned a few times in the Qur?an. As an example, the following Ayah mentions Muhammad
(Pickthall translation) 2:144 ?Muhammad is but a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) have passed away before him. Will it be that, when he dieth or is slain, ye will turn back on your heels? He who turneth back on his heels doth no hurt to Allah, and Allah will reward the thankful.?
How can a title die or be slain?
That is a person being refereed to. A number of other Ayah?s refer to this very same person? as Muhammad. If this is indeed a ?title? as you claim, why are other prophets mentioned by name and the prophet Muhammad as a ?title??
Additionally, why are the previous prophets not referred to by the same ?title?: Muhammad? After all, they were also delivering the same message.
May Allah guide us all.
Peace Findingthetruepath,
I think people in their obsession to invalidate the traditional muslims' religious practices, the Sunnah and hadith try to find obscure interpretations of the Quran through wishful thinking.
May God guide us into eternal bliss
Quote from: FindingTheTruePath on January 08, 2013, 07:49:45 AM
Peace be upon you mmkhan,
So, let me get this right ? you are claiming that Muhammad is not a name, but a ?title? due to some grammatical anomaly for it to be a name?
Peace be upon you too brother,
Did I say/claim that? :&
I did not used any grammar to prove that Muhammad is not a name, but I have shown how Allah clarified it in alQuraan by using it in a different way.
Quote
As, posted by others, Muhammad is mentioned a few times in the Qur?an. As an example, the following Ayah mentions Muhammad
(Pickthall translation) 2:144 ?Muhammad is but a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) have passed away before him. Will it be that, when he dieth or is slain, ye will turn back on your heels? He who turneth back on his heels doth no hurt to Allah, and Allah will reward the thankful.?
How can a title die or be slain?
It is like...
5:19
...فَقَدۡ جَآءَکُمۡ بَشِیۡرٌ وَّ نَذِیۡرٌ ...5:19 ...But there has come to you a bringer of good tidings and a warner...
Instead of this translation people are translating something as
"
...But there has come to you Basheer and Nazeer..."
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 08, 2013, 10:52:05 AM
Peace Findingthetruepath,
I think people in their obsession to invalidate the traditional muslims' religious practices, the Sunnah and hadith try to find obscure interpretations of the Quran through wishful thinking.
May God guide us into eternal bliss
Salaam,
Unfortunately people forget why we have been created. We are only been created to serve Allah alone, and in serving Him alone, there is no place for any nabi or rasool.
51:56 وَ مَا خَلَقۡتُ الۡجِنَّ وَ الۡاِنۡسَ اِلَّا لِیَعۡبُدُوۡنِ51:56 And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to serve Me.
May Allah save us from all kinds of shirk and guide us to Him alone :pr
mmKhan
33.
There can be no difficulty to the Prophet in what Allah has indicated to him as a duty. It was the practice (approved) of Allah amongst those of old that have passed away. And the command of Allah is a decree determined. (38)
(It is the practice of those) who preach the Messages of Allah, and fear Him, and fear none but Allah. And enough is Allah to call (men) to account. (39)
Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things. (40)
So, who is this khatam an-nibiyin?
As far as I gather from the contents of the whole of Qur'an his mission is the message contained in the Qur'an, which is a reminder and a check for all revelation from the Divina Light. That is why he is called khatam annabiyin, because his message, the Qur'an is khatam a nubu'wa, the seal of profecy.
The Qur'an keeps telling that God sent warners everywhere to every people and keeps reminding that His message has been the same and He has kept reminding humanity of His revelation, and telling us that all prophets are one, that they are not better one than the other, because in fact Prophecy is what they are, the belong to Prophecy and not Prophecy belongs to them. Just like the angels they are subservient to their mission and not the other way around.
To guide us in the maze of purported or authentic revelations and divine "certainties" propferred by men, comes the seal of prophecy the message transmitted by Muhammad and whether it is a title or a name or both things, does not change a thing in the message. And the message is the same one handed down from all time of humanity through whichever prophet. And there have been many prophets for humanity, not just those mentionned in the Qur'an. That is Muhammad, the seal of all those, the sublime confirmation of the sublime message to all humanity through the ages. So that when we learn and compare from whetever messages, we know which message handed down is authentic and true or not, be the prophet who transmitted it known or unknown. Prophets are one, their mission one, pass the Divine Light to people. And that is why the Qur'an orders us to deal equally with all the prophets because they are the same, they are one, they are all indeed praised, because their mission is one who broghut light to humans.
Let us not be stingy, they are all sent for our service, if we do not feel at ease calling one of them Muhammad, let us call all of them Muhammad, they are one and they did love the people and served them.
Salaam
Salam
QuoteThe Qur'an keeps telling that God sent warners everywhere to every people and keeps reminding that His message has been the same and He has kept reminding humanity of His revelation, and telling us that all prophets are one, that they are not better one than the other, because in fact Prophecy is what they are, the belong to Prophecy and not Prophecy belongs to them. Just like the angels they are subservient to their mission and not the other way around.
To guide us in the maze of purported or authentic revelations and divine "certainties" propferred by men, comes the seal of prophecy the message transmitted by Muhammad and whether it is a title or a name or both things, does not change a thing in the message. And the message is the same one handed down from all time of humanity through whichever prophet. And there have been many prophets for humanity, not just those mentionned in the Qur'an. That is Muhammad, the seal of all those, the sublime confirmation of the sublime message to all humanity through the ages. So that when we learn and compare from whetever messages, we know which message handed down is authentic and true or not, be the prophet who transmitted it known or unknown. Prophets are one, their mission one, pass the Divine Light to people. And that is why the Qur'an orders us to deal equally with all the prophets because they are the same, they are one, they are all indeed praised, because their mission is one who broghut light to humans.
thank Huruf for her wonderful words. :) peace
Thanks to you Mirajamnur, you really endeavour to go see and bring light.
Salaam
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 08, 2013, 10:52:05 AM
Peace Findingthetruepath,
I think people in their obsession to invalidate the traditional muslims' religious practices, the Sunnah and hadith try to find obscure interpretations of the Quran through wishful thinking.
May God guide us into eternal bliss
Peace be upon you Man of Faith,
I am new to this forum, and I must admit i am dismayed by the over analysing and the constant search for the 'hidden' meaning of the Quran. Things that I would take literally, are in this forum being dissected and analysed to such an extend that it makes me wonder; did Allah intend the Quran to be understood by a bunch of code breakers only?
I myself read/recite the Quran but do not understand Arabic. I rely on no less than 5 different translations to understand any ayah. I freed myself from the obsession with Hadith that most Muslims have, as I could not rationalise most of the stuff in the light of the Quran ? and also a lot of it did not make any logical sense as well. But now I find myself in another dilemma ? I feel some of the stuff here is at the other extreme of the scales.
May Allah guide us all on the true straight path.
Peace FindingTheTruePath,
I suppose it is a problem with humans that they often must be so exaggerated about what they do, so they lose all proportions. Does God not tell us that the Quran is easy to learn?
But on the other hand, the traditionalists distorted much of the religion over centuries, so its practices need to be purified. However we shouldn't jump to hasty conclusions, as to remove physical prayers, invalidate Hajj, change fasting rules and such changes.
I have felt it cannot be that physical prayers are invented, even Jews do them to some extent and they were not really islam-friendly. It feels strange so many circumstantial sources would be so wrong.
And here in this thread people try to erase prophet Muhammad from history. Why not erase Jesus or Abraham too? There are little proof of them too.
Despite this risky business I find this forum to be the best place to find the truth, and not all here are so quick to adopt such controversial ideas. Personally I am careful about rushing to conclusions, and you will find many other too.
May God show us the true path
Quote from: FindingTheTruePath on January 17, 2013, 08:14:47 AM
I am new to this forum, and I must admit i am dismayed by the over analysing and the constant search for the 'hidden' meaning of the Quran. Things that I would take literally, are in this forum being dissected and analysed to such an extend that it makes me wonder; did Allah intend the Quran to be understood by a bunch of code breakers only?
Peace,
Red: Nope, alQuraan is for all, but unfortunately people don't or cannot come out of their mindsets that they already in practice. This might be the reason, rasools are sent to people to correct them in their understandings, and to explain them what they don't know, etc.
Decoding of aayaat of alQuraan can be done by any person who is:
- Willing to do so by giving time for it with an open mind.
- By seeking Allah help and guidance on the same.
- And trying to be a Muttaqee [one who avoid whatever Allah asked to avoid].
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His only path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 17, 2013, 08:48:43 AM
I suppose it is a problem with humans that they often must be so exaggerated about what they do, so they lose all proportions. Does God not tell us that the Quran is easy to learn?
Peace,
Red: Nope :nope: Allah did not say that alQuraan is easy to learn, but He said it is easy to remember as per 54:17, 22, 32, 40.
Quote
But on the other hand, the traditionalists distorted much of the religion over centuries, so its practices need to be purified. However we shouldn't jump to hasty conclusions, as to remove physical prayers, invalidate Hajj, change fasting rules and such changes.
Many things that you don't agree with does not make it wrong or hasty. If you stick to alQuraan and seek Allah's help in its understanding, you will surely come to conclusions on many things that you don't know or you don't believe them to be true now. Please be patient and do not deny the aayaat, just keep on hold as per 10:109.
Quote
I have felt it cannot be that physical prayers are invented, even Jews do them to some extent and they were not really islam-friendly. It feels strange so many circumstantial sources would be so wrong.
I think, many of these things which are in practice in Sunnism or Shiaism are mainly come from Judaism.
Quote
And here in this thread people try to erase prophet Muhammad from history. Why not erase Jesus or Abraham too? There are little proof of them too.
Do you deny the aayaat of Allah in alQuraan? Don't you see evidence given in the opening thread. Do you think if you love Muhammad you will get Jannat or am I trying to get Jannat by omitting Muhammad?
I simply don't follow what I like or my wishes brother, I only follow what Allah guides me to, alhamduliAllah.
Saying anyone wrong is very easy, but proving them wrong with the aayaat are the real deal.
Quote
Despite this risky business I find this forum to be the best place to find the truth, and not all here are so quick to adopt such controversial ideas. Personally I am careful about rushing to conclusions, and you will find many other too.
Red: This is the same way I use to think earlier.
And you are very correct that you are not adopting these things quickly. We are not allowed to rush to conclusions until Allah make it clear for us. So, be patient, this is the correct step you have taken.
No offence intended.
May God show us the true path and increase us in knowledge :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
I would like to clarify that I am no Muhammad-lover, in fact far from it., but that does not mean I try to erase him from history and it has nothing to do with idolization.
And I accept that you have different opinions, I just wanted to raise awareness of not rushing to conclusions.
And please see me as very open-minded, because I listen to all arguments. I just warn people about rushing to various conclusions that may be incorrect.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 17, 2013, 10:11:05 AM
Peace,
I would like to clarify that I am no Muhammad-lover, in fact far from it., but that does not mean I try to erase him from history and it has nothing to do with idolization.
And I accept that you have different opinions, I just wanted to raise awareness of not rushing to conclusions.
And please see me as very open-minded, because I listen to all arguments. I just warn people about rushing to various conclusions that may be incorrect.
God bless you
Peace,
Thanks for clarification brother. I agree with you :handshake:
May Allah bless you, :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan,
I apologize for seeming arrogant in the earlier post, I realized I came about a bit bluntly and it was not my intention. It seems it can be a human defect.
What is most important is that we worship God alone, believe in the Hereafter and are righteous.
God was most likely not harsh when he put certain rituals on our shoulders considered his 1:1 attributes.
The individual development is most important, like becoming kind, generous, helpful etc, to be admitted into God's kingdom. This is what probably will keep most people
from salvation, involving idol worship. The ego as idol is common.
By the way brother mmkhan, I used to call myself Christian before this. I do not have much connection to traditional islam and hadith etc. I did never believe in the trinity and it may have made it easier for me to accept the Quran.
Anyway, my opinion on this thread is that Muhammad was a prophet, but the arguments against this are interesting, I have to admit that. More solid proof and I might believe it. Unfortunately this feels just like saying Jesus never lived.
May God guide you into the light
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 17, 2013, 11:04:43 AM
Peace mmkhan,
I apologize for seeming arrogant in the earlier post, I realized I came about a bit bluntly and it was not my intention. It seems it can be a human defect.
What is most important is that we worship God alone, believe in the Hereafter and are righteous.
God was most likely not harsh when he put certain rituals on our shoulders considered his 1:1 attributes.
The individual development is most important, like becoming kind, generous, helpful etc, to be admitted into God's kingdom. This is what probably will keep most people
from salvation, involving idol worship. The ego as idol is common.
Peace Man of Faith,
No need to apologize brother, I may react in the same way some times ;) May Allah forgive us :pr
Quote
By the way brother mmkhan, I used to call myself Christian before this. I do not have much connection to traditional islam and hadith etc. I did never believe in the trinity and it may have made it easier for me to accept the Quran.
Wow MashaAllah! It will be surely easy for you to understand alQuraan, inshaAllah because you are free from traditional Islam.
Quote
Anyway, my opinion on this thread is that Muhammad was a prophet, but the arguments against this are interesting, I have to admit that. More solid proof and I might believe it. Unfortunately this feels just like saying Jesus never lived.
May God guide you into the light
Allah will guide us slowly brother, we have to be patient. If you know how to read Arabic, then my opening thread may help you somehow, inshaAllah. If you don't know how to read Arabic, then please wait, until Allah makes it clear for you.
If you are referring to Eisa by mentioning Jesus, then again my opening thread will help you on this as well. Eisa, Ibrahim, Musa and many others are clearly mentioned as names in alQuraan.
May God increase our knowledge and guide us to His path :pr
mmKhan
salaam
before being a nabi, Muhammad was a pagan.
we can deduce from that that the name he was given at birth was probably pagan.
some historians give the name of Qotham, or Zobath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad)
according to legends, he was named qotham by his great father in memory of a son lost 3 years before.
on the other side, even the name of the father of the prophet. Abd Allah is not usual in pagan society and it seems that there is no abdallah before that abdallah.
Whatever is the real name of the prophet before prophecy, his name after is Muhammad or Ahmed wich are extracted from the same root.
Peace
Quote from: noshirk on January 17, 2013, 11:31:45 AM
before being a nabi, Muhammad was a pagan.
Certainly you (or anybody else still living at the moment) do not know that for certain.
Quote from: Jafar on January 17, 2013, 12:16:14 PM
Certainly you (or anybody else still living at the moment) do not know that for certain.
salaam
6:155 And this is a Book that We have sent down which is blessed, so follow it and be aware, that you may receive mercy.
6:156 Lest you say: "The Book was only sent down to two groups before us, and we were unaware of their study!"
6:157 Or you say: "If the Book was sent to us we would have been more guided than they!" Clarity has come to you from your Lord, and a guidance and a mercy. Who is more wicked than he who denies the revelations of God and turns away from them? ....
62:2 He is the One who sent to the OMMIYIN a messenger from among themselves, to recite to them His revelations, and to purify them, and teach them the Book and the wisdom. And before this, they were clearly astray.
3:20 If they debate with you, then say: "I have submitted myself to God, as well as those who follow me." And say to those who have received the Book and the OMMYIN: "Have you submitted?" If they have submitted then they are guided, and if they turn away, then you are only to deliver, and God is Seer over the servants.
7:157 "Those who follow the OMMI messenger prophet whom they find written for them in the Torah and the Injeel; he orders them to kindness, and prohibits them from vice, and he makes lawful for them the good things, and he makes unlawful for them the evil things, and he removes their burden and the shackles that are upon them. So those who believe in him, and support him, and help him persevere, and follow the light that was sent down with him; these are the successful ones."
OMMI meaning is clear according to quran : who don't receive book.
the illeterate meaning is from hadiths.
Peace
Peace be upon you all,
I also, like brother Man of Faith, do not idolize the prophet Muhammad, but reading through some of the posts (in other threads) here I feel as some people think this was just a regular delivery guy from DHL who came to drop off a package. For me personally he has my utmost respect, for he was chosen from all of mankind to deliver Allah's message. He is also described in the Quran as an 'honoured messenger' ... so why do we not hold him in honour (without idolizing him)?
069.040
Asad: Behold, this [Quran] is indeed the [inspired] word of a noble apostle,
Pickthall: That it is indeed the speech of an illustrious messenger.
Sahih: [That] indeed, the Qur'an is the word of a noble Messenger.
Shakir: Most surely, it is the Word brought by an honored Apostle,
YusufAli: That this is verily the word of an honoured messenger;
I struggled for a long time with the Hadith ... they just did not make ?sense?, just as I am struggling to understand why it is claimed his name was not Muhammad. I cannot rationalise the reasons given so far. Maybe I have missed something.
Peace to you all.
Quote from: FindingTheTruePath on January 17, 2013, 03:07:17 PM
Peace be upon you all,
I also, like brother Man of Faith, do not idolize the prophet Muhammad, but reading through some of the posts (in other threads) here I feel as some people think this was just a regular delivery guy from DHL who came to drop off a package. For me personally he has my utmost respect, for he was chosen from all of mankind to deliver Allah's message. He is also described in the Quran as an 'honoured messenger' ... so why do we not hold him in honour (without idolizing him)?
069.040
Asad: Behold, this [Quran] is indeed the [inspired] word of a noble apostle,
Pickthall: That it is indeed the speech of an illustrious messenger.
Sahih: [That] indeed, the Qur'an is the word of a noble Messenger.
Shakir: Most surely, it is the Word brought by an honored Apostle,
YusufAli: That this is verily the word of an honoured messenger;
I struggled for a long time with the Ahadith; they just did not make ?sense?, just as I am struggling to understand why it is claimed his name was not Muhammad. I cannot rationalise the reasons given so far. Maybe I have missed something.
Peace to you all.
salaam FindingTheTruePath
Don't struggle too much brother just take, what some are trying to convey, with a pinch of salt. After all this is 'free minds' and it doesn't cost them anything to play pick and chose, between play the man or play the ball. ;)
:peace:
Interesting little info here:
Mahomet
Mahomet, the history of whom is well known to us, recognized the teaching of Moses and Jesus Christ. He thought that he had to draw people's attention to wrong interpretations given by Jews-rabbis, but at the swne time he criticized also the Orthodox Church - particularly for its final decision accepted in the 4th century to recognized Jesus Christ as a God's Son and stating the dogma of Trinity. Jesus Christ was for him a prophet lighted up by the Holy Spirit (Ghost). Mahomet considered himself to be a person, whom archangel Gavriil ordered to teach people, but his personal behaviour was not ordered him from the above, he did not pretend to it.
One must not forget that the Arabs' cultural level in the epoch of Mahomet was lower than that one in the epoch of Jesus Christ. They were idolaters and did not dispose moral foundations stated according to religious laws. The law of the strong one predominated among them in the epoch of Moses at the beginning of the 7th century.
As well as Moses Mahomet forcibly brought his people to monotheism and worldly morals.
source:
http://www.webjam.com/karaim/anan_ben_david
Quote from: noshirk on January 17, 2013, 12:57:26 PM
OMMI meaning is clear according to quran : who don't receive book.
the illeterate meaning is from hadiths.
I think you do not understand the meanings of "Pagan"..
Ummi / unlearned / uneducated doesn't necessarily mean Pagan..
The "Books within a bundle called Bible" (and so does the Quran) is not THE ONLY source of guidance thus you can deduce those who are not aware of Bible (or Quran) is definitely a Pagan.
And that's actually one of the key message being put forward with Muhammad..
It's the same as saying: "You Jews/Xtians (People of the book) are not the ONLY guided people and/or the chosen people on earth. There are many others! And I (God) can guide whomever I wish with or without any book"
Salam / Peace
Quote from: Jafar on January 19, 2013, 03:43:38 AM
I think you do not understand the meanings of "Pagan"..
Ummi / unlearned / uneducated doesn't necessarily mean Pagan..
The "Books within a bundle called Bible" (and so does the Quran) is not THE ONLY source of guidance thus you can deduce those who are not aware of Bible (or Quran) is definitely a Pagan.
And that's actually one of the key message being put forward with Muhammad..
It's the same as saying: "You Jews/Xtians (People of the book) are not the ONLY guided people and/or the chosen people on earth. There are many others! And I (God) can guide whomever I wish with or without any book"
Salam / Peace
salaam
i think Ommi is to be opposed to people of the book.
i am now from people of the book. Muhammad became from people of the book after he received Quran.
i don't know what was the religion of Muhammad before he received the book.
Pagan is the most probable hypothesis. Perhaps he accepted Jewish faith before receiving the Book. I don't know.
Peace
Quote from: Jafar on January 19, 2013, 03:43:38 AM
I think you do not understand the meanings of "Pagan"..
Ummi / unlearned / uneducated doesn't necessarily mean Pagan..
Salam / Peace
Peace
Agreed
QuoteThe "Books within a bundle called Bible" (and so does the Quran) is not THE ONLY source of guidance thus you can deduce those who are not aware of Bible (or Quran) is definitely a Pagan.
To me it would make more sense if I were to say those who are not aware of a bundle within The Book :hmm
QuoteAnd that's actually one of the key message being put forward with Muhammad..
It's the same as saying: "You Jews/Xtians (People of the book) are not the ONLY guided people and/or the chosen people on earth. There are many others! And I (God) can guide whomever I wish with or without any book
Or there are others who were given The Book too :hmm
salaam
God sent prophets to all people so says the Qur'an, so all peoples are peoples of the book.
But, anybody, even while formally or outwardly posing as people of tghe book, can become pagan, by beliefs or behaviour. To become pegan you do not need to worship Mercury or a goat. You can worship yourself, your fancies, another person, ideas, whatever, and that is why there are people that have gone astray. Guidance came to everybody, and amongs all peoples there have been those that go astray. Within christians, within muslims, within anything, because strayness is always within reach, you do not have to do anything extraordinary, and you may not even feel it, you may even think that you are serving or defending an ideal...
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on January 19, 2013, 07:56:29 AM
God sent prophets to all people, so says the Qur'an, so all peoples are peoples of the book.
But, anybody, even while formally or outwardly posing as people of tghe book, can become pagan, by beliefs or behaviour. To become pegan you do not need to worship Mercury or a goat. You can worship yourself, your fancies, another person, ideas, whatever, and that is why there are people that have gone astray. Guidance came to everybody, and amongs all peoples there have been those that go astray. Within christians, within muslims, within anything, because strayness is always within reach, you do not have to do anything extraordinary, and you may not even feel it, you may even think that you are serving or defending an ideal...
Salaam
salaam
Exactly!!! May I also add: 'to say with your mouth that we seek refuge in ALLAAH, and then ask for guidance from ALLAAH is the first requirement. But actuallly not having faith that ALLAAH will guide you and protect you, means tha what you say from your mouth you do not believe in. It means what'? :hmm
QuoteTo become pegan you do not need to worship Mercury or a goat. You can worship yourself, your fancies, another person, ideas
I read other day chapter 41 of the Quran and reading 34-38 and more confirmed to me that it is important to appreciate and thank those who do good to you.
salaam
Quote from: noshirk on January 19, 2013, 06:56:03 AM
salaam
i think Ommi is to be opposed to people of the book.
i am now from people of the book. Muhammad became from people of the book after he received Quran.
i don't know what was the religion of Muhammad before he received the book.
Pagan is the most probable hypothesis. Perhaps he accepted Jewish faith before receiving the Book. I don't know.
Peace
Salamun alaika,
Grand Qur'aan: The most authentic and best biography of Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam (http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Individual%20Ayaat/002.%20Albaqrah/151.htm)
Salaam
Very interesting post, surprisingly, there are number of occassions people posted ayat 33:40 and did not analyse it further, I agree all the names are attributes to the personalities in Quran, which can be proven by Allah's name/attribute, He is Rehaman, Jabaar, Khahar etc but He is one Allah (The God). Similarly, the attributes to Al-Kitab are Quran, Furqaan, Burhan, Rooh, Torah, Injeel but only one Book. Going back to 33:40
"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things."
1. Muhammad is not the father of men (Muhammad is in present tense and he is not a father of men)
2. But he the Messenger of Allah and seal of the prophets (Muhammad's job is a messenger of Allah, and he seals that message to all the prophets, including Ibraheem, Mosa, Essa so on).
Therefore Muhammad existence from all times as a messenger until present.
Further the people who were given the book are mentioned in 6:83-90
Peace:
Of course the name Mohamed means something (and something great since it was given to the prophet by God), names given to people by God have meanings. not like the names given to us nowadays that are totally meaningless. Remember that in the torah God named Abraham, since that was not his original name, and also God changed the name to Jacob calling him Israel, etc.
Why do you argue about something that only God Knows (is The All Knowing obliged to tell us in every revelation why He changes the name of His prophets and when, how is it that you reason, The all-mighty does whatever he wills). Of course we should not idolize prophet Mohamed, but we certainly shall respect his name, for he was blessed by God with revelation. Mohamed was the name given by God to His last messenger/prophet, and that all that matters.
God will not reward us for finding the original names of his prophets. He doesn't say: run to find all the hidden stuff in the Qur'an, he says Run to do the good deeds. Adore only God and treat your brother as you would like to be treated. respect all the prophets and make no difference between them.
Here is an explanation of the name of Prophet Mohamed found for 61:6 Mohamed Assad's message of the Qur'an:
6 This prediction is supported by several references in the Gospel of St. John to the Parakletos (usually rendered as Comforter") who was to come after Jesus. This designation is almost certainly a corruption of Periklytos ("the Much-Praised"), an exact Greek translation of the Aramaic term or name Mawhamana. (It is to be borne in mind that Aramaic was the language used in Palestine at the time of, and for some centuries after, Jesus, and was thus undoubtedly the language in which the original - now lost -texts of the Gospels were composed.) In view of the phonetic closeness of Periklytos and Parakletos it is
easy to understand how the translator - or, more probably, a later scribe - confused these two expressions. It is significant that both the Aramaic Mawhamana and the Greek Periklytos have the same meaning asthe two names of the Last Prophet, Muhammad and Ahmad, both of which are derived from the verb hamida ("he praised") and the noun hamd ("praise"). An even more unequivocal prediction of the advent of the Prophet Muhammad - mentioned by name, in its Arabic form - is said to be forthcoming from the so-called Gospel of St. Barnabas, which, though now regarded as apocryphal, was accepted as authentic and was read in the churches until the year 496 of the Christian era, when it was banned as "heretical" by a decree of Pope Gelasius. However, since the original text of that Gospel is not available (having come down to us only in an Italian translation dating from the late sixteenth century), its authenticity cannot be established with certainty.
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 18, 2013, 11:37:36 PM
Adore only God and treat your brother as you would like to be treated.
Salaam,
This not from alQuraan.
Quote
Here is an explanation of the name of Prophet Mohamed found for 61:6 Mohamed Assad's message of the Qur'an:
6 This prediction is supported by several references in the Gospel of St. John to the Parakletos (usually rendered as Comforter") who was to come after Jesus. This designation is almost certainly a corruption of Periklytos ("the Much-Praised"), an exact Greek translation of the Aramaic term or name Mawhamana. (It is to be borne in mind that Aramaic was the language used in Palestine at the time of, and for some centuries after, Jesus, and was thus undoubtedly the language in which the original - now lost -texts of the Gospels were composed.) In view of the phonetic closeness of Periklytos and Parakletos it is
easy to understand how the translator - or, more probably, a later scribe - confused these two expressions. It is significant that both the Aramaic Mawhamana and the Greek Periklytos have the same meaning asthe two names of the Last Prophet, Muhammad and Ahmad, both of which are derived from the verb hamida ("he praised") and the noun hamd ("praise"). An even more unequivocal prediction of the advent of the Prophet Muhammad - mentioned by name, in its Arabic form - is said to be forthcoming from the so-called Gospel of St. Barnabas, which, though now regarded as apocryphal, was accepted as authentic and was read in the churches until the year 496 of the Christian era, when it was banned as "heretical" by a decree of Pope Gelasius. However, since the original text of that Gospel is not available (having come down to us only in an Italian translation dating from the late sixteenth century), its authenticity cannot be established with certainty.
I understood.
Until you stop reading all this, you will never understand alQuraan's true meaning bro. You did not properly read nor understood the opening post of this thread for sure... because I was saying something else there and you came up with something else.
Anyways, I will make it easy for you, just answer my simple question.
Q. Who is Muhammad? If you say [as you already said in your post] a messenger and/or a prophet, prove it from alQuraan. There is no person called Muhammad in alQuraan.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
peace:
QuoteUntil you stop reading all this, you will never understand alQuraan's true meaning bro
The true meaning of the Qur'an is only known by The All-knowing, I will understand the true meaning of the Qur'an only if God wills it. For the moment I am happy to see it as guidance, guidance from The Most-Merciful for those who open their hearth humbly and are not blindly arrogant. I seek refuge in God from being of the ignorant.
3:144...... وما محمد إلا رسول And not muhamad (mhmd) except messenger33:40 ....ما كان محمد أبا أحد من رجالكم ولكن رسول اللـه Muhamad is not the father of any one of your men, but is God's Apostle/messenger47:2..........والذين آمنوا وعملوا الصالحات وآمنوا بما نزل على محمدwhereas those who have attained to faith and do righteous deeds, and have come to believe in what has been bestowed from on high on/over Muhamad48:29......محمد رسول اللـه ۚ والذين معه أشداء على الكفار Muhamad messenger/apostle (of) God and those who (are) with him (are) firm towards/over the disbeliever/deniers of the truthRemember that everybody here is posting his/her personal opinions about the Qur'an/God's message, patience patience is a sign of the Guided ones. That which is written in the verses above is enough for me to recognize the prophet as Muhamad. If we deny the name of Muhamad, we will end up denying Jesus, for his name is not in the old testament, and neither he mentions his name in the words attributed to him in Matthew/Mark/Luke/John.
Remember that God is the only one that is going to show us on judgement day the truth about that on which we differ.
QuoteThis not from alQuraan.
I didn't say it was from alquran. the laws of God never change.
salaam
if muhammad was birth name of rassool then muhammad is a "pagan/idolater/whatever was his family religion " name
it is a clear anachronism for me.
Peace
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 19, 2013, 11:31:20 PM
peace:
The true meaning of the Qur'an is only known by The All-knowing, I will understand the true meaning of the Qur'an only if God wills it. For the moment I am happy to see it as guidance, guidance from The Most-Merciful for those who open their hearth humbly and are not blindly arrogant. I seek refuge in God from being of the ignorant.
Peace wrkmmn,
This is what I was saying. You have stop reading everything else and then only Allah the all-Knowing will guide us directly, but if we take other's interpretations then, we are cutting off Allah's source of guidance. This is how I personally understand, it is up to you.
Quote
Remember that everybody here is posting his/her personal opinions about the Qur'an/God's message, patience patience is a sign of the Guided ones. That which is written in the verses above is enough for me to recognize the prophet as Muhamad. If we deny the name of Muhamad, we will end up denying Jesus, for his name is not in the old testament, and neither he mentions his name in the words attributed to him in Matthew/Mark/Luke/John. Remember that God is the only one that is going to show us on judgement day the truth about that on which we differ.
Those aayaat are already been discussed on this same thread in previous pages, please take a look at them if you want to understand it. I simply wanted to say that the usage of word "MuhammadUN" or "MuhammadIN" in alQuraan is not used as a name. If you like to accept it, its for you and if you want to deny, its up to you. No offence intended.
10:41 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=10&verse=41) وَ اِنۡ کَذَّبُوۡکَ فَقُلۡ لِّیۡ عَمَلِیۡ وَ لَکُمۡ عَمَلُکُمۡ ۚ اَنۡتُمۡ بَرِیۡٓـــُٔوۡنَ مِمَّاۤ اَعۡمَلُ وَ اَنَا بَرِیۡٓءٌ مِّمَّا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ10:41 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=10&verse=41) And if they deny you, then say, "For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do."
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 19, 2013, 11:37:05 PM
I didn't say it was from alquran. the laws of God never change.
Peace,
Quote
God will not reward us for finding the original names of his prophets. He doesn't say: run to find all the hidden stuff in the Qur'an, he says Run to do the good deeds. Adore only God and treat your brother as you would like to be treated. respect all the prophets and make no difference between them.
:hmm
If Muhammad in the Quran not a prophet, so Isa is our last prophet then.
Quote from: Earthdom on May 20, 2013, 07:22:12 AM
If Muhammad in the Quran not a prophet, so Isa is our last prophet then.
Salaam Earthdom,
There is no first and last messenger and prophet. Allah sends them whenever people need them.
4:164 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=164) وَ رُسُلًا قَدۡ قَصَصۡنٰہُمۡ عَلَیۡکَ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ وَ رُسُلًا لَّمۡ نَقۡصُصۡہُمۡ عَلَیۡکَ ؕ وَ کَلَّمَ اللّٰہُ مُوۡسٰی تَکۡلِیۡمًا 4:164 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=164) And messengers We have mentioned to you before and messengers we have not mentioned to you; and Allah communicated with Musa, directly.
We are not given info about many rasools, hence saying who is last could be wrong.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 20, 2013, 07:38:00 AM
Salaam Earthdom,
There is no first and last messenger and prophet. Allah sends them whenever people need them.
4:164 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=164) وَ رُسُلًا قَدۡ قَصَصۡنٰہُمۡ عَلَیۡکَ مِنۡ قَبۡلُ وَ رُسُلًا لَّمۡ نَقۡصُصۡہُمۡ عَلَیۡکَ ؕ وَ کَلَّمَ اللّٰہُ مُوۡسٰی تَکۡلِیۡمًا
4:164 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=164) And messengers We have mentioned to you before and messengers we have not mentioned to you; and Allah communicated with Musa, directly.
We are not given info about many rasools, hence saying who is last could be wrong.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace be with you, brother mmkhan.
I think it will be weird if the name of the Prophet is nowhere mentioned even ONCE inside the very book which was revealed through that very same Prophet. Don't you think?
:peace:
Quote from: Scribbler on May 20, 2013, 08:15:48 AM
Peace be with you, brother mmkhan.
I think it will be weird if the name of the Prophet is nowhere mentioned even ONCE inside the very book which was revealed through that very same Prophet. Don't you think?
:peace:
Peace be with you too brother Scribbler,
Red: How do you know that? I am sure you cannot give any reference from alQuraan on this bro. And what do you think about this? (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604108.msg302100#msg302100) I think Muhammad was a created character.
Hope this may be helpful inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
If the word Muhammad is not a proper noun, what does the word mean then?
God bless you
Quote from: mmkhan on May 20, 2013, 12:37:23 PM
... I think Muhammad was a created character...
the highlight above is from me.
How do you explain the verse 48:29 below?
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا ۖ سِيمَاهُمْ فِي وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ السُّجُودِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ ۚ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ فَآزَرَهُ فَاسْتَغْلَظَ فَاسْتَوَىٰ عَلَىٰ سُوقِهِ يُعْجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ الْكُفَّارَ ۗ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًاMuhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with
him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.
Peace,
Khalil
Salaam Man of Faith and Khalil,
Please go through this thread from beginning, these questions has been answered already.
--> مُحَمَّدٌ in 33:40 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=40)
--> مُحَرَّمٌ in 6:139 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=139)
--> مُنَزَّلٌ in 6:114 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=114)
--> مُتَبَّرٌ in 7:139 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=7&verse=139)
--> مُّمَرَّدٌ in 27:44 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=27&verse=44)
--> مُعَلَّمٌ in 44:14 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=44&verse=14)
These words are written in exactly same way, then why only Muhammadun is name and others are not? Just think about it.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 20, 2013, 03:20:34 PM
Salaam Man of Faith and Khalil,
Please go through this thread from beginning, these questions has been answered already.
--> مُحَمَّدٌ in 33:40 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=40)
--> مُحَرَّمٌ in 6:139 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=139)
--> مُنَزَّلٌ in 6:114 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=114)
--> مُتَبَّرٌ in 7:139 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=7&verse=139)
--> مُّمَرَّدٌ in 27:44 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=27&verse=44)
--> مُعَلَّمٌ in 44:14 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=44&verse=14)
These words are written in exactly same way, then why only Muhammadun is name and others are not? Just think about it.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
The red highlight above is from me.
Dear mmkhan,
It seems that you don?t know much about the rules and regulations governing the Arabic language. You just write down a bunch of words out their context, from The Qur?aan, claiming that, because they SOUND just the SAME in your ears, then they all must belong to the same group, linguistically. You're just following your whim and conjecture on issues you have little or no knowledge about, none whatsoever.
In 48:29 I purposely, and in big lettering, highlighted the PROPER name ?MUHAMMAD? and the pronoun ?HIM? that was used to refer to the Prophet, pbuh, in the verse, i.e. the part that talks about ?those who are with HIM?. You disregard the whole meaning and context of the verse and follow your own impulsive gibberish.
Peace,
Khalil
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 20, 2013, 05:45:03 PM
The red highlight above is from me.
Dear mmkhan,
It seems that you don?t know much about the rules and regulations governing the Arabic language. You just write down a bunch of words out their context, from The Qur?aan, claiming that, because they SOUND just the SAME in your ears, then they all must belong to the same group, linguistically. You're just following your whim and conjecture on issues you have little or no knowledge, none whatsoever.
Peace brother,
Red: This is not from alQuraan, but what I wrote is indeed from alQuraan. Allah never said in His Book that Arabic Language rules and regulations which was made by humans is the way to understand the aayaat of alQuraan. But Allah said, He guides whom He wills... How? This is an interesting question, you have to understand this point.
AlKitaab is nothing but referring to alQuraan's TEXT, which is very important, and alKitaab is the guidance for alMuttaqeen 2:2. If you ignore that and run behind man made rules and regulations which Allah never confirmed, then you have to answer to your Lord what you have done. And surely, here you follow your own wishes. Do you see this difference bro?
Quote from: kgwithnob
In 48:29 I purposely, and in big lettering, highlighted the PROPER name ?MUHAMMAD? and the pronoun ?HIM? that was used to refer to the Prophet, pbuh, in the verse, i.e. the part that talks about ?those who are with HIM?. You disregard the whole meaning and context of the verse and follow your own impulsive gibberish.
Peace,
Khalil
Why didn't you read previous pages of this thread to get your answer on this. I did not disregard it, I said in my previous post
Quote from: mmKhanSalaam Man of Faith and Khalil,
Please go through this thread from beginning, these questions has been answered already.
Cool down brother, how can you blame me with "I disregard the whole meaning and context of the verse", "I follow my own impulsive gibberish" and "I am following my whim and conjecture" without studying this thread in full? Even if you do so, I will ask you to seek Allah's help and guidance on this subject, inshaAllah, He will show you the right path.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween (http://s16.postimage.org/7g525pigh/dammahtain1.jpg) either two of them, as in Muhammed i.e., (http://s11.postimage.org/61fz5f1nz/Muhammed.png)
How about the verses
11:42, 11:45, 26:106, 37:75, 71:21, and 71:26 below. I hope you didn't miss them on purpose.
وَهِيَ تَجْرِي بِهِمْ فِي مَوْجٍ كَالْجِبَالِ وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ ابْنَهُ وَكَانَ فِي مَعْزِلٍ يَا بُنَيَّ ارْكَب مَّعَنَا وَلَا تَكُن مَّعَ الْكَافِرِينَ
وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ رَّبَّهُ فَقَالَ رَبِّ إِنَّ ابْنِي مِنْ أَهْلِي وَإِنَّ وَعْدَكَ الْحَقُّ وَأَنتَ أَحْكَمُ الْحَاكِمِينَ
إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ أَخُوهُمْ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
وَلَقَدْ نَادَانَا نُوحٌ فَلَنِعْمَ الْمُجِيبُونَ
قَالَ نُوحٌ رَّبِّ إِنَّهُمْ عَصَوْنِي وَاتَّبَعُوا مَن لَّمْ يَزِدْهُ مَالُهُ وَوَلَدُهُ إِلَّا خَسَارًا
وَقَالَ نُوحٌ رَّبِّ لَا تَذَرْ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ دَيَّارًاPeace,
Khalil
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 20, 2013, 07:41:21 PM
How about the verses 11:42, 11:45, 26:106, 37:75, 71:21, and 71:26 below. I hope you didn't miss them on purpose.
وَهِيَ تَجْرِي بِهِمْ فِي مَوْجٍ كَالْجِبَالِ وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ ابْنَهُ وَكَانَ فِي مَعْزِلٍ يَا بُنَيَّ ارْكَب مَّعَنَا وَلَا تَكُن مَّعَ الْكَافِرِينَ
وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ رَّبَّهُ فَقَالَ رَبِّ إِنَّ ابْنِي مِنْ أَهْلِي وَإِنَّ وَعْدَكَ الْحَقُّ وَأَنتَ أَحْكَمُ الْحَاكِمِينَ
إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ أَخُوهُمْ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
وَلَقَدْ نَادَانَا نُوحٌ فَلَنِعْمَ الْمُجِيبُونَ
قَالَ نُوحٌ رَّبِّ إِنَّهُمْ عَصَوْنِي وَاتَّبَعُوا مَن لَّمْ يَزِدْهُ مَالُهُ وَوَلَدُهُ إِلَّا خَسَارًا
وَقَالَ نُوحٌ رَّبِّ لَا تَذَرْ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ دَيَّارًا
Peace,
Khalil
Peace Khalil,
Not only "Nooh" but also "Loot", "Hood", "Saleh", "Shuaib" are also used with tanween, so they might not the names. It is like:
2:67 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=67) وَ اِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہٖۤ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡمُرُکُمۡ اَنۡ تَذۡبَحُوۡا بَقَرَۃً ؕ قَالُوۡۤا اَتَتَّخِذُنَا ہُزُوًا ؕ قَالَ اَعُوۡذُ بِاللّٰہِ اَنۡ اَکُوۡنَ مِنَ الۡجٰہِلِیۡنَ2:67 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=67) And when Moses said to his people, "Indeed, Allah commands you to slaughter a cow." They said, "Do you take us in ridicule?" He said, "I seek refuge in Allah from being among the ignorant."
Here the word Baqara is not a name and also note that "fatha tanween" is used on word baqara that means a cow or any cow. And when it is pointing to a particular one, then it will be said as:
2:68 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=68) قَالُوا ادۡعُ لَنَا رَبَّکَ یُبَیِّنۡ لَّنَا مَا ہِیَ ؕ قَالَ اِنَّہٗ یَقُوۡلُ اِنَّہَا بَقَرَۃٌ لَّا فَارِضٌ وَّ لَا بِکۡرٌ ؕ عَوَانٌۢ بَیۡنَ ذٰلِکَ ؕ فَافۡعَلُوۡا مَا تُؤۡمَرُوۡنَ2:68 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=2&verse=68) They said, "Call upon your Lord to make clear to us what it is." [Moses] said, "[Allah] says, 'It is a cow which is neither old nor virgin, but median between that,' so do what you are commanded."
Here "dhamma tanween" is used on the word Baqara to point out a particular one among cows, but still it is not referred as name. This is how Allah explains, alhamduliAllah :hail
Hope you get what I am saying inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 20, 2013, 09:22:54 PM
Not only "Nooh" but also "Loot", "Hood", "Saleh", "Shuaib" are also used with tanween, so they might not the names. It is like:
It seems that there is no way to have a logical dialogue with you, but let me ask you one last question.
Who is the prophet that was given The Qur'aan, and what is his name?
Peace,
Khalil
Quote from: mmkhan on May 20, 2013, 07:38:00 AM
There is no first and last messenger and prophet. Allah sends them whenever people need them.
Peace @mmkhan
33:40."Muhammad is not fathers of yours, but he is
رَسُولَ of Allah and Khattam al Nabbiyin".
You said if "Muhammad" is just a title name, then who is the Qhattam al Nabi (closer of all Nabi)? Yesus?
Yes word Muhammad can be literally means "commendable".But it's normal, if a person's name adopted from the words.
Even we're reject hadith.This means we aren't fully or radically trashed the hadith.May hadith already distorted in term of fiqh, but not so in historical shira'.
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 20, 2013, 10:40:56 PM
It seems that there is no way to have a logical dialogue with you, but let me ask you one last question. Who is the prophet that was given The Qur'aan, and what is his name?
Yes, if some Christians or Jews, ask us question. "Who is your prophet?", "How is historical background of the Quran?".
It's funny, if we answered them by say "We don't know".
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 20, 2013, 10:40:56 PM
It seems that there is no way to have a logical dialogue with you, but let me ask you one last question. Who is the prophet that was given The Qur'aan, and what is his name?
Peace,
Khalil
Peace Khalil,
That's OK with me... Please take a look this (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604108.msg302100#msg302100) for answer to your question.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Earthdom on May 21, 2013, 03:46:43 AM
Peace @mmkhan
33:40."Muhammad is not fathers of yours, but he is رَسُولَ of Allah and Khattam al Nabbiyin".
You said if "Muhammad" is just a title name, then who is the Qhattam al Nabi (closer of all Nabi)? Yesus?
Yes word Muhammad can be literally means "commendable".But it's normal, if a person's name adopted from the words.
Peace Earthdom,
Your translation is wrong. Please take a look at this (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.msg308016#msg308016) for detailed answer, inshaAllah.
Quote
Even we're reject hadith.This means we aren't fully or radically trashed the hadith. May hadith already distorted in term of fiqh, but not so in historical shira'.
You should say "I" instead of "WE" brother. I don't have any place for hadith nor for so called historical shariah.
Quote
Yes, if some Christians or Jews, ask us question. "Who is your prophet?", "How is historical background of the Quran?".
It's funny, if we answered them by say "We don't know".
Nope! That's not funny if you say "I don't know", but this is funny to claim to be a muslim and care about people more than Allah. I personally don't care about people, but I care about my Lord, Allah. What if He don't like it if I say something, is important that what people think.
BTW, you can take a look at the link given in my post above this.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
Do not care about people?
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 21, 2013, 05:01:25 AM
Peace,
Do not care about people?
God bless you
Peace brother,
Nope :nope: and why should I? And there is no aayat asking me to do so, do you have any? Please quote. Besides that, I have the following aayaat to share.
5:105 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=105) یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا عَلَیۡکُمۡ اَنۡفُسَکُمۡ ۚ لَا یَضُرُّکُمۡ مَّنۡ ضَلَّ اِذَا اہۡتَدَیۡتُمۡ ؕ اِلَی اللّٰہِ مَرۡجِعُکُمۡ جَمِیۡعًا فَیُنَبِّئُکُمۡ بِمَا کُنۡتُمۡ تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ5:105 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=105) O you who have believed, upon you is yourselves. Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided. To Allah is you return all together; then He will inform you of what you used to do.
16:91 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=91) وَ اَوۡفُوۡا بِعَہۡدِ اللّٰہِ اِذَا عٰہَدۡتُّمۡ وَ لَا تَنۡقُضُوا الۡاَیۡمَانَ بَعۡدَ تَوۡکِیۡدِہَا وَ قَدۡ جَعَلۡتُمُ اللّٰہَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ کَفِیۡلًا ؕ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَعۡلَمُ مَا تَفۡعَلُوۡنَ16:91 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=91) And fulfill the covenant of Allah when you have taken it, and do not break oaths after their confirmation and surely Allah has made you a kafil over yourself. Indeed, Allah knows what you do.
To understand what "Kafil" means, you can take a look at 3:37 where Allah made Zakariyya a kafil of Maryam. Hope this may help inshaAllah.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
It is really a cynical God you follow.
God bless you
Peace be with you, mmkhan.
It seems like you're ignoring the fact that the earliest manuscripts of the Quran didn't contain any diacritics/vowel marks, and that they were introduced much later. Now please don't say that you don't believe this very well-known fact since it's not written in the Quran.
And as for tanwin, the signs which indicate, "-un, -in, -an", may be written in a vocalised text even if they are not pronounced. So, even if it's written "Muhammadun", you have no warrant to conclude that it is not a name of a person as you can't find any other names containing a tanwin.
And your claim that the Quran was revealed upon Prophet Moses (pbuh), contradicts with hundreds of verses of the Quran.
Peace.
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 21, 2013, 07:00:09 AM
Peace,
It is really a cynical God you follow.
God bless you
Peace,
No problem, it doesn't matter whatever you think... For you is 10:41.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Scribbler on May 21, 2013, 07:05:24 AM
Peace be with you, mmkhan.
It seems like you're ignoring the fact that the earliest manuscripts of the Quran didn't contain any diacritics/vowel marks, and that they were introduced much later. Now please don't say that you don't believe this very well-known fact since it's not written in the Quran.
Peace be with you too Scribbler,
Red: I think this word don't suite the sentence.
Blue: Don't you believe that alQuraan talks about everything? Specially when it is about alQuraan itself?
Purple:
10:37
وَ مَا کَانَ ہٰذَا الۡقُرۡاٰنُ اَنۡ یُّفۡتَرٰی مِنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَ لٰکِنۡ تَصۡدِیۡقَ الَّذِیۡ بَیۡنَ یَدَیۡہِ وَ تَفۡصِیۡلَ الۡکِتٰبِ لَا رَیۡبَ فِیۡہِ مِنۡ رَّبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ10:37 And it was not for
this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but a confirmation of what is in
HIS both hands and a detailed explanation of the Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.
Please study from 10:37-44 carefully on this subject.
I am really sad to know that many of us claim to follow alQuraan alone but we take other sources for guidance. Many of us claim that they don't believe in hadith but they take is as historical proof. Are we not deceiving Allah and ourselves? May Allah help us understand the Truth and may He open our qalbs to accept it :pr
Quote
And as for tanwin, the signs which indicate, "-un, -in, -an", may be written in a vocalised text even if they are not pronounced. So, even if it's written "Muhammadun", you have no warrant to conclude that it is not a name of a person as you can't find any other names containing a tanwin.
Red: Do you accept that you don't have any evidence from alQuraan to support what you think? If you have any, please show me, I am open for corrections, always, inshaAllah.
If your heart and mind don't accept what is said, please DO NOT RUSH and DO NOT DENY the aayaat of alQuraan 10:39 but keep it on hold and wait until Allah clarifies it for you 10:109.
Quote
And your claim that the Quran was revealed upon Prophet Moses (pbuh), contradicts with hundreds of verses of the Quran.
Peace.
I did not say that alQuraan
revealed upon Musa... anyways, I would love to see those hundreds of aayaat of alQuraan which you wanted to show me. Please share, inshaAllah, I will correct my stand.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 21, 2013, 07:32:41 AM
Peace be with you too Scribbler,
Red: I think this word don't suite the sentence.
Blue: Don't you believe that alQuraan talks about everything? Specially when it is about alQuraan itself?
Purple:
10:37 وَ مَا کَانَ ہٰذَا الۡقُرۡاٰنُ اَنۡ یُّفۡتَرٰی مِنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَ لٰکِنۡ تَصۡدِیۡقَ الَّذِیۡ بَیۡنَ یَدَیۡہِ وَ تَفۡصِیۡلَ الۡکِتٰبِ لَا رَیۡبَ فِیۡہِ مِنۡ رَّبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ
10:37 And it was not for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but a confirmation of what is in HIS both hands and a detailed explanation of the Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.
Please study from 10:37-44 carefully on this subject.
I am really sad to know that many of us claim to follow alQuraan alone but we take other sources for guidance. Many of us claim that they don't believe in hadith but they take is as historical proof. Are we not deceiving Allah and ourselves? May Allah help us understand the Truth and may He open our qalbs to accept it :pr
Red: Do you accept that you don't have any evidence from alQuraan to support what you think? If you have any, please show me, I am open for corrections, always, inshaAllah.
If your heart and mind don't accept what is said, please DO NOT RUSH and DO NOT DENY the aayaat of alQuraan 10:39 but keep it on hold and wait until Allah clarifies it for you 10:109.
I did not say that alQuraan revealed upon Musa... anyways, I would love to see those hundreds of aayaat of alQuraan which you wanted to show me. Please share, inshaAllah, I will correct my stand.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace be with you, brother.
The thread which you've referred above, clearly shows your fallacies and how you've failed to reply to the arguments which Mazhar has put forward against yours. Hence, I would hinder myself from going into more arguments regarding this subject. Please don't mind, cause I think that even if I give you irrefutable proofs, you won't see them as "proofs", and our arguments will go in circles as it happened before between you and Mazhar.
God bless you, brother. And may Allah guide us to His straight path.
:peace:
Peace mmkhan,
What does 10:41 have to do with this?
Well, if you mean that I have my way and you have yours then you are right, if you want to delve into something else. Edit: I skip what I wrote, no point arguing.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 21, 2013, 05:01:25 AM
Peace,
Do not care about people?
God bless you
Peace Man of Faith,
Sorry to jump in here but I thought he meant he doesn't care about what people think, if they think something is funny or not. Like some people will mock the idea of talking to God who we can't see. They can't see that they themselves constantly study and refer to what can't be seen such as the past, future, all manner of natural processes and so on. The follow up question would why do we need to see God rather than to know God? Anyway, that's just an additional point about how people can take on a mocking tone and I don't think we should care about what they think.
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
Thanks for trying to calm the situation. I may have rushed to conclusions. Well, brother mmkhan is entitled to his opinion about the Quran and that there is no prophet called Muhammad. Only thing is that I wonder to who God revealed Quran to then. And who is the prophet in the stories of Quran, anonymous?
Like people say, it is actually irrelevant, but it is still weird to have an anonymous prophet who delivered the Quran :)
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 21, 2013, 10:02:53 AM
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
Thanks for trying to calm the situation. I may have rushed to conclusions. Well, brother mmkhan is entitled to his opinion about the Quran and that there is no prophet called Muhammad. Only thing is that I wonder to who God revealed Quran to then. And who is the prophet in the stories of Quran, anonymous?
Like people say, it is actually irrelevant, but it is still weird to have an anonymous prophet who delivered the Quran :)
God bless you
Peace Man of Faith,
I actually agree with you in that I believe Prophet Muhammad was an actual man named Muhammad, it follows through with the system/approach established before. I mean, if Muhammad is simply a title, if that's what Allah swt has stated and that's what He guides me towards I will accept but right now that's not what I get from the Quran. As you said, each to their own. :)
Quote from: mmkhan on May 21, 2013, 04:02:49 AM
... Please take a look this (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604108.msg302100#msg302100) for answer to your question...
Just as I expected. You beat around the bush again, and shunned my direct, straightforward, and very simple question. I ask you again!
Who was the prophet that The Qur'aan was given to, and what is his name?If you don't come up with a direct, straightforward, and simple answer, then I have to conclude that you are, but a
dishonest and a
hypocritical individual.
Peace,
Khalil
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
True we are our own individuals, but I wish there was a little bit more consensus. Is the Quran really so hard to interpret?
But as I have stated before; it feels like people are over-ambitious at cleansing traditional islam in my opinion in some areas. Some have removed prayers completely, no form of them at all and it seems so weird and is not symmetric to what I have grasped of the Quran. Sujud may not mean prostration, but what does it matter. I think it means "to submit" or something along the lines. It does not prevent me from prostrating since it is a form of very humble greeting and not only related to religion historically. It is taking bowing down a little further. You can do sujud by prostrating is what I believe and say some beautiful words in prayer.
Sorry for drifting off-topic. Muhammad or not Muhammad - is the question. Since we have no other name, let us call the man Muhammad (glad that "Muhammad" is not alive and heard all crap attributed to him ;)
God bless you
Peace.
Be cool. I understand the challenges you face, brother MMKhan in discovering a breakthrough phenomenon on who was given the Quran and to present it as the truth. IMHO, that indeed is a very remarkable finding. The truth is yet to be discovered. I am open. I give you my support. Please continue with your research. The Quran is self-explanatory, consistent and easy to remember.
I have studied carefully on the concept of messenger, they are living in every nation, they use the language of the people, their mother tongue, they go to the market, they are people like you and me (sorry I don?t have time to show the ayats). Among them are human and angel messengers.
And We did certainly give Musa the Book (lKitaba) and followed up after him with messengers. And We gave Isa, the son of Maryam, clear proofs (bayinati) and supported him with the lqudusi. But is it [not] that every time a messenger came to you, with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant? And a party you denied and another party you killed. (2:287)
That is the Book, wherein is no doubt, a guidance to the godfearing (2:2)
Also people of Abraham was given the Book?
Is it the same Book? Perfected. Protected. Delivered by angel messenger, and the Quran as messenger, to human messengers for all people in all nations? Unlike other prophets, why there no story on prophet Muhammad in the Quran? Am I into dangerous zone?
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 21, 2013, 11:02:57 AM
Just as I expected. You beat around the bush again, and shunned my direct, straightforward, and very simple question. I ask you again! Who was the prophet that The Qur'aan was given to, and what is his name?
If you don't come up with a direct, straightforward, and simple answer, then I have to conclude that you are, but a dishonest and a hypocritical individual.
Peace,
Khalil
Peace Khalil,
Red: Wow! Think what you like to, I don't care. I rest my case and yours with Allah, He is the best judge among us.
I don't need to answer you anymore... because you are one who don't want to accept ANYTHING, even the aayaat of Allah, then it is purely waste to answer.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on May 21, 2013, 09:24:03 AM
Peace Man of Faith,
Sorry to jump in here but I thought he meant he doesn't care about what people think, if they think something is funny or not. Like some people will mock the idea of talking to God who we can't see. They can't see that they themselves constantly study and refer to what can't be seen such as the past, future, all manner of natural processes and so on. The follow up question would why do we need to see God rather than to know God? Anyway, that's just an additional point about how people can take on a mocking tone and I don't think we should care about what they think.
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
Thanks!
May Allah bless you and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: zone on May 21, 2013, 01:17:16 PM
Peace.
Be cool. I understand the challenges you face, brother MMKhan in discovering a breakthrough phenomenon on who was given the Quran and to present it as the truth. IMHO, that indeed is a very remarkable finding. The truth is yet to be discovered. I am open. I give you my support. Please continue with your research. The Quran is self-explanatory, consistent and easy to remember.
I have studied carefully on the concept of messenger, they are living in every nation, they use the language of the people, their mother tongue, they go to the market, they are people like you and me (sorry I don?t have time to show the ayats). Among them are human and angel messengers.
And We did certainly give Musa the Book (lKitaba) and followed up after him with messengers. And We gave Isa, the son of Maryam, clear proofs (bayinati) and supported him with the lqudusi. But is it [not] that every time a messenger came to you, with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant? And a party you denied and another party you killed. (2:287)
That is the Book, wherein is no doubt, a guidance to the godfearing (2:2)
Also people of Abraham was given the Book?
Is it the same Book? Perfected. Protected. Delivered by angel messenger, and the Quran as messenger, to human messengers for all people in all nations? Unlike other prophets, why there no story on prophet Muhammad in the Quran? Am I into dangerous zone?
Peace Zone,
Thanks!
May Allah bless you and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace:
O people why do you argue about the things that you will never know with certainty. why don't you stop and focus on the clear and easy stuff. If you go down this path you will only end up in more sects, creating more division and confusion than unity.
3:7He it is who has bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, containing messages that are clear in and by themselves - and these are the essence of the divine writ - as well as others that are allegorical.5 Now those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ6 which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out [what is bound to create] confusion,7 and seeking [to arrive at] its final meaning [in an arbitrary manner]; but none save God knows its final meaning.8 Hence, those who are deeply rooted in knowledge say:"We believe in it; the whole [of the divine writ] is from our Sustainer - albeit none takes this to heart save those who are endowed with insight.
If this is how God refers to the ones that fight/dispute because of what their own sick mind tell them is the final and true meaning of allegorical verses, think of how God sees those that fight/dispute for what only their own minds see and that the truth of it they will never know.
Just because the scribes decided to put the same diacriticals as other words to the name/title of prophet Muhamad, it doesn't mean that Muhamad is not the way God called His messenger.
Peace wrkmmn,
Thanks for quoting an aayat. I also have an aayaat to share, please follow:
39:45 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=39&verse=45) وَ اِذَا ذُکِرَ اللّٰہُ وَحۡدَہُ اشۡمَاَزَّتۡ قُلُوۡبُ الَّذِیۡنَ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ بِالۡاٰخِرَۃِ ۚ وَ اِذَا ذُکِرَ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ دُوۡنِہٖۤ اِذَا ہُمۡ یَسۡتَبۡشِرُوۡنَ
39:45 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=39&verse=45) And when Allah is mentioned alone, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink, but when those other than Him are mentioned, immediately they rejoice.
May Allah protect us from such behavior and guide us on His path alone :pr
mmKhan
peace mmkhan:
Quote39:45 And when Allah is mentioned alone, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink, but when those other than Him are mentioned, immediately they rejoice.
the issue here is not about worshiping God alone, don't twist it. The issue is that you want to leave us with a nameless prophet. Do you really believe that the believers, which have been many since the birth of Islam, would forget to pass on the true name of the prophet. Come on! that's nonsensical, and is like saying that the Israelites would have forgotten the name of Moses, or the Christians Jesus. If we accept your proposition, we will have a book containing a message from God that was received by nobody. Then in the future somebody like You will come out with the Idea that the Book descended it form heaven, or that somebody found it under a rock (like the Mormons).
I wonder why many here call themselves wise-ones/burn outs, but their words don't reflect it. Also, they call themselves believers, but in their word the sign of God is hard to see or totally absent. I have started to believe what many traditionalist accuse the followers of this movement of, of being people trying to twist the Book just to fit their twisted westernized mind.
Have anybody here heard the proverbs: He who calls himself wise is the worse fool.
Then many here react angrily and arrogantly: a true believer can't feel anger nor be arrogant, those are signs of the hypocrites who only look for personal glory and to be praised by the other sheeps. humbleness and Patience, patience is the sign of the guided ones.
Peace,
Where does 39:45 enter the picture in response to wrkmmn's post? I doubt he means that we should feel joy about hearing Muhammad's name. Just that we should not twist the Truth. I think very few here idolize Muhammad to any greater extent.
Use the ayat of the Quran wisely please.
God bless you
I think that borther Mmkhan is very much within his own reflections and believes in them but when it comes to bringing over to others what he thinks or believes is right, I really cannot make heads or tails of it, specifically in this question. I still do not know what he is getting at or what he sees wrong with people thinking that the Qur'an was revealed or given or borught or whatever to a perticular person and that person having a name or being denominated by whatever means.
Usually revelation, be it new revelation or the same revelation renewed, comes and is transmitted through certian people, all over the world, sometimes as utterances in the transmitter own expression, sometimes in the very form it was revealed.
I find it surprising that somebody should take the whole of Qur'an as authentic and really a revelation from The Divine, and that at the same there should be3 so much stinginess in recognizing that it has come through some human vehicle to the rest of the people who are not that vehicle. What is wrong with having a rasul, human rasul, as has been done all over time all over the world, to bring the good news to the people? I am at a loss as to this whole problem of a messenger being a problem.
And yes, we all may be messengers for everybody else, but so what? That first messenger to give us word by word the Qur'an what was it, a cloud, an automatic device? The praised or the most praised automatic device? Yes the Qur'an is embedded in everybody's fitra, so what? There is still a Qur'an word by word that has been transmitted generation after generation, and which must have come from somewhere, as a brother says, what? was it found under a rock or something?
For sure I do not want to make fun of anybody, except myself, but I sum up saying the same as at the beginning of this message, brother Mmkhan, be clearer, we do not see what it seems you want to show, really what are you getting at? so that we do not have to guess and, as it seems, guess wrong again and again.
Salaam
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 21, 2013, 10:58:16 PM
peace mmkhan:
the issue here is not about worshiping God alone, don't twist it. The issue is that you want to leave us with a nameless prophet. Do you really believe that the believers, which have been many since the birth of Islam, would forget to pass on the true name of the prophet. Come on! that's nonsensical, and is like saying that the Israelites would have forgotten the name of Moses, or the Christians Jesus. If we accept your proposition, we will have a book containing a message from God that was received by nobody. Then in the future somebody like You will come out with the Idea that the Book descended it form heaven, or that somebody found it under a rock (like the Mormons).
Peace wrkmmn,
Red: Am I twisting the word of Allah? I seek refuge in Allah for the same. Do you see that aayat about WORSHIPING Allah alone? :&
Why don't you see if you are fitting in the aayat 39:45? Is this aayat not for you? I see in each and every aayat whether I fit in that in a positive or negative sense. I quoted this aayat only after seeing people's frustration when Allah is mentioned ALONE. I don't see what is the problem with it? Why they need some other human with Allah for whatever reason it might be, specially when it is not mentioned in alQuraan.
@huruf, Salaam,
I am not trying to apply anything on anybody, I am just trying to bring all to our ONE SINGLE LORD, ALLAH. But I can see, I fail here to do so. I also saw that no body cares to see what aayaat of alQuraan says, they are ready to reject or ignore it. But they are happy to believe in something which is NOT mentioned in alQuraan. Surprized!!!
When I got upset and sad after reading all the responses to this thread where people don't want to accept only Allah alone. Allah has shown me 6:33. Either you see it fits at the situation or not, but I am thankful to my Lord on His guidance, alhamduliAllah :hail
6:33 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=33) قَدۡ نَعۡلَمُ اِنَّہٗ لَیَحۡزُنُکَ الَّذِیۡ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ فَاِنَّہُمۡ لَا یُکَذِّبُوۡنَکَ وَ لٰکِنَّ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ یَجۡحَدُوۡنَ6:33 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=33) We know that you, are saddened by what they say. And indeed, they do not call you untruthful, but it is the verses of Allah that the wrongdoers have problem with.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
Who says anything about needing other than God? I think that you underestimate people. Because we acknowledge that the Quran was delivered by a man called Muhammad we associate partners with God? This has not to do with being content with God alone and it is just for a factual reason I believe this. The Quran could have been delivered by a man called Santa Claus too if it was true and we would believe it.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 22, 2013, 05:05:07 AM
Peace,
Who says anything about needing other than God? I think that you underestimate people. Because we acknowledge that the Quran was delivered by a man called Muhammad we associate partners with God? This has not to do with being content with God alone and it is just for a factual reason I believe this. The Quran could have been delivered by a man called Santa Claus too if it was true and we would believe it.
God bless you
Salaamun alayka,
May I ask how you acknowledged this, because till today I have not seen a single person who has proofed this with only Quran verses.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: mmkhan on May 22, 2013, 04:37:34 AM
When I got upset and sad after reading all the responses to this thread where people don't want to accept only Allah alone.
Salaamun alayka,
I think the emotions from some people is because they were able to leave the hadiths about the bad Mohammed, but they did not leave yet the hadiths about the good Mohammed.
So doing the good Mohammed injustice (ofcourse not from Quranic point of view) is at the moment a little bit to much.
QuoteAllah has shown me 6:33. Either you see it fits at the situation or not, but I am thankful to my Lord on His guidance, alhamduliAllah :hail
6:33 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=33) قَدۡ نَعۡلَمُ اِنَّہٗ لَیَحۡزُنُکَ الَّذِیۡ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ فَاِنَّہُمۡ لَا یُکَذِّبُوۡنَکَ وَ لٰکِنَّ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ یَجۡحَدُوۡنَ
6:33 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=33) We know that you, are saddened by what they say. And indeed, they do not call you untruthful, but it is the verses of Allah that the wrongdoers have problem with.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
What are you talking about??? that ayaat is not for you, you forgot brackets >:(
6:33 We know that you (O Mohammed), are saddened by what they (kuffar of Mekka and Medina) say. And indeed, they (kuffar of Mekka and Medina) do not call you (O Mohammed) untruthful, but it is the verses of Allah that the wrongdoers have problem with.[/color]
Salaam,
Bender
Peace brother Bender,
It comes down to the interpretation of verses. We acknowledge through the verses that this person was called Muhammad, nickname or not. And like I said, hypothetically it would not matter if he was called Santa Claus, we just want something to refer to.
I understand if it is thrilling to remove Muhammad completely off your map for the purpose of nullifying the practices of traditional muslims once and for all. I am just curious who the man in the Quran who lived through the stories was then. And who was the man with so many stories invented about him and original written parchment with the Quran on written by him.
Whoever it is who wrote it we can call him Muhammad even if by nickname. How does it matter?
Should we refer to him as the anonymous messenger that the Quran was revealed to and who caused a lot of stories to emerge? Codename Muhammad is better then, is it not? Is it better to pretend he never existed?
Oh by the way, how about "the Quran man"?
Okay. I admit I am a bit sarcastic now. But remember if you erase Muhammad from history you have a book written by no one since God did not finish it straight in Heaven and sent it down. It was revealed to someone who wrote it down. A prophet.
Still I wonder why you are so touchy about one man no matter what his name was. And it is not because I embrace hadith, I have barely ever read a hadith.
God bless you
Yes, I am puzzled, he torah or whatever or the injil or the zabur has permission from intelligent people to have been received by one prophet or other, but there is no such permission for the Qur'an. Understood. Good. Great. So did it come through a pure virgin who didn't even feel something passed through her or there is another way we stupid people have not thought about?
I am beeing sarcastic, yes, because, I asked certain questions or raised certain points, other people did too, and the only answer I got was that God alone was wanted. Great. Obviously I hadn't thought of that, I was having luch with Saturn, Brhmaputra, Bush son and father, a few gnomes and dunces and whatever.
Please do not hide behind "Godaloneskirts?". We may be on another lower, much lower level than others, but please leave the God alone admonitions and holier than thou stuff and say whatever you have to say as to how the Qur'an came to the first people who got it. You know? that book that starts with Bismillaherahmanirrahim, and then goes on with Alhamdul-llahi... See the one I mean?
All the other put forward we already got it, even before reading this thread, we all are prophets or could be. Great. Good. Very well. That I am sure of, but I confess that I did not have anything to do with giving the Qur'an to print orwrite down or recite the first time it was done. All I want to know is how and through which means it came about as it is and got to be known like that. The God alone part, I my be unworth of it, but I did get right the first time, and even before, and even while I was christian I never mistook with God a bearded man. I don't like beards. So now may be we can get to the next bit.
Talking about deliveries, I hope there is nto a mother doing the job here, because it really is turning out laborious. Ya salaam.
Salaam
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 22, 2013, 08:30:35 AM
Peace brother Bender,
It comes down to the interpretation of verses. We acknowledge through the verses that this person was called Muhammad, nickname or not. And like I said, hypothetically it would not matter if he was called Santa Claus, we just want something to refer to.
Salaamun alayka,
RED: interpretation based on The Quran or sources other then The Quran?
BLUE: Can you give me an example of such verse please.
QuoteI understand if it is thrilling to remove Muhammad completely off your map for the purpose of nullifying the practices of traditional muslims once and for all.
GREEN: you totally misunderstood ;)
The simple purpose is to get the truth. As simple as that. If a sect X can proof only from Quran deed Y, then I will inshaAllah practise Y in the same way as sect X.
It's not a hunt on Mohammed but a hunt for truth.
QuoteI am just curious who the man in the Quran who lived through the stories was then.
Can you give an example?
QuoteAnd who was the man with so many stories invented about him and original written parchment with the Quran on written by him.
I dunno
QuoteWhoever it is who wrote it we can call him Muhammad even if by nickname. How does it matter?
It matters if it is not the truth. Unless one doesn't care much about truth.
QuoteShould we refer to him as the anonymous messenger that the Quran was revealed to and who caused a lot of stories to emerge? Codename Muhammad is better then, is it not? Is it better to pretend he never existed?
imo there must be a first person(s) who got The Quran first, and imo we can find who this person is by studying only the verses of The Quran very carefully.
And I am sure the information is there in The Quran in front of our eyes, but we can't grasp it because we are not clean enough to see it.
Quote
Oh by the way, how about "the Quran man"?
Okay. I admit I am a bit sarcastic now. But remember if you erase Muhammad from history you have a book written by no one since God did not finish it straight in Heaven and sent it down. It was revealed to someone who wrote it down. A prophet.
As long as no one brings Quranic evidence almost every scenario is possible, but only 1 is the truth.
QuoteStill I wonder why you are so touchy about one man no matter what his name was. And it is not because I embrace hadith, I have barely ever read a hadith.
God bless you
Touchy? Maybe you can give me an example where I overreacted so that inshaAllah I can correct myself.
Salaam,
Bender
Salaam,
See if this (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604108.msg327943#msg327943) may help someone :hmm
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace Bender,
Why not call him Muhammad? Even if it is by codename or nickname. Well, brother, I am eager ears if you have a better option. Please do not get me wrong, I am no narrow-minded traditionalist and I try to be rational and draw logical conclusions. In fact I am interested about mmkhans research, but I am not quick to run to conclusions.
Give example? Well, the Quran is narrated as if there is a person between the Believers and God. Who is it if not a prophet? You have the whole Quran as your example brother.
Okay. I misunderstood your intent. I have a prejudice that many people are here to nullify everything about traditional islam :)
At a final note brother Bender, interpreting the Quran can be tedious and I understand if the name Muhammad may be inaccurate, but so far Muhammad is the best answer for me. I do not glorify him or anything.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 22, 2013, 11:16:22 AM
Peace Bender,
Why not call him Muhammad? Even if it is by codename or nickname. Well, brother, I am eager ears if you have a better option. Please do not get me wrong, I am no narrow-minded traditionalist and I try to be rational and draw logical conclusions. In fact I am interested about mmkhans research, but I am not quick to run to conclusions.
Salaamun alayka,
GREEN: What's wrong with "I don't know" if one does not know?
BLUE: Sorry I have nothing better at the moment, only equal assumptions.
RED: imo that's the correct approach :handshake:
QuoteGive example? Well, the Quran is narrated as if there is a person between the Believers and God. Who is it if not a prophet? You have the whole Quran as your example brother.
The question remains the same, can you give me an example :)
QuoteOkay. I misunderstood your intent. I have a prejudice that many people are here to nullify everything about traditional islam :)
Sure there are people who do this.
QuoteAt a final note brother Bender, interpreting the Quran can be tedious and I understand if the name Muhammad may be inaccurate, but so far Muhammad is the best answer for me. I do not glorify him or anything.
God bless you
Per my current knowledge I am 100% sure that Mohammed is not used as a name of a person in The Quran.
proof: translate the first 3 words of 48:29.
may Allah bless you 2
Bender
Peace Bender,
I respect your opinion and I will keep yours and mmkhans approach on my mind, but I am not excluding Muhammad at this time. For the sake of coherence I keep him in my reference. The prophet in Quran is called Muhammad by me for now.
I find it a bit silly to give an example. What about most of the context of Quran. You can sure find it yourself. Maybe I will give an example and description when I have the opportunity.
Anyway, like mmkhan was trying to say, God is what counts the most if not entirely. But I have a more open attitude, perhaps. Well, I am just a little bit better than I used to be :)
God bless you
So, please then, give a translation of 48.29
On the other hand, it is very logic if a messenger was to come whose name will be Ahmad, which means the most praiseworthy, that later on the fullfilment of 3isa's rediction be stressed by stating that indeed, the most preaisale is indeed praised, which is Muhammadun, one that was to be the most praisedworthy surpisingly turns out also to be praised.
So what is shocking about that and why so much mistery on the part of the "there is no messenger muhammad to come and give in plain words and without riddles what their notion is, because as yet I have not seen that they have given any explanation of anything that should clear anything at all. All we get is "that can't be.
No reason why that cannot be and no idea of what can be either. So we are left with a batallion of prophets whose ,essages are not guranteed and the one message which is guranteed, is forbidden to have a transmitter from God to the rest of the mortals, because it si a sin to speak of such a prophet. I find it too much of a joke. Not that I am shocked. I am not, I feel cheated, because of much ado about nothing and what looks like a big promise of some way the Qur'an was transmitted, but there is nothing, so according to that notion what we should believe, ignorant as we are, is that the Qur'an is there but forbidden to discuss or imagine how it came to be there. If that is not what is being said, then please be clearer, because I am starting to feel the whole thing as a practical joke. So people are lectured if they speak about Muhammad, but then they are asked to believe in what, in speontaneous generation? so it seems.
If those who put forward the ban Muhammad campaign cannot answer what they are asked, then I am out of this thread because it is a cheat. I know that nobody is going to cry for that, for sure I am not, Huruf can leave any time she wants, but I want to say that: that nothing is being spoken clearly and all I have seen is a parade of offers which are not followed by any delivery. Bluff is called, isn't it.
Salaam
Salaam
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 22, 2013, 12:48:45 PM
Peace Bender,
I respect your opinion and I will keep yours and mmkhans approach on my mind, but I am not excluding Muhammad at this time. For the sake of coherence I keep him in my reference. The prophet in Quran is called Muhammad by me for now.
I find it a bit silly to give an example. What about most of the context of Quran. You can sure find it yourself. Maybe I will give an example and description when I have the opportunity.
Anyway, like mmkhan was trying to say, God is what counts the most if not entirely. But I have a more open attitude, perhaps. Well, I am just a little bit better than I used to be :)
God bless you
Peace Man of Faith,
I was not responding to your posts because you said, you are out of it, but now I found you still continuously using my name, so I would like to clarify on the part I have highlighted in your quote above.
Please feel free to believe in Muhammad or whatever you want to make him, I cannot question it. Because that is you who is doing so and you are only responsible for that. Please remove from your mind that I am forcing anyone to believe in what I believe, NO! I am not doing that. But I am sharing my knowledge that Allah gave me. So that,
- Some may benefit from it.
- Some may discuss it further and bring in some more facts and discoveries from alQuraan and get to its conclusions.
This was only my intention. But its seems that people think I am getting some million bucks for making others convince on what I said, unfortunately. :brickwall:
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan,
No need to take such a defensive stance brother. I am not disallowing you from having your opinion and I am sorry if I was sarcastic before. I am sure you care about people and I was slightly misusing your mood state.
Sorry that I was referring to you but it was because it was your main idea so I used you as reference. Well, since you obviously have been reading my posts you know my conversation with brother Bender. I thought you may had put me on ignore or something.
I am sure you were pressured earlier when you responded to me and others, I understand how frustrating it must be to be so determined about something and people do not believe you. If you are right about the non-Muhammad theory then try harder and people might embrace your ideas if they are true. Please do not believe that he is utterly important for me, I am truly God alone and that is not the reason I argued about him but only for the Truth itself.
And if Muhammad is actually a man then we must respect him like any other dead person. I am sure that there is a man who wrote down Quran and even if his name was not Muhammad we must show a little respect at least, not because he was prophet or messenger but for his status as a human being. Or the anonymous prophet as you would like to put it.
Hmm... I do not remember that I told you that I am out of it, but I may have lost my memory about it. Perhaps I was also under influence of emotions.
May we stay like brothers despite our differences.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 22, 2013, 12:48:45 PM
Peace Bender,
I respect your opinion and I will keep yours and mmkhans approach on my mind, but I am not excluding Muhammad at this time. For the sake of coherence I keep him in my reference. The prophet in Quran is called Muhammad by me for now.
I find it a bit silly to give an example. What about most of the context of Quran. You can sure find it yourself. Maybe I will give an example and description when I have the opportunity.
Anyway, like mmkhan was trying to say, God is what counts the most if not entirely. But I have a more open attitude, perhaps. Well, I am just a little bit better than I used to be :)
God bless you
Salaamun alayka,
:handshake:
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: huruf on May 22, 2013, 01:45:29 PM
So, please then, give a translation of 48.29
On the other hand, it is very logic if a messenger was to come whose name will be Ahmad, which means the most praiseworthy, that later on the fullfilment of 3isa's rediction be stressed by stating that indeed, the most preaisale is indeed praised, which is Muhammadun, one that was to be the most praisedworthy surpisingly turns out also to be praised.
So what is shocking about that and why so much mistery on the part of the "there is no messenger muhammad to come and give in plain words and without riddles what their notion is, because as yet I have not seen that they have given any explanation of anything that should clear anything at all. All we get is "that can't be.
No reason why that cannot be and no idea of what can be either. So we are left with a batallion of prophets whose ,essages are not guranteed and the one message which is guranteed, is forbidden to have a transmitter from God to the rest of the mortals, because it si a sin to speak of such a prophet. I find it too much of a joke. Not that I am shocked. I am not, I feel cheated, because of much ado about nothing and what looks like a big promise of some way the Qur'an was transmitted, but there is nothing, so according to that notion what we should believe, ignorant as we are, is that the Qur'an is there but forbidden to discuss or imagine how it came to be there. If that is not what is being said, then please be clearer, because I am starting to feel the whole thing as a practical joke. So people are lectured if they speak about Muhammad, but then they are asked to believe in what, in speontaneous generation? so it seems.
If those who put forward the ban Muhammad campaign cannot answer what they are asked, then I am out of this thread because it is a cheat. I know that nobody is going to cry for that, for sure I am not, Huruf can leave any time she wants, but I want to say that: that nothing is being spoken clearly and all I have seen is a parade of offers which are not followed by any delivery. Bluff is called, isn't it.
Salaam
Salaam
Salaamun alayki,
I do not understand why this discussion is so heated up. We are just discussing ideas.
Anyways imo 48:29 says "Mohammed is the messenger of Allah..."
first this is a statement, second the statement was there 1000 years ago and is still here at present time and will be in the future.
Does this Mohammed not die if it was a person? So if it dies then it can for sure not be the Mohammed of The Quran, because the Mohammed of 48:29 in The Quran is always in present time. Note also that it is written as MohammedUN, thus a not specified Mohammed.
it is written in the same way as "Allahu rabbu Al3alameena" only difference is that it is not Al-LahUN as Allah is always specified and present.
Anyways this is how Allah showed me.
Also I like to say that there is nothing to feel cheated about, we are just discussing.
And there is no ban Mohammed campain.
As I already told, I have no answers yet for the questions.
The only thing I know at the moment is that from my study and with what Allah showed me, Mohammed of 48:29 can never be a name of a person, probably it is something like a title.
That's all I know.
And I also do not agree with MmKhan that it was Musa.
Anyways lets try not to get in :voodoo: mood :) I think this is a interesting subject and at the end of the day we will all learn more inshaAllah.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Bender on May 22, 2013, 05:33:50 PM
... Note also that it is written as MohammedUN, thus a not specified Mohammed...
Dear Bender,
In Arabic language, nearly all
PERSONAL MASCULINE NOUNS end with ?
THZAMMAH TANWIN?, which pronounces ?
UN?. It is a
rule of the language. This ending can change to other forms depending on the structure of the sentence, but the noun will still remain a noun. It does not change to anything else like where you guys out of
ignorance think it is a ?CHARACTER?. See the verses below as examples.
BTW; the names in the verses below are all
PROPER nouns.
26:106 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:124 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ هُودٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:142 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ صَـٰلِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:161 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ لُوطٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:177 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ شُعَيۡبٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَPeace,
Khalil
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 22, 2013, 08:19:52 PM
Dear Bender,
In Arabic language All PERSONAL MASCULINE NOUNS end with ?THZAMMAH TANWIN?, which pronounces ?UN?. It is a rule of the language. This ending can change to other forms depending on the structure of the sentence, but the noun will still remain a noun. It does not change to anything else like where you guys out of ignorance think it is a ?CHARACTER?. See the verses below as examples.
BTW; the names in the verses below are all PROPER nouns.
26:106 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:124 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ هُودٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:142 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ صَـٰلِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:161 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ لُوطٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:177 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ شُعَيۡبٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
Peace,
Khalil
Hi,
Not all names end in Tanween - non Arabic names such as Ibrahim do not.
Quote from: Bender on May 22, 2013, 06:39:55 AM
Salaamun alayka,
May I ask how you acknowledged this, because till today I have not seen a single person who has proofed this with only Quran verses.
Salaam,
Bender
There are many verses which provide proof. 3:144
Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 22, 2013, 08:56:38 PM
Hi,
Not all names end in Tanween - non Arabic names such as Ibrahim do not.
I made a correction. Thanks for reminding me, and :welcome:
Peace,
Khalil
Quote from: Bender on May 22, 2013, 05:33:50 PM
Salaamun alayki,
I do not understand why this discussion is so heated up. We are just discussing ideas.
Anyways imo 48:29 says "Mohammed is the messenger of Allah..."
first this is a statement, second the statement was there 1000 years ago and is still here at present time and will be in the future.
Does this Mohammed not die if it was a person? So if it dies then it can for sure not be the Mohammed of The Quran, because the Mohammed of 48:29 in The Quran is always in present time. Note also that it is written as MohammedUN, thus a not specified Mohammed.
it is written in the same way as "Allahu rabbu Al3alameena" only difference is that it is not Al-LahUN as Allah is always specified and present.
Anyways this is how Allah showed me.
Also I like to say that there is nothing to feel cheated about, we are just discussing.
And there is no ban Mohammed campain.
As I already told, I have no answers yet for the questions.
The only thing I know at the moment is that from my study and with what Allah showed me, Mohammed of 48:29 can never be a name of a person, probably it is something like a title.
That's all I know.
And I also do not agree with MmKhan that it was Musa.
Anyways lets try not to get in :voodoo: mood :) I think this is a interesting subject and at the end of the day we will all learn more inshaAllah.
Salaam,
Bender
Salaam, Bender,
Thanks for your politeness saying that the discussion is heated up instead of saying that I was being too sharp or worse. I heated it up because I saw it going nowhere. I was trying to get the thing out with forceps, not even so I got it, but you at least answered what you could answer. Thank you. It was a deliberate but
not an illwilled of hostile heating. I appreciate brother mmkhan and you.
I remember in one of the threads that brother mmkhan said that the Arabic word "ism" does nto mean name. I think, after thinking it over myself, that that assumption might have something to do with the difficulty for him to say straight what he has in mind, if he knows it. "Ism" might not be a 100% equivalent of "name" in English but certainly in a big proportion it is equivalent. He opposed name to attribute if I don't remember wrong. Well, may be that opposition might be made in English but not necessarily in Arabic, and if we think of it, any name is named after attributing something to the named. Persons are named when they are born, but that is just a usage. Usually many things and persons through history have been named after the name they earned, not the name they were given at birth or inception.
I thank those of you who have cleared the question about the tanwin in names. I sort of had an idea that that did not make a name into a non-name, but as I did not recall axactly the rule, I did not say anything. In fact, again, it all comes from separating atributes from names. Al 3adil is a name of God, but, like names should be, it is not a void name, it is a name full of significance. So, seen from the point of view of the faithful, what is the reason for Muhammadun not being a name besides beeing an attribute since in Arabic, Quranic Arabic, both things go hand in hand? Anybody respoding to that denomination would be Muhammadun and could be named Mhammadun. Which Muhammadun? Obviously the Muhammadun at hand for the purpose that is being dealt with.
You say_
QuoteAnyways imo 48:29 says "Mohammed is the messenger of Allah..."
first this is a statement, second the statement was there 1000 years ago and is still here at present time and will be in the future.
Does this Mohammed not die if it was a person? So if it dies then it can for sure not be the Mohammed of The Quran, because the Mohammed of 48:29 in The Quran is always in present time. Note also that it is written as MohammedUN, thus a not specified Mohammed.
I have very great doubts on that and not because I think that it cannot be applied to anybody any time if she or he fulfills de conditions, but because the fact that it might include other people does most certainly not exclude the person then and there who was existant when it was said or revealed for the Qur'an. In fact it occurred to me long time ago, that the khatam an-nabiyin, if taken as last prophet, what it would mean would be that for those who believe in that prophet, that khatam, they would not be needing any other prophet, that is, they would have reached adult age as believers and faithful and would themselves emancipate and be for themselves and for their community their prophets, that is a community of universal prophethood. That is one way which I thought could be interpreted, which in itself is full of meaning. Obviously for those who did no benefit from the prophethood of Muhammadun, there might be other prophets, I do not know, but I see it as possible.
But then, even assuming that as a verified fact, what I do not get is why the need of keeping all the prophets previous to the transmitter of the Qur'an, and then do away with the transmitter fo the Qur'an as if it was a blot o something to be ashamed of. There is something very wrong there, unless a good explanation is given. So please if there is such explanation, once more, I request it for the purpose of understanding the whole thing and if there is something to it. If there was ever a prophet, then the khatam annabiyin certifies it, it would ridiculous that somebody who does not existe does any certifying.
So, Bender, thanks for your answer and let us see if brother mmkhan can and will explain further or not.
Salaam
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 22, 2013, 08:19:52 PM
Dear Bender,
In Arabic language, nearly all PERSONAL MASCULINE NOUNS end with ?THZAMMAH TANWIN?, which pronounces ?UN?. It is a rule of the language. This ending can change to other forms depending on the structure of the sentence, but the noun will still remain a noun. It does not change to anything else like where you guys out of ignorance think it is a ?CHARACTER?. See the verses below as examples.
BTW; the names in the verses below are all PROPER nouns.
26:106 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:124 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ هُودٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:142 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ صَـٰلِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:161 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ لُوطٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:177 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ شُعَيۡبٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
Peace,
Khalil
This post literally destroys the position which brother mmkhan and bender hold.
Thanks for the verses, Khalil.
Peace.
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 22, 2013, 08:19:52 PM
Dear Bender,
In Arabic language, nearly all PERSONAL MASCULINE NOUNS end with ?THZAMMAH TANWIN?, which pronounces ?UN?. It is a rule of the language. This ending can change to other forms depending on the structure of the sentence, but the noun will still remain a noun. It does not change to anything else like where you guys out of ignorance think it is a ?CHARACTER?. See the verses below as examples.
BTW; the names in the verses below are all PROPER nouns.
26:106 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:124 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ هُودٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:142 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ صَـٰلِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:161 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ أَخُوهُمۡ لُوطٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
26:177 إِذۡ قَالَ لَهُمۡ شُعَيۡبٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
Peace,
Khalil
Salaamun alayka,
Thank you for mentioning those verses and alhamdu to The One who has showed me those ayaats long time ago :hail
Brother if there is something which you can not comprehend it does not mean that I speak of ignorance.
Maybe I have have knowledge that has not reached you yet.
And even if I am wrong then it's not because of ignorance but because I am always in learning phase.
Allah never called Ibrahim ignorant when he searched for Him even when he was wrong. No Allah says Ibrahim was not of almushrikeen.
Anyways, maybe you can look again at one verse before every ayaat you mentioned.
I will give you the first one:
26:105
كَذَّبَتْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ الْمُرْسَلِينَAs you can see Almurasleena is plural. How is that possible? So who are those "
الْمُرْسَلِينَ " when we know that only Nuh was sent.
Same goes for every ayaat you mentioned, inshaAllah it will be more clear for you.
Furthermore I want to state that you can study The Quran only in 1 way and that is with the help of Allah.
Grammar books and other sources besides Allah will only confuse you.
Salaam and may Allah increase our knowledge
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 22, 2013, 09:04:44 PM
There are many verses which provide proof. 3:144
Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
Salaamun alayka,
And what exactly does this proof?
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Scribbler on May 23, 2013, 06:47:36 AM
This post literally destroys the position which brother mmkhan and bender hold.
Thanks for the verses, Khalil.
Peace.
Salaamun alayki,
Ah I see, you see discussing the ayaats of The Quran as a competition.
Thanks anyway for your contribution.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 22, 2013, 08:56:38 PM
Hi,
Not all names end in Tanween - non Arabic names such as Ibrahim do not.
Salaamun alayka,
I can only find ayaats like this:
12:02 Inna anzalnahu quranan AAarabiyyan laAAallakum taAAqiloonaI never saw ayaats like this:
- Inna anzalnahu quranan AAarabiyyan illa ismu Ibrahim laAAallakum taAAqiloona
Salaam,
Bender
What am I missing here? If there is a reason for the discussion I fail to see it.
Salaam
Peace Family,
According to the book, "A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic".
Muhammad is a proper arabic name, the nunation indicates the proper
name is derived from an adjective. So to answer the question of the thread,
"Was Muhammed name of a Prophet?" The answer would be yes.
Thanks mmkhan for this thread :handshake:
:peace:
Quote from: huruf on May 23, 2013, 03:37:28 AM
Salaam, Bender,
Thanks for your politeness saying that the discussion is heated up instead of saying that I was being too sharp or worse. I heated it up because I saw it going nowhere. I was trying to get the thing out with forceps, not even so I got it, but you at least answered what you could answer. Thank you. It was a deliberate but
not an illwilled of hostile heating. I appreciate brother mmkhan and you.
Salaamun alayki,
thx you to for the kind words :)
We are all responsible for the way a discussion goes including myself.
QuoteI remember in one of the threads that brother mmkhan said that the Arabic word "ism" does nto mean name. I think, after thinking it over myself, that that assumption might have something to do with the difficulty for him to say straight what he has in mind, if he knows it.
I can't speak for MmKhan but I know that I have this problem.
It is very hard for me to express my thoughts in written words, let alone in a language which is not my motherstongue.
Quote"Ism" might not be a 100% equivalent of "name" in English but certainly in a big proportion it is equivalent. He opposed name to attribute if I don't remember wrong. Well, may be that opposition might be made in English but not necessarily in Arabic, and if we think of it, any name is named after attributing something to the named. Persons are named when they are born, but that is just a usage. Usually many things and persons through history have been named after the name they earned, not the name they were given at birth or inception.
I thank those of you who have cleared the question about the tanwin in names. I sort of had an idea that that did not make a name into a non-name, but as I did not recall axactly the rule, I did not say anything. In fact, again, it all comes from separating atributes from names. Al 3adil is a name of God, but, like names should be, it is not a void name, it is a name full of significance. So, seen from the point of view of the faithful, what is the reason for Muhammadun not being a name besides beeing an attribute since in Arabic, Quranic Arabic, both things go hand in hand? Anybody respoding to that denomination would be Muhammadun and could be named Mhammadun. Which Muhammadun?Obviously the Muhammadun at hand for the purpose that is being dealt with.
You say_
per my current understanding, the closest definition for "ism" in The Quran is something like "identifier" not an attribute.
see for example 12:78
12:78 They said: "O Al3azeezu, he has an elderly father, so take one of us in his place. Indeed we see you as one of the good doers."Obviously Al3azeezu is not an attribute of Yusuf, but that is how his brothers identified him.
The same goes for AlAsma AlHusna, they are not attributes of Allah but identifiers of Him. Like "He is Al3azeezu AlHakeemu".
Anyways this is how I understand it at the moment.
RED: yes that is entirely possible, but his proper name could also be Ahmed or Richard.
QuoteI have very great doubts on that and not because I think that it cannot be applied to anybody any time if she or he fulfills de conditions, but because the fact that it might include other people does most certainly not exclude the person then and there who was existant when it was said or revealed for the Qur'an.
No I am not excluding the person then :nope:
But as far as I know The Quran never says that AlQuran was revealed and/or given for the first time to a man named Mohammed, this information did not came to us from The Quran but from sources other then The Quran.
QuoteIn fact it occurred to me long time ago, that the khatam an-nabiyin, if taken as last prophet, what it would mean would be that for those who believe in that prophet, that khatam, they would not be needing any other prophet, that is, they would have reached adult age as believers and faithful and would themselves emancipate and be for themselves and for their community their prophets, that is a community of universal prophethood. That is one way which I thought could be interpreted, which in itself is full of meaning. Obviously for those who did no benefit from the prophethood of Muhammadun, there might be other prophets, I do not know, but I see it as possible.
Sure it is a possibility. I think we have to think out of our boxes to understand the ayaats of The Quran better. As long as we have preprogrammed information which is not Quran based then it is very hard to grasp the ayaats of The Quran.
QuoteBut then, even assuming that as a verified fact, what I do not get is why the need of keeping all the prophets previous to the transmitter of the Qur'an, and then do away with the transmitter fo the Qur'an as if it was a blot o something to be ashamed of. There is something very wrong there, unless a good explanation is given. So please if there is such explanation, once more, I request it for the purpose of understanding the whole thing and if there is something to it.
If there was ever a prophet, then the khatam annabiyin certifies it, it would ridiculous that somebody who does not existe does any certifying.
I understand that some might think this. But that is absolutely not true. The Mohammed mentioned in The Quran is nothing to be ashamed of :nope:
But I can not proof from The Quran that he was the transmitter of the Quran :( And as long as no body can proof this I have every option open.
And 1 of the many options is that there was a man who's proper name was Mohammed and that he was the first person who got The Quran.
QuoteSo, Bender, thanks for your answer and let us see if brother mmkhan can and will explain further or not.
Salaam
thank you to for your detailed response.
Salaam and may Allah lead us to the truth,
Bender
Quote from: huruf on May 23, 2013, 08:20:19 AM
What am I missing here? If there is a reason for the discussion I fail to see it.
Salaam
Not sure what you meant here, I thought we were discussing the name Mohammed
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 07:26:35 AM
...Brother if there is something which you can not comprehend it does not mean that I speak of ignorance....
Dear Bender,
1st: By using the word ?
ignorance? I did not mean to insult you. I meant, lack of knowledge regarding rules of Arabic language.
QuoteFurthermore I want to state that you can study The Quran only in 1 way and that is with the help of Allah.
Grammar books and other sources besides Allah will only confuse you.
2nd: Common sense dictates that, if a particular language is
NOT my mother tongue, then for me to understand it and be able to render a correct and valid opinion regarding that language, is to
first study and learn the rules and regulations governing the language.
3rd: Arabic language existed long before the revelation of The Qur?aan, and then Allaah, swt, decided to pick Muhammad, pbuh, as His Prophet messenger, giving The Qur?aan to him. Muhammad was an Arab, speaking Arabic. So, The Qur?ann
MUST had been revealed in Arabic following its grammatical rules in order for Muhammad and his people to understand it. That is why
26:198,199 inform us that if The Qur?aan was sent down to
NONE Arabs and
read to them, they wouldn?t believe in it. Why? Because it was not in their tongue.
QuoteAnyways, maybe you can look again at one verse before every ayaat you mentioned.
I will give you the first one:
26:105 كَذَّبَتْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ الْمُرْسَلِينَ
As you can see Almurasleena is plural. How is that possible? So who are those " الْمُرْسَلِينَ " when we know that only Nuh was sent.
Same goes for every ayaat you mentioned, inshaAllah it will be more clear for you.
4th: What does this have to do with the subject of this tread?
I answer it anyway. Those people had rejected the messengers that had come to them
BEFORE Noohh, Hood, Saalih, Loot, and Shu?ayb.
Peace,
Khalil
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 07:26:35 AM
Salaamun alayka,
Thank you for mentioning those verses and alhamdu to The One who has showed me those ayaats long time ago :hail
Brother if there is something which you can not comprehend it does not mean that I speak of ignorance.
Maybe I have have knowledge that has not reached you yet.
And even if I am wrong then it's not because of ignorance but because I am always in learning phase.
Allah never called Ibrahim ignorant when he searched for Him even when he was wrong. No Allah says Ibrahim was not of almushrikeen.
Anyways, maybe you can look again at one verse before every ayaat you mentioned.
I will give you the first one:
26:105 كَذَّبَتْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ الْمُرْسَلِينَ
As you can see Almurasleena is plural. How is that possible? So who are those " الْمُرْسَلِينَ " when we know that only Nuh was sent.
Same goes for every ayaat you mentioned, inshaAllah it will be more clear for you.
Furthermore I want to state that you can study The Quran only in 1 way and that is with the help of Allah.
Grammar books and other sources besides Allah will only confuse you.
Salaam and may Allah increase our knowledge
Bender
Hi,
Saying that Grammar books are there for confusion is stupidity. It is Allah who has constrained us to language and that is why other sources are necessary. Often when people say this:
" I want to state that you can study The Quran only in 1 way and that is with the help of Allah. " - it tends to be meaningless cop-outs. Everything happens because of the almighty. But when you are ill, you still head for the doctor.
As to the Mursileen being plural, then those are the Prophets before Noah.
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 07:28:08 AM
Salaamun alayka,
And what exactly does this proof?
Salaam,
Bender
It disproves this:
"The only thing I know at the moment is that from my study and with what Allah showed me, Mohammed of 48:29 can never be a name of a person, probably it is something like a title."
QuoteI understand that some might think this. But that is absolutely not true. The Mohammed mentioned in The Quran is nothing to be ashamed of :nope:
But I can not proof from The Quran that he was the transmitter of the Quran :( And as long as no body can proof this I have every option open.
And 1 of the many options is that there was a man who's proper name was Mohammed and that he was the first person who got The Quran.
Quran does prove [it is not 'proof'] that a person named Muhammad received the Quran. I am sorry to say, your whole basis is illogical. As a Sunni, I am thinking how blessed I am. About 1500 years history doesn't disappear like that. Your dilemma is evidence as to why the "Quran only" position is so illogical and leads to chaos.
I have given you two verse that are pretty explicit:
Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
There is no confusion.
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 07:36:49 AM
Salaamun alayka,
I can only find ayaats like this:
12:02 Inna anzalnahu quranan AAarabiyyan laAAallakum taAAqiloona
I never saw ayaats like this:
- Inna anzalnahu quranan AAarabiyyan illa ismu Ibrahim laAAallakum taAAqiloona
Salaam,
Bender
Hi,
Please learn basics of Arabic and have some humility to ask if unsure rather than dictate to people.
Ibrahim is name of Hebrew origin and not of Arabic. However the name is Arabicised. For example the name Benjamin is Anglicised version of the Hebrew name Ben Yamin - which in Arabic is Binyameen.
In Arabic foreign names are classed as Ghayr Munsarrif [ Mamnu al-Sarf] - which means they do not have Tanween.
Quote from: kgwithnob on May 23, 2013, 12:33:11 PM
Dear Bender,
1st: By using the word ?ignorance? I did not mean to insult you. I meant, lack of knowledge regarding rules of Arabic language.
Salaamun alayka,
:handshake:
Quote2nd: Common sense dictates that, if a particular language is NOT my mother tongue, then for me to understand it and be able to render a correct and valid opinion regarding that language, is to first study and learn the rules and regulations governing the language.
Ok that is for you :handshake:
Quote3rd: Arabic language existed long before the revelation of The Qur?aan, and then Allaah, swt, decided to pick Muhammad, pbuh, as His Prophet messenger, giving The Qur?aan to him. Muhammad was an Arab, speaking Arabic. So, The Qur?ann MUST had been revealed in Arabic following its grammatical rules in order for Muhammad and his people to understand it. That is why 26:198,199 inform us that if The Qur?aan was sent down to NONE Arabs and read to them, they wouldn?t believe in it. Why? Because it was not in their tongue.
I will give you again :handshake: not because I agree with you but because you say a lot of things which are not from The Quran and only if you read a couple of verses before and after 26:198,99 then you will come inshaAllah to new understandings.
Quote4th: What does this have to do with the subject of this tread?
everything
QuoteI answer it anyway. Those people had rejected the messengers that had come to them BEFORE Noohh, Hood, Saalih, Loot, and Shu?ayb.
Peace,
Khalil
Brother, making a word in capitals and bold does not make it part of The Quran :nope:
Maybe you wish there was a BEFORE but I am sorry.
Here is a verse were BEFORE is used.
22:42
وَإِن يُكَذِّبُوكَ فَقَدْ كَذَّبَتْ قَبْلَهُمْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ وَعَادٌ وَثَمُودُHere is a verse were AFTER is used.
7:68
أَوَعَجِبْتُمْ أَن جَاءَكُمْ ذِكْرٌ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ عَلَىٰ رَجُلٍ مِّنكُمْ لِيُنذِرَكُمْ ۚ وَاذْكُرُوا إِذْ جَعَلَكُمْ خُلَفَاءَ مِن بَعْدِ قَوْمِ نُوحٍ وَزَادَكُمْ فِي الْخَلْقِ بَسْطَةً ۖ فَاذْكُرُوا آلَاءَ اللَّـهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَin 26:105 it would be something like this: Kaththabat qablahum qawmu noohin almursaleena
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 04:43:57 PM
Hi,
Saying that Grammar books are there for confusion is stupidity. It is Allah who has constrained us to language and that is why other sources are necessary. Often when people say this:
" I want to state that you can study The Quran only in 1 way and that is with the help of Allah. " - it tends to be meaningless cop-outs. Everything happens because of the almighty. But when you are ill, you still head for the doctor.
Salaamun alayka,
:handshake:
QuoteAs to the Mursileen being plural, then those are the Prophets before Noah.
read the last paragraph in the reply above.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 04:46:15 PM
It disproves this:
"The only thing I know at the moment is that from my study and with what Allah showed me, Mohammed of 48:29 can never be a name of a person, probably it is something like a title."
Salaamun alayka,
You forgot on what you were replying :hmm
I will remind you inshaAllah:
Because we acknowledge that the Quran was delivered by a man called Muhammad
Please go back in the thread to make sure on what you are replying.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 04:53:13 PM
Quran does prove [it is not 'proof'] that a person named Muhammad received the Quran.
Salaamun alayka,
RED: thank you :handshake:
BLUE: prove please
QuoteI am sorry to say, your whole basis is illogical. As a Sunni, I am thinking how blessed I am. About 1500 years history doesn't disappear like that. Your dilemma is evidence as to why the "Quran only" position is so illogical and leads to chaos.
Allah never named you sunni :nope:
QuoteI have given you two verse that are pretty explicit:
Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
There is no confusion.
And what do they proof?
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 04:58:17 PM
Hi,
Please learn basics of Arabic and have some humility to ask if unsure rather than dictate to people.
Ibrahim is name of Hebrew origin and not of Arabic. However the name is Arabicised. For example the name Benjamin is Anglicised version of the Hebrew name Ben Yamin - which in Arabic is Binyameen.
In Arabic foreign names are classed as Ghayr Munsarrif [ Mamnu al-Sarf] - which means they do not have Tanween.
Salaamun alayka,
Are you correcting Allah now :&
May Allah protect me to go against His ayaats :pr
Bender
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 05:33:35 PM
Salaamun alayka,
Are you correcting Allah now :&
May Allah protect me to go against His ayaats :pr
Bender
Hello,
I find this response immature. And it doesn't make much sense. How is what I said - in any way correcting Allah?
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 05:20:15 PM
Salaamun alayka,
:handshake:
read the last paragraph in the reply above.
Salaam,
Bender
It is pretty clear, if you read the verses, that plural can only refer to the Prophets BEFORE Noah. Simple logic. In speech, it is not necessary to keep repeating everything, over and over. I fail to see your objections.
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 05:31:46 PM
Salaamun alayka,
RED: thank you :handshake:
BLUE: prove please
Allah never named you sunni :nope:
And what do they proof?
Salaam,
Bender
"Allah never named you sunni :nope:"
Allah never named me Amin, nor British Indian, or various other parts of my identities.
"And what do they proof?"
I have already told you what they prove. By the way, again your usage of the word 'proof' here is incorrect. It is 'prove' the verb and not proof the noun.
If you don't mind, can I ask how old you are?
Peace:
Quote"Per my current knowledge I am 100% sure that Mohammed is not used as a name of a person in The Quran.
proof: translate the first 3 words of 48:29."
If the name Muhamad is not referring to a person:
48:29MUHAMMAD is God's Apostle; and those who are with him are firm and unyielding towards all deniers of the truth, full of mercy towards one another. Thou canst see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking favour with God and goodly
acceptance: their marks are on their faces, traced by prostration.how could he have prostrated with those with him?
33:40 [And know, O believers, that] Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men,50 but isGod's Apostle and the Seal of all Prophets.51 And God has indeed full knowledge of everything.How could he be referred as father, not just human but male?
3:144 AND MUHAMMAD is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels?104 But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him].
How could he have been slain or die, if not human?
Muhamad could be a title just like Israel was the title of Jacob, or the title Abraham, but whether it is a title or name, it is the title/name given to the one who received the Qur'an from Gabriel. Also, if those names are to be considered titles, then people should be forbidden from using them as personal names, for they will never ever be equal to those to whom those names/titles were given.
Maybe the reason why mmkan and bender are so fiercely arguing about this issue is because they want to probe is a title that they can assign to themselves. Sorry Guys, maybe you can call yourselves prophets since you are professing the Qur'an, but I don't think anybody will like you calling yourselves Muhamaduns.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 05:46:36 PM
"Allah never named you sunni :nope:"
Allah never named me Amin, nor British Indian, or various other parts of my identities.
"And what do they proof?"
I have already told you what they prove. By the way, again your usage of the word 'proof' here is incorrect. It is 'prove' the verb and not proof the noun.
If you don't mind, can I ask how old you are?
Peace,
English could be Bender's second language. Although I know that when I'm tired and I've got more to type, I end up making some errors as well.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 05:39:27 PM
Hello,
I find this response immature. And it doesn't make much sense. How is what I said - in any way correcting Allah?
Salaamun alayka,
InshaAllah soon you will know
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 05:42:06 PM
It is pretty clear, if you read the verses, that plural can only refer to the Prophets BEFORE Noah. Simple logic. In speech, it is not necessary to keep repeating everything, over and over.
Salaamun alayka,
Indeed, that is what you wish to read.
But I am sorry it's not there.
QuoteI fail to see your objections.
no problem for me :handshake:
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on May 23, 2013, 06:19:55 PM
Peace,
English could be Bender's second language. Although I know that when I'm tired and I've got more to type, I end up making some errors as well.
Salam,
That is why I am correcting him. Reason for asking his age is that I find his reasoning to be quite poor and attitude somewhat immature.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 05:46:36 PM
"Allah never named you sunni :nope:"
Allah never named me Amin, nor British Indian, or various other parts of my identities.
Salaam,
Indeed that's why: God has selected alddeena for you, so do not die except as muslimoona
Quote"And what do they proof?"
I have already told you what they prove.
No you did not.
please reread your replys
QuoteBy the way, again your usage of the word 'proof' here is incorrect. It is 'prove' the verb and not proof the noun.
thank you :handshake:
QuoteIf you don't mind, can I ask how old you are?
Sorry I do now know you well enough.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 06:23:22 PM
Salaamun alayka,
Indeed, that is what you wish to read.
But I am sorry it's not there.
no problem for me :handshake:
Salaam,
Bender
Dear one :-),
Often things are implied and not always stated. Else discourse would be infinitive. The above is a simple enough logic. I think I've said enough on it.
Peace:
Quotefirst this is a statement, second the statement was there 1000 years ago and is still here at present time and will be in the future.Does this Mohammed not die if it was a person? So if it dies then it can for sure not be the Mohammed of The Quran, because the Mohammed of 48:29 in The Quran is always in present time.
People use some common sense. the "is"could be time bound for the time when the prophet walked the earth and for the people who was around him. For example: if the phrase said "Mohamed is the father of this child" and somebody reads it in front of you and your son, would then that mean that Muhamad is the father of your son. lest not be of the ignorant.
Quote from: Bender on May 23, 2013, 06:31:11 PM
Indeed that's why we: God has selected alddeena for you, so do not die except as muslimoona."
When a disagreement arises, one clarifies where one belongs. Shia, Sunni and etc all call themselves Muslims, but, when you add further identities it instant clarifies who you are and where you belong.
"O humankind We [God] have created you male and female, and made you into communities and tribes, so that you may know one another. Surely the noblest amongst you in the sight of God is the most godfearing of you. God is All-knowing and All-Aware" (Quran 49:13).
QuoteNo you did not.
please reread your replys
Yes I did.
Please read reply #174
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 23, 2013, 06:18:16 PM
Peace:
If the name Muhamad is not referring to a person:
48:29MUHAMMAD is God's Apostle; and those who are with him are firm and unyielding towards all deniers of the truth, full of mercy towards one another. Thou canst see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking favour with God and goodly
acceptance: their marks are on their faces, traced by prostration.
how could he have prostrated with those with him?
33:40 [And know, O believers, that] Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men,50 but isGod's Apostle and the Seal of all Prophets.51 And God has indeed full knowledge of everything.
How could he be referred as father, not just human but male?
3:144 AND MUHAMMAD is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels?104 But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him].
How could he have been slain or die, if not human?
Salaamun alayka,
Did i say Mohammed is not referring to a person? :nope:
ONLY thing I said is that Mohammed in The Quran is not a proper name of a person.
QuoteMuhamad could be a title just like Israel was the title of Jacob, or the title Abraham, but whether it is a title or name, it is the title/name given to the one who received the Qur'an from Gabriel.
RED: that is what I think :handshake:
it is really nothing special what I am saying.
QuoteMaybe the reason why mmkan and bender are so fiercely arguing about this issue is because they want to probe is a title that they can assign to themselves. Sorry Guys, maybe you can call yourselves prophets since you are professing the Qur'an, but I don't think anybody will like you calling yourselves Muhamaduns.
:o
:hypno:
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on May 23, 2013, 06:19:55 PM
Peace,
English could be Bender's second language. Although I know that when I'm tired and I've got more to type, I end up making some errors as well.
Salaamun alayki,
Thank you :handshake:
it's actually my third language
Salaam,
Bender
"ONLY thing I said is that Mohammed in The Quran is not a proper name of a person."
Hello again Bender,
And your evidence? It has been rather conclusively proven - it IS a name and not a title.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 06:46:15 PM
"ONLY thing I said is that Mohammed in The Quran is not a proper name of a person."
Hello again Bender,
And your evidence? It has been rather conclusively proven - it IS a name and not a title.
مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00050.%20Kanoo%20Kaf%20Waw%20Noon/3.gif): Verb: Deficient; Perfect; third person; singular; masculine.
Defective-Incomplete verbs are coined to affirm a subject's description being other than the description of its Masdar-Verbal Noun. Defective verbs are entered upon the subject and the predicate. It gives the nominative state to the first as its noun and it gives accusative state to the second as its predicate. When used for sentential abrogation, it signifies the meanings of "to become", where the predication of the sentence still holds true and continues to hold true.
(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00005.%20Hamad%20Ha%20Meem%20Dal/4.gif): [Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam] Proper Noun: Masculine; nominative.
It is the Subject Noun of deficient Verb(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.061/250.%20Nabi%20Noon%20Ba%20Waw/1.gif)(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00035.%20Khatama%20Khe%20Ta%20Meem%20seal/2.gif) (http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/000.%20Encyclopaedia%20of%20Arabic%20of%20Qur'aan/5.%20MUHAMMAD%20sas/04.%20Khatama%20nNabiyeena.htm)
Quote from: Mazhar on May 23, 2013, 07:33:17 PM
مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ
(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00050.%20Kanoo%20Kaf%20Waw%20Noon/3.gif): Verb: Deficient; Perfect; third person; singular; masculine. Defective-Incomplete verbs are coined to affirm a subject's description being other than the description of its Masdar-Verbal Noun. Defective verbs are entered upon the subject and the predicate. It gives the nominative state to the first as its noun and it gives accusative state to the second as its predicate. When used for sentential abrogation, it signifies the meanings of "to become", where the predication of the sentence still holds true and continues to hold true.
(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00005.%20Hamad%20Ha%20Meem%20Dal/4.gif): [Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam] Proper Noun: Masculine; nominative. It is the Subject Noun of deficient Verb
(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.061/250.%20Nabi%20Noon%20Ba%20Waw/1.gif)(http://haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00035.%20Khatama%20Khe%20Ta%20Meem%20seal/2.gif) (http://free-minds.org/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/000.%20Encyclopaedia%20of%20Arabic%20of%20Qur'aan/5.%20MUHAMMAD%20sas/04.%20Khatama%20nNabiyeena.htm)
Mazhar,
What are you trying to prove with this? You didn't say.
This is partly a reply to Bender's post 170
Quoteper my current understanding, the closest definition for "ism" in The Quran is something like "identifier" not an attribute.
see for example 12:78
12:78 They said: "O Al3azeezu, he has an elderly father, so take one of us in his place. Indeed we see you as one of the good doers."
Obviously Al3azeezu is not an attribute of Yusuf, but that is how his brothers identified him.
The same goes for AlAsma AlHusna, they are not attributes of Allah but identifiers of Him. Like "He is Al3azeezu AlHakeemu".
Anyways this is how I understand it at the moment.
I think we are back to splitting hairs. Of course names are identifiers, but they are not numbers. If we identified people by numbers randomly attributed, we could keep to the "identifier" idea without any problem. But names identify not randomly, identify because somebody uses them for a reason. All prophets names in the Qur'an and even non prophet names have a reason. When you say that Al 3adil is an identifier, I agree, but it identifies because it is pointing at something which pertains to the named, it is not a mark without a meaning. So in fact a name is also a title in the Qur'an. We are "perverted" by our present usage of giving names which mean nothing, whereas through history were for a long time given with a meaning. They still are in many places and on many occasions, and those names that are earned, may be called nicknames, alias or whatever, they may not be legal names of a person but they are certainly names by Qur'anic usage. Such a name may be attrributed to more than one person, then those persons would be distinguished by some other addition if the person meant did not get idenfied clearly, like with X the younger or X the older, or things like that.
So really this thing about Muhammad name or title, we may quietly say that it is both, so what? And, as I said in previous message some pages ago, if there is the prediction by 3isa ibnu Maryam that there will come a messenger whose name is Ahmad, which means the most praised, and then later on there is talk about a Muhammadun which means praised, is it really, really that preposterous to think that that passive participle, muhammadun, praised, is in fact a certification by the Qur'an, that that Ahmad prediction has been fulfilled, that the most praised has indeed been praised, that the prediction is a thing done?
Then there are allusions to the present to how what is said in the Qur'an is nto for the past (only I guess) but for all time, so what? That does not change a thing to the fact that the Qur'an was transmitted at a certain point in history, as to when exactly there are different opinions, but for us certainly in the past rather old past. So now we are all, or we should all strive to be Muhammaduun, fine, so in what that does change a thing to a past Muhammadun? And what is incoherent or surprising to having a praised messenger as khatam annabiyin? does that not stand as a praise to all prophets, as a praise to prophecy, as a praise to the unbreakable flow from God to humanity. Prophecy is living it is not dead, The praised one made it universal under his seal, God made it so. We are all under that seal. All past prophets, all people who received prophecy, in fact all people, all we have to do is to accept it.
This Muhammadun, as far as I am concerned not only does not do away with a Muhammadun person but in fact makes a perfect circle with all creation, because all creation is praised and everybody is praised for as long as we acknowledge that we spring from the divinity, that all we are is a flow from the divinity, prophecy is that, the certification that Divinity is always flowing to us and back, or not? the conscience of being a projection of the divinity, of the divine conscience and will, and as a divine deed wothy of praise because we are not by ourselves, but by the divine will.
I may be wrong, but I perceive in some people, not you Bender, a certain guilty selfconsciousness concerning al Rasul that transmitted the Qur'an, as if he was helplessly tainted by polygamy, cruelty, all the sins that have been piled on him by enemies and "friends" alike.
We should do away with that. Those are mental ghosts, noise. What remains is the khatam and the string of Allah to all of us, which we should not let go of. The khatam entails also a promise from our God, and this "our" is not as opposed to yours or their, but a closer feeling of God, who is not a stranger, but our intimate God.
This khatam and Muhhamadun thing is greater than our petty personal appreciations of this or that depiction of a man. It is a declaration of essence, of divine essence to humans. We are not tied to minute dos or don'ts and splitting hairs. We are free, free to feel, to think, to love, fee not to put limits to our divine aspirations.
Yes, sorry , this was a long sermon. The catholic church does not know what it lost when it didn't allow women to be priests. I would have made may be not the best, but the longest sermonist around. My excuses.
Salaam
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 07:47:37 PM
Mazhar,
What are you trying to prove with this? You didn't say.
Your quote:
QuoteAnd your evidence? It has been rather conclusively proven - it IS a name and not a title.
Peace be with you, Bender.
Brother, it is seems like you haven't looked closely into some verses of the Quran which are essential for the discussion of the points that you have raised. The truth is right there, we just need to see clearly. I'll answer your points in three steps, God willing, it should now be clear to you.
STEP 1:
Who is a messenger? A messenger is a person who is entrusted with a message, a message bearer. This definition is sanctioned in the Quran.
So the king said: "Bring him to me." But when the messenger (Arabic: rasulu) came to him, (Joseph) said: "Go back to thy lord, and ask
him, 'What is the state of mind of the ladies who cut their hands'? For my Lord is certainly well aware of their snare." (12:50)
You can see that the message bearer who was sent to the prison to summon Prophet Joseph (pbuh) is referred to as a "Rasul" (messenger).
STEP 2:
Now take a look at the following verse.
O Messengers! (Arabic: rusulu - plural). Eat of the good things and do right. Indeed, I am aware of what ye do (23:51)
You can see that God is saying "messengers - plural", and not "messenger - singular".
This verse is directed to whom?
The messengers!
To whom is God directly talking/referring in this verse?
The messengers!
If you read this verse in context with its following verse, it becomes clear that this verse was directed at the Prophet's community.
And indeed this brotherhood/community (Arabic: ummatukum) of yours is a single brotherhood, and I am your Lord, therefore fear Me (23:52)
Therefore, those that aided the Prophet in spreading the message were also being referred to as "messengers". It is clear, brother. God wouldn't say "messengers - plural" instead of "messenger - singular" if this verse was only directed to one person. God never makes any mistake. So there is NO WAY you can deny this.
STEP 3:
You can now see the same thing, as you probably have already, with respect to Prophet Noah (pbuh) and his supporters of bearing the message, who also by God have been referred to as "messengers - plural".
The people of Noah rejected the messengers. (26:105)
This can be further supported with verse - 25:37
And the people of Noah, when they rejected the messengers, We drowned them and We made them as a Sign for mankind and We have prepared
for (all) wrong-doers a grievous Penalty (25:37)
But you were right on one thing. People who say that the plurality of messenger denotes messengers BEFORE Prophet Noah (pbuh), are completely wrong in their reasoning. Their assertion sounds nonsensical as the verses clearly talk about people who were present during the time of Prophet Noah (pbuh) when they rejected him.
This is the same case with the rest of the messengers of the past:
The Ad (people) rejected the messengers (26:123)
The Thamud (people) rejected the messengers (26:141)
The people of Lut rejected the messengers (26:160)
The Companions of the Wood rejected the messengers (26:176)
Dear Bender, I have provided you evidence directly from the Quran. The signs of Allah are clear and lucid, at least for me, alhamdoulillah, I see no ambiguity and no abstrusity. With utmost respect, even now if you don't get that the names (Nooh, Hud, Loot, Shuaib, Muhammad etc.) are all proper nouns, then I really don't have anything else to say anymore.
No hard feelings intended. :handshake:
May Allah guide us to His straight path. :)
God has decreed (Arabic: Kataba l-lahu): "It is I and My messengers (Arabic: Warasuli) who must prevail": For God is One full of strength, able to
enforce His Will (58:21)
Peace. :peace:
Quote from: Scribbler on May 24, 2013, 04:10:36 AM
Peace be with you, Bender.
Brother, it is seems like you haven't looked closely into some verses of the Quran which are essential for the discussion of the points that you have raised. The truth is right there, we just need to see clearly. I'll answer your points in three steps, God willing, it should now be clear to you.
STEP 1:
Who is a messenger? A messenger is a person who is entrusted with a message, a message bearer. This definition is sanctioned in the Quran.
So the king said: "Bring him to me." But when the messenger (Arabic: rasulu) came to him, (Joseph) said: "Go back to thy lord, and ask
him, 'What is the state of mind of the ladies who cut their hands'? For my Lord is certainly well aware of their snare." (12:50)
You can see that the message bearer who was sent to the prison to summon Prophet Joseph (pbuh) is referred to as a "Rasul" (messenger).
STEP 2:
Now take a look at the following verse.
O Messengers! (Arabic: rusulu - plural). Eat of the good things and do right. Indeed, I am aware of what ye do (23:51)
You can see that God is saying "messengers - plural", and not "messenger - singular".
This verse is directed to whom?
The messengers!
To whom is God directly talking/referring in this verse?
The messengers!
If you read this verse in context with its following verse, it becomes clear that this verse was directed at the Prophet's community.
And indeed this brotherhood/community (Arabic: ummatukum) of yours is a single brotherhood, and I am your Lord, therefore fear Me (23:52)
Therefore, those that aided the Prophet in spreading the message were also being referred to as "messengers". It is clear, brother. God wouldn't say "messengers - plural" instead of "messenger - singular" if this verse was only directed to one person. God never makes any mistake. So there is NO WAY you can deny this.
STEP 3:
You can now see the same thing, as you probably have already, with respect to Prophet Noah (pbuh) and his supporters of bearing the message, who also by God have been referred to as "messengers - plural".
The people of Noah rejected the messengers. (26:105)
This can be further supported with verse - 25:37
And the people of Noah, when they rejected the messengers, We drowned them and We made them as a Sign for mankind and We have prepared
for (all) wrong-doers a grievous Penalty (25:37)
But you were right on one thing. People who say that the plurality of messenger denotes messengers BEFORE Prophet Noah (pbuh), are completely wrong in their reasoning. Their assertion sounds nonsensical as the verses clearly talk about people who were present during the time of Prophet Noah (pbuh) when they rejected him.
This is the same case with the rest of the messengers of the past:
The Ad (people) rejected the messengers (26:123)
The Thamud (people) rejected the messengers (26:141)
The people of Lut rejected the messengers (26:160)
The Companions of the Wood rejected the messengers (26:176)
Dear Bender, I have provided you evidence directly from the Quran. The signs of Allah are clear and lucid, at least for me, alhamdoulillah, I see no ambiguity and no abstrusity. With utmost respect, even now if you don't get that the names (Nooh, Hud, Loot, Shuaib, Muhammad etc.) are all proper nouns, then I really don't have anything else to say anymore.
No hard feelings intended. :handshake:
May Allah guide us to His straight path. :)
God has decreed (Arabic: Kataba l-lahu): "It is I and My messengers (Arabic: Warasuli) who must prevail": For God is One full of strength, able to
enforce His Will (58:21)
Peace. :peace:
Thsi is a clear, neat and meaningful message.
You have done like a good messenger, Scribbler.
Thank you. Very entlightening.
Salaam
Quote from: Scribbler on May 24, 2013, 04:10:36 AM
Peace be with you, Bender.
Brother, it is seems like you haven't looked closely into some verses of the Quran which are essential for the discussion of the points that you have raised. The truth is right there, we just need to see clearly. I'll answer your points in three steps, God willing, it should now be clear to you.
STEP 1:
Who is a messenger? A messenger is a person who is entrusted with a message, a message bearer. This definition is sanctioned in the Quran.
So the king said: "Bring him to me." But when the messenger (Arabic: rasulu) came to him, (Joseph) said: "Go back to thy lord, and ask
him, 'What is the state of mind of the ladies who cut their hands'? For my Lord is certainly well aware of their snare." (12:50)
You can see that the message bearer who was sent to the prison to summon Prophet Joseph (pbuh) is referred to as a "Rasul" (messenger).
STEP 2:
Now take a look at the following verse.
O Messengers! (Arabic: rusulu - plural). Eat of the good things and do right. Indeed, I am aware of what ye do (23:51)
You can see that God is saying "messengers - plural", and not "messenger - singular".
This verse is directed to whom?
The messengers!
To whom is God directly talking/referring in this verse?
The messengers!
If you read this verse in context with its following verse, it becomes clear that this verse was directed at the Prophet's community.
And indeed this brotherhood/community (Arabic: ummatukum) of yours is a single brotherhood, and I am your Lord, therefore fear Me (23:52)
Therefore, those that aided the Prophet in spreading the message were also being referred to as "messengers". It is clear, brother. God wouldn't say "messengers - plural" instead of "messenger - singular" if this verse was only directed to one person. God never makes any mistake. So there is NO WAY you can deny this.
STEP 3:
You can now see the same thing, as you probably have already, with respect to Prophet Noah (pbuh) and his supporters of bearing the message, who also by God have been referred to as "messengers - plural".
The people of Noah rejected the messengers. (26:105)
This can be further supported with verse - 25:37
And the people of Noah, when they rejected the messengers, We drowned them and We made them as a Sign for mankind and We have prepared
for (all) wrong-doers a grievous Penalty (25:37)
But you were right on one thing. People who say that the plurality of messenger denotes messengers BEFORE Prophet Noah (pbuh), are completely wrong in their reasoning. Their assertion sounds nonsensical as the verses clearly talk about people who were present during the time of Prophet Noah (pbuh) when they rejected him.
This is the same case with the rest of the messengers of the past:
The Ad (people) rejected the messengers (26:123)
The Thamud (people) rejected the messengers (26:141)
The people of Lut rejected the messengers (26:160)
The Companions of the Wood rejected the messengers (26:176)
Dear Bender, I have provided you evidence directly from the Quran. The signs of Allah are clear and lucid, at least for me, alhamdoulillah, I see no ambiguity and no abstrusity. With utmost respect, even now if you don't get that the names (Nooh, Hud, Loot, Shuaib, Muhammad etc.) are all proper nouns, then I really don't have anything else to say anymore.
No hard feelings intended. :handshake:
May Allah guide us to His straight path. :)
God has decreed (Arabic: Kataba l-lahu): "It is I and My messengers (Arabic: Warasuli) who must prevail": For God is One full of strength, able to
enforce His Will (58:21)
Peace. :peace:
Excellent post, very illuminating!
Thank you!
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 06:28:33 PM
Salam,
That is why I am correcting him. Reason for asking his age is that I find his reasoning to be quite poor and attitude somewhat immature.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 06:46:15 PM
"ONLY thing I said is that Mohammed in The Quran is not a proper name of a person."
Hello again Bender,
And your evidence? It has been rather conclusively proven - it IS a name and not a title.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 06:39:33 PM
When a disagreement arises, one clarifies where one belongs. Shia, Sunni and etc all call themselves Muslims, but, when you add further identities it instant clarifies who you are and where you belong.
"O humankind We [God] have created you male and female, and made you into communities and tribes, so that you may know one another. Surely the noblest amongst you in the sight of God is the most godfearing of you. God is All-knowing and All-Aware" (Quran 49:13).
Yes I did.
Please read reply #174
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 23, 2013, 06:31:47 PM
Dear one :-),
Often things are implied and not always stated. Else discourse would be infinitive. The above is a simple enough logic. I think I've said enough on it.
Salaamun alayka,
whatever makes you happy :handshake:
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 23, 2013, 06:36:33 PM
Peace:
People use some common sense. the "is"could be time bound for the time when the prophet walked the earth and for the people who was around him. For example: if the phrase said "Mohamed is the father of this child" and somebody reads it in front of you and your son, would then that mean that Muhamad is the father of your son. lest not be of the ignorant.
Salaamun alayka,
RED: Can you please give me an example from The Quran, thx.
BLUE: It must be: "Mohammed is the father of YOUR child" if it is general and "Mohammed is the father of BENDER's child" if it was only for Benders. And if it was specific for me then I do not think Allah will reveal something like that in a book for everyone but would only reveal it to me.
GREEN: Allah shall inform us about our disputes.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: huruf on May 24, 2013, 03:49:30 AM
This is partly a reply to Bender's post 170
I think we are back to splitting hairs. Of course names are identifiers, but they are not numbers. If we identified people by numbers randomly attributed, we could keep to the "identifier" idea without any problem. But names identify not randomly, identify because somebody uses them for a reason. All prophets names in the Qur'an and even non prophet names have a reason. When you say that Al 3adil is an identifier, I agree, but it identifies because it is pointing at something which pertains to the named, it is not a mark without a meaning. So in fact a name is also a title in the Qur'an. We are "perverted" by our present usage of giving names which mean nothing, whereas through history were for a long time given with a meaning. They still are in many places and on many occasions, and those names that are earned, may be called nicknames, alias or whatever, they may not be legal names of a person but they are certainly names by Qur'anic usage. Such a name may be attrributed to more than one person, then those persons would be distinguished by some other addition if the person meant did not get idenfied clearly, like with X the younger or X the older, or things like that.
Salaamun alayki,
I totally agree with you :)
QuoteSo really this thing about Muhammad name or title, we may quietly say that it is both, so what?
For you and for me it's so what, but for most people its close to blasphemy.
Besides this it has also consequences in how one understands The Quran.
Anyways in The Quran it is never used as proper name.
QuoteAnd, as I said in previous message some pages ago, if there is the prediction by 3isa ibnu Maryam that there will come a messenger whose name is Ahmad, which means the most praised, and then later on there is talk about a Muhammadun which means praised, is it really, really that preposterous to think that that passive participle, muhammadun, praised, is in fact a certification by the Qur'an, that that Ahmad prediction has been fulfilled, that the most praised has indeed been praised, that the prediction is a thing done?
This is entirely possible.
Forgive me but I like splitting hairs and going of-topic ;)
It was not a prediction
QuoteThen there are allusions to the present to how what is said in the Qur'an is nto for the past (only I guess) but for all time, so what?
I do not agree, I think this is not so what :nope: I think this has major consequences :yes
QuoteThat does not change a thing to the fact that the Qur'an was transmitted at a certain point in history, as to when exactly there are different opinions, but for us certainly in the past rather old past. So now we are all, or we should all strive to be Muhammaduun, fine, so in what that does change a thing to a past Muhammadun?
nothing, but for now it changes a lot.
QuoteAnd what is incoherent or surprising to having a praised messenger as khatam annabiyin? does that not stand as a praise to all prophets, as a praise to prophecy, as a praise to the unbreakable flow from God to humanity. Prophecy is living it is not dead, The praised one made it universal under his seal, God made it so. We are all under that seal. All past prophets, all people who received prophecy, in fact all people, all we have to do is to accept it.
This Muhammadun, as far as I am concerned not only does not do away with a Muhammadun person but in fact makes a perfect circle with all creation, because all creation is praised and everybody is praised for as long as we acknowledge that we spring from the divinity, that all we are is a flow from the divinity, prophecy is that, the certification that Divinity is always flowing to us and back, or not? the conscience of being a projection of the divinity, of the divine conscience and will, and as a divine deed wothy of praise because we are not by ourselves, but by the divine will.
I may be wrong, but I perceive in some people, not you Bender, a certain guilty selfconsciousness concerning al Rasul that transmitted the Qur'an, as if he was helplessly tainted by polygamy, cruelty, all the sins that have been piled on him by enemies and "friends" alike.
We should do away with that. Those are mental ghosts, noise. What remains is the khatam and the string of Allah to all of us, which we should not let go of. The khatam entails also a promise from our God, and this "our" is not as opposed to yours or their, but a closer feeling of God, who is not a stranger, but our intimate God.
This khatam and Muhhamadun thing is greater than our petty personal appreciations of this or that depiction of a man. It is a declaration of essence, of divine essence to humans. We are not tied to minute dos or don'ts and splitting hairs. We are free, free to feel, to think, to love, fee not to put limits to our divine aspirations.
Yes, sorry , this was a long sermon. The catholic church does not know what it lost when it didn't allow women to be priests. I would have made may be not the best, but the longest sermonist around. My excuses.
Salaam
I understand now why they didn't allow women to be priests ;D
I agree with most what you said, nice post.
salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Scribbler on May 24, 2013, 04:10:36 AM
Peace be with you, Bender.
Brother, it is seems like you haven't looked closely into some verses of the Quran which are essential for the discussion of the points that you have raised. The truth is right there, we just need to see clearly. I'll answer your points in three steps, God willing, it should now be clear to you.
STEP 1:
Who is a messenger? A messenger is a person who is entrusted with a message, a message bearer. This definition is sanctioned in the Quran.
So the king said: "Bring him to me." But when the messenger (Arabic: rasulu) came to him, (Joseph) said: "Go back to thy lord, and ask
him, 'What is the state of mind of the ladies who cut their hands'? For my Lord is certainly well aware of their snare." (12:50)
You can see that the message bearer who was sent to the prison to summon Prophet Joseph (pbuh) is referred to as a "Rasul" (messenger).
STEP 2:
Now take a look at the following verse.
O Messengers! (Arabic: rusulu - plural). Eat of the good things and do right. Indeed, I am aware of what ye do (23:51)
You can see that God is saying "messengers - plural", and not "messenger - singular".
This verse is directed to whom?
The messengers!
To whom is God directly talking/referring in this verse?
The messengers!
Salaamun alayki,
Till here we agree :handshake:
QuoteIf you read this verse in context with its following verse, it becomes clear that this verse was directed at the Prophet's community.
And indeed this brotherhood/community (Arabic: ummatukum) of yours is a single brotherhood, and I am your Lord, therefore fear Me (23:52)
RED: :nope:
Is 5:6 also only for the prophet's community? If not, then please show me how to distinguish such verses.
QuoteTherefore, those that aided the Prophet in spreading the message were also being referred to as "messengers". It is clear, brother. God wouldn't say "messengers - plural" instead of "messenger - singular" if this verse was only directed to one person. God never makes any mistake. So there is NO WAY you can deny this.
I never deny an ayaat of The Quran :nope:
That verse indeed is directed to the messengers (PLURAL) BUT there is no restriction in time :nope: That verse is in present :yes
Allah never makes mistakes and He did not forget any words.
Besides that, do you know that what you said here is not clear at all for 99% of the so called muslim world. If you tell them there were human messengers with Mohammed they would chase you down, because it goes against everything they believe in. InshaAllah you will understand why I mention this.
QuoteSTEP 3:
You can now see the same thing, as you probably have already, with respect to Prophet Noah (pbuh) and his supporters of bearing the message, who also by God have been referred to as "messengers - plural".
The people of Noah rejected the messengers. (26:105)
This can be further supported with verse - 25:37
And the people of Noah, when they rejected the messengers, We drowned them and We made them as a Sign for mankind and We have prepared
for (all) wrong-doers a grievous Penalty (25:37)
This was also for a long time my understanding. Please compare 26:105-106 with 36:13-14.
I am almost sure that you know that in all the pasages in The Quran about Nuh, he was always the only one.
Thus you will never find "Nuh and the other messengers said ..."
So how come the plural is used.
InshaAllah if you understand verses like 7:11 and 7:22-24 then verses like 26:105-106 and 25:37 and many more verses will be more clear.
QuoteBut you were right on one thing. People who say that the plurality of messenger denotes messengers BEFORE Prophet Noah (pbuh), are completely wrong in their reasoning. Their assertion sounds nonsensical as the verses clearly talk about people who were present during the time of Prophet Noah (pbuh) when they rejected him.
This is the same case with the rest of the messengers of the past:
The Ad (people) rejected the messengers (26:123)
The Thamud (people) rejected the messengers (26:141)
The people of Lut rejected the messengers (26:160)
The Companions of the Wood rejected the messengers (26:176)
thank you :)
But if someone shares the same understanding as you, does it always mean he/she is right? ;)
Quote
Dear Bender, I have provided you evidence directly from the Quran.
Thank you very much for your detailed response :handshake:
QuoteThe signs of Allah are clear and lucid, at least for me, alhamdoulillah, I see no ambiguity and no abstrusity. With utmost respect, even now if you don't get that the names (Nooh, Hud, Loot, Shuaib, Muhammad etc.) are all proper nouns, then I really don't have anything else to say anymore.
I understand your position :handshake:
But the signs Allah showed me are also very clear to me and from what He showed me I know for sure that Mohammed is not a proper name.
QuoteNo hard feelings intended. :handshake
May Allah guide us to His straight path. :)
God has decreed (Arabic: Kataba l-lahu): "It is I and My messengers (Arabic: Warasuli) who must prevail": For God is One full of strength, able to
enforce His Will (58:21)
Peace. :peace:
:handshake:
salaam,
Bender
Rethinking word مُحَمَّدٌ :
1) the word muhammadun is a noun
2) the word muhammadun is a male plurar world
3) The tanwin an in un is depending of the verse context
4) مُحَمَّدٌ is a passive word, this mean this word is a word who is become a target to giving a task or something
Similiarity cases occured in:
وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَهُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ
إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ
وَاللَّهُ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ
Clear verse that proof Muhammad is a name:
33:40 Mohammad(un) is not the father of any of your men, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
Maybe my explanation sound strange
Salam.
Peace:
(3:66) Lo! You are the ones who would argue about that which is known to you; but
why do you argue about something which is unknown to you? Yet God knows [it], whereas
you do not know:
3:69 Some of the أَهْلِ people/family of الْكِتَابِ the book would love to lead you astray: yet none do they lead astray but themselves, and perceive it not.
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 30, 2013, 10:47:59 AM
Peace:
(3:66) Lo! You are the ones who would argue about that which is known to you; but
why do you argue about something which is unknown to you? Yet God knows [it], whereas
you do not know:
3:69 Some of the أَهْلِ people/family of الْكِتَابِ the book would love to lead you astray: yet none do they lead astray but themselves, and perceive it not.
Salaamun alayka,
Thank you for those verses.
(fm translation)
3:70 "O people of the Book, why do you reject the revelations of God while you are bearing witness?"
3:71 "O people of the Book, why do you confound the truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know?"
3:72 And a group from among the people of the Book said: "Believe in what was sent down to those who believe during the beginning of the day, and reject it by the end of it, perhaps they will return."
3:73 "And do not believe except in he who follows your system." Say: "The guidance is the guidance of God." That anyone should be given similar to what you have been given, or that they debate with you at your Lord. Say: "The bounty is in the hand of God, He gives it to whom He chooses, and God is Encompassing, Knowledgeable."
3:74 He singles out with His mercy whom He chooses, and God is with Great Bounty.Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Mazhar on May 24, 2013, 04:05:54 AM
Your quote:
Salam,
I am still a little confused - as again you were sparse with your words :-)
Are putting this up against me or for me? As I do not take this to prove that the word "Muhammed" is title.
Salam all,
QuoteBut the signs Allah showed me are also very clear to me and from what He showed me I know for sure that Mohammed is not a proper name.
If my tone becomes harsher, I apologize in advance. But I am losing patience with statements of Bender. Look at the above comment. Such statements cannot be taken seriously at all. What signs? So, for over thousand years "Muhammad" - has been a name - and now say so of someone are we expected to accept it. Bender has had his chance to give evidence. Failing that, above is just an excuse and a poor one. Personal "signs" cannot be taken with seriousness where the Quran is concerned.
As a Sunni, this kind hogwash and easy acceptance of it really portrays a negative image of "Quran-only". You claim to follow Quran only - yet - repeatedly I find evidence on this board people tend to believe what they want to believe and call it "Allah's signs". There is absolutely no evidence that the word Muhammad is a title. There has been no other person ever claiming to be of this title. Just because someone has thought it up in their mind and are obstinately sticking to it - should these "thoughts" be given an airing in public and have any credence? No. Then everyone will make up whatever their heart wishes.
You reject "Hadith" on the basis of it "weakness" - yet - we Sunni's strongly reject all such interpretations. Here is one very clear reason why Sunnism has an easy and crucial advantage over "Quran only":
Besides over 1,500 years - it is development of Sunni thought and it bounding into coherent law. We have pretty clear principles that have developed over time as to how "law" can be derived. Before rejecting - it would be nice if people knew exactly what they were rejecting. But I seriously doubt 1 person has studied say - Usuls of Sunni thought.
I think people will find the following book very useful:
"Language and the interpretation of Islamic law" by Dr. Sukrija Husejn Ramic.
It is available freely - as Phd Thesis - if Phd theses are available free in your country. In England - it is available from the British library website.
The book doesn't teach you Hadith. It is about how law from source - whether Quran or Hadith - is derived from language.
Peace:
Quote
The book doesn't teach you Hadith. It is about how law from source - whether Quran or Hadith - is derived from language.
Why learning how law was derived from language for people of other times, when you can learn how to derive laws for our time in "The Principles of STATE AND GOVERNMENT IN ISLAM by Muhammad Assad".
Peace The_Chimp,
There are those who take one step too many in the interpretation of Quran. But you should know that not everyone around here believe in the threads and the statements put forth nor support them.
Apart from that, the only laws you need to know can be found relatively easily in the Quran, no other hadith required. God's religion does not have an excessive amount of laws and restrictions, it is a pretty easy religion unless you follow a lot of man-made inventions.
In fact it is so easy that you could follow only the Bible and be a muslim as long as you follow the underlying Message to worship God alone, believe in the Last Day while being a good person.
There is a reason why God says that people from the Nazarenes and Jews can make it to Heaven too. The very reason is that all are islam (as long as unitarian Christian or other non-idolatrous believers).
I have studied as much as necessary of sunni thought. I study sahih hadith at the moment and there is not much to discover really.
Many people around here came from sunnism and they know what it is about. And most have been wise enough to leave the sect.
Personally, I see little reason in not rejecting hadith. Why would God add extra rules besides the main revelation? Did He "forget" to add them in the Book?
God said: "We did not leave anything out of this book!". Do you claim that God is a liar?
Are you among the Sunni muslims who also do not believe the Quran is preserved?
You may be talking about that it is Muhammad's "Sunnah" that is in hadith. But why follow his sunnah when he followed God's sunnah? Is it not better to live the kind of life God expects out of us in the Quran? Quran is pretty clear on what God likes and dislikes. And I do not want to be a stereotype, do you think God likes that?
Simply following the commands and inspiration from Quran and thus obeying God makes me reject hadith. Would I not then I would not be a Believer.
"Perfectly detailed"
"Easy to remember, want to learn?"
"In what other hadith do they believe?"
Please do not make a joke out of my Master when he says the Quran is sufficient. God does not like it. The Book is my Guide and I am fine with it. The Quran is God's exact wordings where no other book has been, what is better to follow if not God's own choice of words?
And hadith is so unreliable it is barely usable for anything except a good laugh for the amusing things one can read in it. Come on, an average blessed man can write books with better guidelines.
Back to what you wrote, I have no reason to not believe Muhammad was not a Messenger of God. I think most of those who keep coming up with these conspiracy theories are just falling victim to wishful thinking in attempts to nullify the practices of traditional islam completely. I do not believe that everything traditional muslims do and believe is wrong, I am not that arrogant, self-proclaimed. Some people are removing prayers from the map based on conjecture and I think that is rushing to naive conclusions.
You are right, Quran alone may not keep going strong, at least not in the favor of God, if people keep abrogate verses from Quran by crazy interpretations of it. The no prayer approach does not even seem have any support for it as it does not suit the context. And people are coming up with conjecture about fasting while the verses are pretty clear. So in some of your initial criticism you are right, and therefore I agree that this approach to Quran has a negative image, but that is not the fault of the approach bit rather in the minds of people.
Remember, I did not become a Quran only to make the religion Westernized or more slack but rather purify it. I still do regular prayers, fast, pay charity and follow every other guideline within Quran and I will continue to do so.
And hey, do not come with questions such as "Where do you find information on salat in Quran?" because I just frown and make some silly gesture. If you actually study sahih bukhari you will know why. And Quran is pretty clear on what to give to charity too, so do not come about with common silly rhetoric.
The Quran suffices me.
And please I did not mean to insult your belief system. I understand that my stand is pretty certain, but I accept other belief systems (deens). Please go ahead and call me kufr because it is correct in your deen, but then think twice on why you call me that.
Kufr for believing in God alone and following His revelation, is that not a joke?
Had I been of the same caliber, all of that deen of Sunni would be kufr, even mushrik, but I refrain from such statements out of courtesy. In my faith we do not aggress against others and only fight in self defense. And we discuss in the friendliest possible manner. Peace.
And finally, sorry for bringing this all into the inappropriate thread.
God bless you
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 30, 2013, 12:22:36 PM
Salam all,
If my tone becomes harsher, I apologize in advance. But I am losing patience with statements of Bender. Look at the above comment. Such statements cannot be taken seriously at all. What signs? So, for over thousand years "Muhammad" - has been a name - and now say so of someone are we expected to accept it. Bender has had his chance to give evidence. Failing that, above is just an excuse and a poor one. Personal "signs" cannot be taken with seriousness where the Quran is concerned.
As a Sunni, this kind hogwash and easy acceptance of it really portrays a negative image of "Quran-only". You claim to follow Quran only - yet - repeatedly I find evidence on this board people tend to believe what they want to believe and call it "Allah's signs". There is absolutely no evidence that the word Muhammad is a title. There has been no other person ever claiming to be of this title. Just because someone has thought it up in their mind and are obstinately sticking to it - should these "thoughts" be given an airing in public and have any credence? No. Then everyone will make up whatever their heart wishes.
You reject "Hadith" on the basis of it "weakness" - yet - we Sunni's strongly reject all such interpretations. Here is one very clear reason why Sunnism has an easy and crucial advantage over "Quran only":
Besides over 1,500 years - it is development of Sunni thought and it bounding into coherent law. We have pretty clear principles that have developed over time as to how "law" can be derived. Before rejecting - it would be nice if people knew exactly what they were rejecting. But I seriously doubt 1 person has studied say - Usuls of Sunni thought.
I think people will find the following book very useful:
"Language and the interpretation of Islamic law" by Dr. Sukrija Husejn Ramic.
It is available freely - as Phd Thesis - if Phd theses are available free in your country. In England - it is available from the British library website.
The book doesn't teach you Hadith. It is about how law from source - whether Quran or Hadith - is derived from language.
Salaamun alayka,
No I did not find your tone to be harsh.
About signs, I will give you again the sign Allah showed me, as He is showing it to every one who wants to accept His ayaats as they are.
"
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّـهِ "
If you can't read Arabic then there are in here a lot of people who can translate it for you or maybe you know yourself some expert in Arabic language.
Now in what time is this sign written and how it is written?
With "how" I mean, is it telling a story or is it a command or is it statement or maybe something else.
If you can not accept the ayaats of Allah as they are then please don't blame me for your aversion against them.
Same goes for 26:105, if you can't accept it as it is, then I am afraid you have trouble accepting the ayaats of Allah as they are :&
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 30, 2013, 04:33:45 PM
Peace The_Chimp,
There are those who take one step too many in the interpretation of Quran. But you should know that not everyone around here believe in the threads and the statements put forth nor support them.
Salaamun alayka MoF,
Who are the ones who are interpreting?
Did I put some words in ayaats which are not there to make my point?
If so please show me and I will inshaAllah correct myself.
salaam,
Bender
Peace Bender,
Not particularly this topic although it is highly controversial a theory. Sounds very far fetched that people for over 1400 years been roaming the Earth falsely believing their prophet was named Muhammad while he was not.
Although, hadith mainly refers to him as Allah's apostle and not by his name most of the time.
Well, not matter if your reasoning would be true or not it is still viable to refer to him as Muhammad, if but because it is his title as you claim. Just remember many names in the middle-east have another meaning than simply a name, for example, both Hassan and Hussein have other uses as words, so with your reasoning these people cannot be real persons?
I am sure the prophet of Quran is named in the scripture. Maybe his name was Ahmad and changed to Muhammad like Ibrahim was only called Ibram before messengership.
You tend to get it wrong though with my and other's tendency to want to stick with the name or nickname Muhammad, that it is due to remnants of idolatry and we want to stubbornly defend this posture until the end. I could not care less about the name of the prophet of Quran, but it is natural that one uses a name to refer to something if but as a codename. We, humans, tend to give names to all sorts of things for easier reference and "prophet of Quran" is an awkward solution.
Give me the true name of the prophet and I will gladly change my usage. You said earlier that the true name might be right in front of our eyes so keep looking and later try to convince me about your discovery. Until then I will use Muhammad if not because this is the way God refers to him (and as you seem to claim, other apostles).
Philosophies are always appreciated, brother Bender, but until your theory gains foothold and other evidential backup it is still too controversial to believe. It is like a conspiracy theory. Many people believe you just do everything to nullify the religion of traditional muslims, just like the people around here who cut in the practices of praying, fasting and the likes. I am sure this may not be your intent but you are wary that the Quran is 1400 years old and not correctly understood like the ants of the valley that brother noshirk solved the riddle and meant something else.
Keep looking and I am open to further philosophies, but until then Muhammad is Muhammad.
God bless you
Quote from: Bender on May 30, 2013, 06:37:34 PM
Salaamun alayka,
No I did not find your tone to be harsh.
About signs, I will give you again the sign Allah showed me, as He is showing it to every one who wants to accept His ayaats as they are.
" مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّـهِ "
If you can't read Arabic then there are in here a lot of people who can translate it for you or maybe you know yourself some expert in Arabic language.
Now in what time is this sign written and how it is written?
With "how" I mean, is it telling a story or is it a command or is it statement or maybe something else.
If you can not accept the ayaats of Allah as they are then please don't blame me for your aversion against them.
Same goes for 26:105, if you can't accept it as it is, then I am afraid you have trouble accepting the ayaats of Allah as they are :&
Salaam,
Bender
Salaam, Bender
So why not lift the veil of the mystery and just give a clear simple explanation yourself:
Just give your translation of of that aya, say exactly what muhammad(un) means in each of the ayas in which it appears, your translation of those ayas. So may be we will know what eah is talkign about, because this thread in a way looks like we are trying to hold water between our fingers and of course, we don't catch it.
Salaam
Quote from: wrkmmn on May 30, 2013, 04:07:54 PM
Peace:
Why learning how law was derived from language for people of other times, when you can learn how to derive laws for our time in "The Principles of STATE AND GOVERNMENT IN ISLAM by Muhammad Assad".
Salam brother,
Try not to answer for the sake of answering. I don't really think you know what you are talking about.
The book I mentioned simply shows how law/value is derived from text, in other words how language can be interpreted. These are principles - irrespective of time.
Muhammad Assad's book is about governance, a totally different subject.
Thank you.
Quote from: Bender on May 30, 2013, 06:37:34 PM
Salaamun alayka,
No I did not find your tone to be harsh.
About signs, I will give you again the sign Allah showed me, as He is showing it to every one who wants to accept His ayaats as they are.
" مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّـهِ "
If you can't read Arabic then there are in here a lot of people who can translate it for you or maybe you know yourself some expert in Arabic language.
Now in what time is this sign written and how it is written?
With "how" I mean, is it telling a story or is it a command or is it statement or maybe something else.
If you can not accept the ayaats of Allah as they are then please don't blame me for your aversion against them.
Same goes for 26:105, if you can't accept it as it is, then I am afraid you have trouble accepting the ayaats of Allah as they are :&
Salaam,
Bender
I know Classical Arabic very well. Although a non-Native, I have studied to Masters level.
As to this:
"Now in what time is this sign written and how it is written?
With "how" I mean, is it telling a story or is it a command or is it statement or maybe something else.
If you can not accept the ayaats of Allah as they are then please don't blame me for your aversion against them."
I find it to be meaningless. What "sign" are you talking about?
That is beginning of verse verse 48:29. All it says is Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. There is ABSOLUTELY no indication that the word Muhammad is a title of some kind.
"If you can not accept the ayaats of Allah as they are then please don't blame me for your aversion against them."
So which verse am I not taking as it is? Please do not make petty accusations! In conclusion, you have no evidence for your "signs" and that is very clear. And you have not been able to present any.
As for the verse 26:105 that is simple and very clear
"The people of Noah denied the messengers"
Noah was the ONLY messenger sent to his people. A messenger point not only to Allah but to the messengers sent before him. Hence, his people denied him and those before him.
This is evidenced in the next verse:
"When their brother Noah said to them, "Will you not fear Allah ?"
You will not find a verse where any more messengers are mentioned addressing tribes OTHER THAN Noah. What does that tell you? Noah was the only messenger sent to his people
Might I be so bold to suggest, it is you that lacks expertise in Arabic.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 07:36:29 AM
Noah was the ONLY messenger sent to his people. A messenger point not only to Allah but to the messengers sent before him. Hence, his people denied him and those before him.
3:33 اِنَّ اللّٰہَ اصۡطَفٰۤی اٰدَمَ وَ نُوۡحًا وَّ اٰلَ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ اٰلَ عِمۡرٰنَ عَلَی الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ2:67 وَ اِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہٖۤ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡمُرُکُمۡ اَنۡ تَذۡبَحُوۡا بَقَرَۃً ؕ قَالُوۡۤا اَتَتَّخِذُنَا ہُزُوًا ؕ قَالَ اَعُوۡذُ بِاللّٰہِ اَنۡ اَکُوۡنَ مِنَ الۡجٰہِلِیۡنَAs per 2:67 BaqaratAN was the ONLY cow in buffaloes?
4:163 اِنَّاۤ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلَیۡکَ کَمَاۤ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلٰی نُوۡحٍ وَّ النَّبِیّٖنَ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِہٖ ۚ وَ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلٰۤی اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ وَ اِسۡحٰقَ وَ یَعۡقُوۡبَ وَ الۡاَسۡبَاطِ وَ عِیۡسٰی وَ اَیُّوۡبَ وَ یُوۡنُسَ وَ ہٰرُوۡنَ وَ سُلَیۡمٰنَ ۚ وَ اٰتَیۡنَا دَاوٗدَ زَبُوۡرًا 2:23 وَ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ فِیۡ رَیۡبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلۡنَا عَلٰی عَبۡدِنَا فَاۡتُوۡا بِسُوۡرَۃٍ مِّنۡ مِّثۡلِہٖ ۪ وَ ادۡعُوۡا شُہَدَآءَکُمۡ مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ صٰدِقِیۡنَAnd as per 2:23 SuratIN is an ONLY sura in alQuraan!
26:106 اِذۡ قَالَ لَہُمۡ اَخُوۡہُمۡ نُوۡحٌ اَلَا تَتَّقُوۡنَ2:68 قَالُوا ادۡعُ لَنَا رَبَّکَ یُبَیِّنۡ لَّنَا مَا ہِیَ ؕ قَالَ اِنَّہٗ یَقُوۡلُ اِنَّہَا بَقَرَۃٌ لَّا فَارِضٌ وَّ لَا بِکۡرٌ ؕ عَوَانٌۢ بَیۡنَ ذٰلِکَ ؕ فَافۡعَلُوۡا مَا تُؤۡمَرُوۡنَ2:19 اَوۡ کَصَیِّبٍ مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ فِیۡہِ ظُلُمٰتٌ وَّ رَعۡدٌ وَّ بَرۡقٌ ۚ یَجۡعَلُوۡنَ اَصَابِعَہُمۡ فِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ مِّنَ الصَّوَاعِقِ حَذَرَ الۡمَوۡتِ ؕ وَ اللّٰہُ مُحِیۡطٌۢ بِالۡکٰفِرِیۡنَAnd as per 2:68, BaqaratUN was ONLY cow in buffaloes.
And as per 2:19, Ra3dUN was ONLY thunder and BarqUN was ONLY lightening in this world!
May Allah open our hearts for Islam and allow us to accept the aayaat of Allah :pr
mmKhan
Peace all.
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 09:23:42 AM
ONLY cow in buffaloes?[/b]
What do you mean mmkhan?
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 09:23:42 AM
26:106 اِذۡ قَالَ لَہُمۡ اَخُوۡہُمۡ نُوۡحٌ اَلَا تَتَّقُوۡنَ
But the word
نُوۡحٌTanwin in that word is tanwin mankin/sharaf.So that tanwin is exist or not depending the surah, btw because that verse forced the word nuh to became a noun then it must including tanwin.
Btw that tanwin is just a dialectical problem
Peace.
So We inspired (fa-awhayna) to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration, and when Our command comes and the oven overflows, put into the ship from each [creature] two mates and your family, except those for whom the decree [of destruction] has proceeded. And do not address Me concerning those who have wronged; indeed, they are to be drowned. (23:27)
And when you have boarded the ship, you and those with you, then say, 'Praise to Allah who has saved us form the wrongdoing people.' (23:28)
And say, 'My Lord, let me land at a blessed landing place (munzalan), and You are the best to accommodate [us].' " (23:29)
Surely in that are ayats, and surely We put to the test. (23:30)
Then, after them, We brought forth another generation; (23:31)
And We sent (fa-arsalna) among them a messenger from themselves, [saying], "Serve Allah ; you have no deity other than Him; then will you not fear Him?" (23:32)
Salaam,
Here is a translation for all four aayaat using words MuhammadUN and MuhammadIN inshaAllah with the permission of my Lord, Allah. Translation is copied from Sahih International [with necessary changes]. Whatever I am going write down is from my personal understanding, please seek help theCreator, Allah to guide to the truth.
3:144 وَ مَا مُحَمَّدٌ اِلَّا رَسُوۡلٌ ۚ قَدۡ خَلَتۡ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِ الرُّسُلُ ؕ اَفَا۠ئِنۡ مَّاتَ اَوۡ قُتِلَ انۡقَلَبۡتُمۡ عَلٰۤی اَعۡقَابِکُمۡ ؕ وَ مَنۡ یَّنۡقَلِبۡ عَلٰی عَقِبَیۡہِ فَلَنۡ یَّضُرَّ اللّٰہَ شَیۡئًا ؕ وَ سَیَجۡزِی اللّٰہُ الشّٰکِرِیۡنَ
3:144 Muhammad is not but a messenger. Messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
My personal understanding about 3:144
Because of use of MuhammadUN [with tanween], it is not referring to a name of any person as you might have seen in my previous post. To understand the usage of tanween better, please take a look at the following aayaat:
HudAN - 2:2 | marazAN - 2:10 | naarAN - 2:17 | firaashAN, binaaAN, maaAN - 2:22 | yawmAN, shaiyAN - 2:48
laiylatAN - 2:51 | raghadAN, sujjadAN - 2:58 | QawlAN, rijzAN - 2:59 | a3iynAN - 2:60 | misrAN - 2:61 | qiradatAN - 2:65
JannaatIN, thamaratIN - 2:25 | samaawaatIN - 2:29 | kafirIN - 2:41 | nafsIN - 2:48 | unaasIN - 2:60 | saalihAN* - 2:62
ta3amIN, waahidIN, ghazabIN - 2:61 | quwwatIN - 2:63
GhishaawatUN, a3zaabUN - 2:7 | thummUN, bukmUN, u3myUN - 2:18 | muheetUN - 2:19 | QadeerUN - 2:20 | a3dlUN - 2:48
balaaaUN, a3zeemUN - 2:49 | KhairUN - 2:54 | khaufUN - 2:62 | faaridhUN, bikrUN, faaqiu3UN - 2:69
These words are taken just from let then 70 aayaat of sura baqarata, you may find thousands of examples in alQuraan, inshaAllah.
Now back to 3:144, it has to be translated as
And there is no praised one except the messenger. Indeed messengers have passed before* him. So, if he die or be killed, would YOU turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels will never does any harm to Allah. And Allah will reward those who are grateful.
Questions from 3:144.
- If he die or be killed would YOU turn back on your heels? How will YOU turn back on heels, when a messenger die 1400 years ago? Inqalabtum is not a past tense, but it has to be used in present and future. How?
- And whoso ever turns back on his heels will never does any harm to Allah. This part of aayat is also not in past tense. Then how do you understand this?
33:40 مَا کَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ اَبَاۤ اَحَدٍ مِّنۡ رِّجَالِکُمۡ وَ لٰکِنۡ رَّسُوۡلَ اللّٰہِ وَ خَاتَمَ النَّبِیّٖنَ ؕ وَ کَانَ اللّٰہُ بِکُلِّ شَیۡءٍ عَلِیۡمًا
33:40 Muhammad is not the father of one of your men, but the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
As per my personal understanding of 33:40, it has to be translated as:
Did not become a praised one to be a father of YOUR men, but being a messenger of Allah and having a stamp of prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.
To understand the meaning of khatama, please get back to my previous messages in this thread. And look at a word taba3a as seal in 16:108. To understand initial part of 33:40, please check 16:58 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=58) and 16:59 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=59).
16:58 وَ اِذَا بُشِّرَ اَحَدُہُمۡ بِالۡاُنۡثٰی ظَلَّ وَجۡہُہٗ مُسۡوَدًّا وَّ ہُوَ کَظِیۡمٌ
16:58 And when one of them is informed of a female, his face becomes dark, and he suppresses grief.
16:59 یَتَوَارٰی مِنَ الۡقَوۡمِ مِنۡ سُوۡٓءِ مَا بُشِّرَ بِہٖ ؕ اَیُمۡسِکُہٗ عَلٰی ہُوۡنٍ اَمۡ یَدُسُّہٗ فِی التُّرَابِ ؕ اَلَا سَآءَ مَا یَحۡکُمُوۡنَ
16:59 He hides himself from the people because of the ill of which he has been informed. Should he keep it in humiliation or bury it in the ground? Unquestionably, evil is what they decide.
Questions about 33:40
- How could be Muhammad of 1400 years back be a father of YOUR men?
- If he was last of the prophets, then how there are still prophets who are guiding people as per 5:44?
47:2 وَ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَ اٰمَنُوۡا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلٰی مُحَمَّدٍ وَّ ہُوَ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّہِمۡ ۙ کَفَّرَ عَنۡہُمۡ سَیِّاٰتِہِمۡ وَ اَصۡلَحَ بَالَہُمۡ
47:2 And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad - and it is the truth from their Lord - He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.
As per my personal understanding of 47:2, it has to be translated as:
And those who believe and do rectified deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon any praised one and that is the truth from their Lord. He will hide from them their misdeeds and rectify their condition.
Nuzzila is used in 47:2, which is not for past, but it is used for present and future, please take a look at 25:25 for exact word.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ ؕ وَ الَّذِیۡنَ مَعَہٗۤ اَشِدَّآءُ عَلَی الۡکُفَّارِ رُحَمَآءُ بَیۡنَہُمۡ تَرٰىہُمۡ رُکَّعًا سُجَّدًا یَّبۡتَغُوۡنَ فَضۡلًا مِّنَ اللّٰہِ وَ رِضۡوَانًا ۫ سِیۡمَاہُمۡ فِیۡ وُجُوۡہِہِمۡ مِّنۡ اَثَرِ السُّجُوۡدِ ؕ ذٰلِکَ مَثَلُہُمۡ فِی التَّوۡرٰىۃِ ۚۖۛ وَ مَثَلُہُمۡ فِی الۡاِنۡجِیۡلِ ۚ۟ۛ کَزَرۡعٍ اَخۡرَجَ شَطۡـَٔہٗ فَاٰزَرَہٗ فَاسۡتَغۡلَظَ فَاسۡتَوٰی عَلٰی سُوۡقِہٖ یُعۡجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِیَغِیۡظَ بِہِمُ الۡکُفَّارَ ؕ وَعَدَ اللّٰہُ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ مِنۡہُمۡ مَّغۡفِرَۃً وَّ اَجۡرًا عَظِیۡمًا
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating, seeking bounty from Allah and pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.
As per my personal understanding of 48:29, it has to be translated as
The praised one is a messenger of Allah, and those with him are forceful......
Questions about 48:29.
- Who is YOU in "...you see them bowing and prostrating..."?
- If that YOU is referring to us, how can we see those people who passed 1400 years ago?
- Yabtaghoona is muzaarey, that means they are not referring to past, but is used in present and future, how?
- Example of people who are with Muhammad are given in alTawraat and alInjeel and Muhammad's example was not given, why?
- This part of aayat "Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward." Is this forgiveness and great reward on for those people who are with Muhammad 1400 years back?
These are details of my personal understanding of all four aayaat with the word Muhammad(UN)/(IN) in it. Hope this may be of some help if Allah permits, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guides us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Earthdom on May 31, 2013, 10:23:53 AM
Peace all.
What do you mean mmkhan?
Salaamun a3laika Earthdom,
Please see the post above that...
Quote
But the word نُوۡحٌ
Tanwin in that word is tanwin mankin/sharaf.So that tanwin is exist or not depending the surah, btw because that verse forced the word nuh to became a noun then it must including tanwin.
Btw that tanwin is just a dialectical problem
Red: I am sure that alQuraan is the Book of Allah and there is a dialectical problem in it? :hmm
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 09:23:42 AM
3:33 اِنَّ اللّٰہَ اصۡطَفٰۤی اٰدَمَ وَ نُوۡحًا وَّ اٰلَ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ اٰلَ عِمۡرٰنَ عَلَی الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ
2:67 وَ اِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہٖۤ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡمُرُکُمۡ اَنۡ تَذۡبَحُوۡا بَقَرَۃً ؕ قَالُوۡۤا اَتَتَّخِذُنَا ہُزُوًا ؕ قَالَ اَعُوۡذُ بِاللّٰہِ اَنۡ اَکُوۡنَ مِنَ الۡجٰہِلِیۡنَ
As per 2:67 BaqaratAN was the ONLY cow in buffaloes?
4:163 اِنَّاۤ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلَیۡکَ کَمَاۤ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلٰی نُوۡحٍ وَّ النَّبِیّٖنَ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِہٖ ۚ وَ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلٰۤی اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ وَ اِسۡحٰقَ وَ یَعۡقُوۡبَ وَ الۡاَسۡبَاطِ وَ عِیۡسٰی وَ اَیُّوۡبَ وَ یُوۡنُسَ وَ ہٰرُوۡنَ وَ سُلَیۡمٰنَ ۚ وَ اٰتَیۡنَا دَاوٗدَ زَبُوۡرًا
2:23 وَ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ فِیۡ رَیۡبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلۡنَا عَلٰی عَبۡدِنَا فَاۡتُوۡا بِسُوۡرَۃٍ مِّنۡ مِّثۡلِہٖ ۪ وَ ادۡعُوۡا شُہَدَآءَکُمۡ مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ صٰدِقِیۡنَ
And as per 2:23 SuratIN is an ONLY sura in alQuraan!
26:106 اِذۡ قَالَ لَہُمۡ اَخُوۡہُمۡ نُوۡحٌ اَلَا تَتَّقُوۡنَ
2:68 قَالُوا ادۡعُ لَنَا رَبَّکَ یُبَیِّنۡ لَّنَا مَا ہِیَ ؕ قَالَ اِنَّہٗ یَقُوۡلُ اِنَّہَا بَقَرَۃٌ لَّا فَارِضٌ وَّ لَا بِکۡرٌ ؕ عَوَانٌۢ بَیۡنَ ذٰلِکَ ؕ فَافۡعَلُوۡا مَا تُؤۡمَرُوۡنَ
2:19 اَوۡ کَصَیِّبٍ مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ فِیۡہِ ظُلُمٰتٌ وَّ رَعۡدٌ وَّ بَرۡقٌ ۚ یَجۡعَلُوۡنَ اَصَابِعَہُمۡ فِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ مِّنَ الصَّوَاعِقِ حَذَرَ الۡمَوۡتِ ؕ وَ اللّٰہُ مُحِیۡطٌۢ بِالۡکٰفِرِیۡنَ
And as per 2:68, BaqaratUN was ONLY cow in buffaloes.
And as per 2:19, Ra3dUN was ONLY thunder and BarqUN was ONLY lightening in this world!
May Allah open our hearts for Islam and allow us to accept the aayaat of Allah :pr
mmKhan
Greetings,
mmKhan - you leave a lot unsaid. It is difficult to ascertain what you are trying to say. Please, state your point and not just paste verses.
QuoteAs per 2:67 BaqaratAN was the ONLY cow in buffaloes?
What was the point of this?
Buffaloes and Cows are 2 different animals!!!!!!!!!!
Also that verse is talking about a single cow - that is true.
QuoteAnd as per 2:23 SuratIN is an ONLY sura in alQuraan!
In that verse only a single chapter is meant. And that is it.
Having said that - I do not know what point you are trying to make. Rather than trying to be clever, if that is the game you are playing. Why don't you state you point?
mmKhan,
Quote"Because of use of MuhammadUN [with tanween], it is not referring to a name of any person as you might have seen in my previous post."
huh? I don't think you know much Arabic at all. Do you?
Tanween comes on ALL INDEFINITE NOUNS - except those that are Ghair Munsarif, upon whom Tanween is not applicable. For example the name Ibrahim - it doesn't take tanween becuase it is Gahir Munsarif - as non-Arabic names do not accept tanween. As all names are nouns - tanween occurs on them. Just because tanween is upon the name Muhammad that does NOT mean it isn't a name.
Please improve your understanding of Arabic. What you suggest is complete hogwash.
QuoteThese words are taken just from let then 70 aayaat of sura baqarata, you may find thousands of examples in alQuraan, inshaAllah.
So what? What does it show? Like I said. Tanween occurs on all indefinite nouns - unless there is reason for it not to be there.
QuoteAnd there is no praised one except the messenger. Indeed messengers have passed before* him. So, if he die or be killed, would YOU turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels will never does any harm to Allah. And Allah will reward those who are grateful.
I am sorry. I do not think you understand Arabic. Understanding tanween is just the basics.
Here is where your argument falls down:
QuoteDid not become a praised one to be a father of YOUR men, but being a messenger of Allah and having a stamp of prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.
Your translation is completely wrong. See you "invented" the translation to fit in with your argument. Ma Kana does not mean: "Did not become"
Quote- How could be Muhammad of 1400 years back be a father of YOUR men?
- If he was last of the prophets, then how there are still prophets who are guiding people as per 5:44?
1. Again - your poor understanding has let you down. The verse is in - it is NOT referring to men today.
2. There are NO MORE prophets. And neither do verse 5:44 say there are
QuoteAnd those who believe and do rectified deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon any praised one and that is the truth from their Lord. He will hide from them their misdeeds and rectify their condition.
" any praised one" Where did ANY come from? Again - you invented it to fit in with your "personal understanding"
You are hiding behind this "personal understanding". But this is about being CLEARLY wrong.
"Nuzzila is used in 47:2, which is not for past, but it is used for present and future, please take a look at 25:25 for exact word."
Again your understanding lets you down. Arabic can use Present tense to as past tense and to signify tense-less sentence. Also, please read your translation back to yourself . . . why in English have you translated in past?
"has been sent down upon" <- - - This is your translation!
"These are details of my personal understanding of all four aayaat with the word Muhammad(UN)/(IN) in it. Hope this may be of some help if Allah permits, inshaAllah."
I am sorry - but this is reckless ignorance and clear mistakes. And not "personal understanding"
See - this is why "quran-only" leaves a lot to be desired. This is clear fitnah! Whatever anyone feels like - they invent new meanings and understanding.
Mr mmKhan - why do I get the feeling you have some other hidden agenda?
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 11:50:55 AM
Salaam,
Here is a translation for all four ayaat using words MuhammadUN and MuhammadIN inshaAllah with the permission of my Lord, Allah. Translation is copied from Sahih International [with necessary changes]. Whatever I am going write down is from my personal understanding, please seek help theCreator, Allah to guide to the truth.
3:144 وَ مَا مُحَمَّدٌ اِلَّا رَسُوۡلٌ ۚ قَدۡ خَلَتۡ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِ الرُّسُلُ ؕ اَفَا۠ئِنۡ مَّاتَ اَوۡ قُتِلَ انۡقَلَبۡتُمۡ عَلٰۤی اَعۡقَابِکُمۡ ؕ وَ مَنۡ یَّنۡقَلِبۡ عَلٰی عَقِبَیۡہِ فَلَنۡ یَّضُرَّ اللّٰہَ شَیۡئًا ؕ وَ سَیَجۡزِی اللّٰہُ الشّٰکِرِیۡنَ
3:144 Muhammad is not but a messenger. Messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
My personal understanding about 3:144
Because of use of MuhammadUN [with tanween], it is not referring to a name of any person as you might have seen in my previous post. To understand the usage of tanween better, please take a look at the following aayaat:
HudAN - 2:2 | marazAN - 2:10 | naarAN - 2:17 | firaashAN, binaaAN, maaAN - 2:22 | yawmAN, shaiyAN - 2:48
laiylatAN - 2:51 | raghadAN, sujjadAN - 2:58 | QawlAN, rijzAN - 2:59 | a3iynAN - 2:60 | misrAN - 2:61 | qiradatAN - 2:65
JannaatIN, thamaratIN - 2:25 | samaawaatIN - 2:29 | kafirIN - 2:41 | nafsIN - 2:48 | unaasIN - 2:60 | saalihAN* - 2:62
ta3amIN, waahidIN, ghazabIN - 2:61 | quwwatIN - 2:63
GhishaawatUN, a3zaabUN - 2:7 | thummUN, bukmUN, u3myUN - 2:18 | muheetUN - 2:19 | QadeerUN - 2:20 | a3dlUN - 2:48
balaaaUN, a3zeemUN - 2:49 | KhairUN - 2:54 | khaufUN - 2:62 | faaridhUN, bikrUN, faaqiu3UN - 2:69
These words are taken just from let then 70 aayaat of sura baqarata, you may find thousands of examples in alQuraan, inshaAllah.
Now back to 3:144, it has to be translated as
And there is no praised one except the messenger. Indeed messengers have passed before* him. So, if he die or be killed, would YOU turn back on your heels? And whoever turns back on his heels will never does any harm to Allah. And Allah will reward those who are grateful.
Questions from 3:144.
- If he die or be killed would YOU turn back on your heels? How will YOU turn back on heels, when a messenger die 1400 years ago? Inqalabtum is not a past tense, but it has to be used in present and future. How?
- And whoso ever turns back on his heels will never does any harm to Allah. This part of aayat is also not in past tense. Then how do you understand this?
33:40 مَا کَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ اَبَاۤ اَحَدٍ مِّنۡ رِّجَالِکُمۡ وَ لٰکِنۡ رَّسُوۡلَ اللّٰہِ وَ خَاتَمَ النَّبِیّٖنَ ؕ وَ کَانَ اللّٰہُ بِکُلِّ شَیۡءٍ عَلِیۡمًا
33:40 Muhammad is not the father of one of your men, but the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.
As per my personal understanding of 33:40, it has to be translated as:
Did not become a praised one to be a father of YOUR men, but being a messenger of Allah and having a stamp of prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.
To understand the meaning of khatama, please get back to my previous messages in this thread. And look at a word taba3a as seal in 16:108. To understand initial part of 33:40, please check 16:58 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=58) and 16:59 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=59).
16:58 وَ اِذَا بُشِّرَ اَحَدُہُمۡ بِالۡاُنۡثٰی ظَلَّ وَجۡہُہٗ مُسۡوَدًّا وَّ ہُوَ کَظِیۡمٌ
16:58 And when one of them is informed of a female, his face becomes dark, and he suppresses grief.
16:59 یَتَوَارٰی مِنَ الۡقَوۡمِ مِنۡ سُوۡٓءِ مَا بُشِّرَ بِہٖ ؕ اَیُمۡسِکُہٗ عَلٰی ہُوۡنٍ اَمۡ یَدُسُّہٗ فِی التُّرَابِ ؕ اَلَا سَآءَ مَا یَحۡکُمُوۡنَ
16:59 He hides himself from the people because of the ill of which he has been informed. Should he keep it in humiliation or bury it in the ground? Unquestionably, evil is what they decide.
Questions about 33:40
- How could be Muhammad of 1400 years back be a father of YOUR men?
- If he was last of the prophets, then how there are still prophets who are guiding people as per 5:44?
47:2 وَ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَ اٰمَنُوۡا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلٰی مُحَمَّدٍ وَّ ہُوَ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّہِمۡ ۙ کَفَّرَ عَنۡہُمۡ سَیِّاٰتِہِمۡ وَ اَصۡلَحَ بَالَہُمۡ
47:2 And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad - and it is the truth from their Lord - He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.
As per my personal understanding of 47:2, it has to be translated as:
And those who believe and do rectified deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon any praised one and that is the truth from their Lord. He will hide from them their misdeeds and rectify their condition.
Nuzzila is used in 47:2, which is not for past, but it is used for present and future, please take a look at 25:25 for exact word.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ ؕ وَ الَّذِیۡنَ مَعَہٗۤ اَشِدَّآءُ عَلَی الۡکُفَّارِ رُحَمَآءُ بَیۡنَہُمۡ تَرٰىہُمۡ رُکَّعًا سُجَّدًا یَّبۡتَغُوۡنَ فَضۡلًا مِّنَ اللّٰہِ وَ رِضۡوَانًا ۫ سِیۡمَاہُمۡ فِیۡ وُجُوۡہِہِمۡ مِّنۡ اَثَرِ السُّجُوۡدِ ؕ ذٰلِکَ مَثَلُہُمۡ فِی التَّوۡرٰىۃِ ۚۖۛ وَ مَثَلُہُمۡ فِی الۡاِنۡجِیۡلِ ۚ۟ۛ کَزَرۡعٍ اَخۡرَجَ شَطۡـَٔہٗ فَاٰزَرَہٗ فَاسۡتَغۡلَظَ فَاسۡتَوٰی عَلٰی سُوۡقِہٖ یُعۡجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِیَغِیۡظَ بِہِمُ الۡکُفَّارَ ؕ وَعَدَ اللّٰہُ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ مِنۡہُمۡ مَّغۡفِرَۃً وَّ اَجۡرًا عَظِیۡمًا
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating, seeking bounty from Allah and pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.
As per my personal understanding of 48:29, it has to be translated as
The praised one is a messenger of Allah, and those with him are forceful......
Questions about 48:29.
- Who is YOU in "...you see them bowing and prostrating..."?
- If that YOU is referring to us, how can we see those people who passed 1400 years ago?
- Yabtaghoona is muzaarey, that means they are not referring to past, but is used in present and future, how?
- Example of people who are with Muhammad are given in alTawraat and alInjeel and Muhammad's example was not given, why?
- This part of aayat "Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward." Is this forgiveness and great reward on for those people who are with Muhammad 1400 years back?
These are details of my personal understanding of all four aayaat with the word Muhammad(UN)/(IN) in it. Hope this may be of some help if Allah permits, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guides us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Before anything else, rather than past nor present, what verbs in Arabic indicate is whther the action is completed or uncompleted. Completed or uncompleted actions can be in the past, the present, or the future. It is from other pointers from which the time of the action has to be gathered.
In many cases, for obvious reasons what is most proper int he Qur'an is that what must be valid for all time not be characterised by a fixed and that it should not be adscribed to past present or future.
Assuming that the Prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed was told to say something told to him by God and is so expressed in the qur'an, obviously it was indeed said in the past, the question is whether it is to be valid after that. In that case:
What is the problem that Muhamadun be name or title as far as the Qur'an ins concerned. Or is it being suggested that the Qur'an was revealed to more than one Prophet?
I appreciate that finally translations have been provided, or the understanding of the ayas, but I am still puzzled as to how does that affect the prophet who transmitted the Qur'an to the rest people at large. Is that it, that there was more than one prophet, what is being put forward?
As to the question of he being father of rijal as opposed to daughters, that has been traditionally aknowledged. Is there some other aspect of it that is new and tied to the titleness of Muhammadun and not tied the namness of Muhammadun?
On the other hand, rijaal is not necessarily only males, it can be persons of certain standing or eminence or capability in whatever domain, or also any person.
Salaam
Salaam
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 12:29:41 PM
Also that verse is talking about a single cow - that is true.
In that verse only a single chapter is meant. And that is it.
Greetings to you too,
Red: This is what I was asking you. Why it becomes "a single" in the aayaat quoted and why it became "ONLY" when it comes to Nooh? Check what you wrote in your previous message. This is what I was trying to clarify.
Thank Allah that I am not done masters in Arabic, alhamduliAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 01:31:43 PM
Greetings to you too,
Red: This is what I was asking you. Why it becomes "a single" in the aayaat quoted and why it became "ONLY" when it comes to Nooh? Check what you wrote in your previous message. This is what I was trying to clarify.
Thank Allah that I am not done masters in Arabic, alhamduliAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
mmKhan
Verse 2:67
And [recall] when Moses said to his people, "Indeed, Allah commands you to slaughter a cow." They said, "Do you take us in ridicule?" He said, "I seek refuge in Allah from being among the ignorant."
A single cow is mentioned because that is what was going to be slaughtered! It is "single" because of the linguistic form of the word: Indefinite singular noun.
For example:
I want an apple in Arabic is: اريد تفاحا
You can understand from this a single apple is meant.
As for this:
" "ONLY" when it comes to Nooh? "
You do realize that - ONLY is from me and NOT in the verse!
In the verse:
3:33
Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran over the worlds -
Noah is name as is Adam as is Abraham and Imran. They are ALL names!
"Thank Allah that I am not done masters in Arabic, alhamduliAllah."
A pity - then you would not make basic mistakes. And do I take it you have chosen to stay silent on the other questions?
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
Salaam,
I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween (http://s16.postimage.org/7g525pigh/dammahtain1.jpg) either two of them, as in Muhammed i.e., (http://s11.postimage.org/61fz5f1nz/Muhammed.png)
Other prophet's names used in AlQuraan are as:
اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ
اِسۡحٰقَ
اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ
ہٰرُوۡنَ
مُوۡسٰی
سُلَیۡمٰنَ
دَاوٗدَ
اَیُّوۡبَ
یُوۡسُفَ
یَعۡقُوۡبَ
اِلۡیَاسَ
زَکَرِیَّا
یَحۡیٰی
عِیۡسٰی
یُوۡنُسَ
Why not any name ends with tanween? Is Muhammed not a name? If it is a name then how about 6:114 and 6:139?
6:114 اَفَغَیۡرَ اللّٰہِ اَبۡتَغِیۡ حَکَمًا وَّ ہُوَ الَّذِیۡۤ اَنۡزَلَ اِلَیۡکُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ مُفَصَّلًا ؕ وَ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ اَنَّہٗ مُنَزَّلٌ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکَ بِالۡحَقِّ فَلَا تَکُوۡنَنَّ مِنَ الۡمُمۡتَرِیۡنَ
6:114 Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
مُنَزَّلٌ is set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ so why don't they used it as a name? Please click here (http://free-minds.org/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=114) to see other translations of this aayat.
6:139 وَ قَالُوۡا مَا فِیۡ بُطُوۡنِ ہٰذِہِ الۡاَنۡعَامِ خَالِصَۃٌ لِّذُکُوۡرِنَا وَ مُحَرَّمٌ عَلٰۤی اَزۡوَاجِنَا ۚ وَ اِنۡ یَّکُنۡ مَّیۡتَۃً فَہُمۡ فِیۡہِ شُرَکَآءُ ؕ سَیَجۡزِیۡہِمۡ وَصۡفَہُمۡ ؕ اِنَّہٗ حَکِیۡمٌ عَلِیۡمٌ
6:139 And they say, "What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is dead, then all of them have shares therein." He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing.
مُحَرَّمٌ is also set on same weight as مُحَمَّدٌ, so why did they translate it and why not use as a name? Please click here (http://free-minds.org/translation.jsp?chapter=6&verse=139) to see other translations.
If we also translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, which is derived from the word حَمۡدُ, means praise and مُحَمَّدٌ means praised one.
48:29 مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ...
48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah... [regular translation]
If we translate the word مُحَمَّدٌ, 48:29 will be translated as "Praised one is the Messenger of Allah....", this means whoever is the Messenger of Allah is the praised one.
Fortunately or unfortunately I don't have any evidence, not a single aayat that says that AlQuraan was given to Muhammad. Why there is no such aayat if it was given to him?
All explanations, comments, suggestions, critics, advises, support are welcome.
May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path :pr
mmKhan
Mr Khan,
Your original post shows an absolute basic error of Arabic. Why are you obstinately continuing in this, when you clearly know that you do not understand Arabic? If you do not know about Tanween in Arabic, then this does mean you do not understand Arabic. In your last post you had the audacity to suggest that you did not need Arabic.
Can I suggest, if you are that interested in studying Quran, then please learn the language. And not pretend to know a lot and end up misguiding other.
Thank you.
Looks like there are several of them misguiding others here...
I wonder... do they do it on purpose?
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 01:06:52 PM
See - this is why "quran-only" leaves a lot to be desired. This is clear fitnah! Whatever anyone feels like - they invent new meanings and understanding.
6:20 اَلَّذِیۡنَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ یَعۡرِفُوۡنَہٗ کَمَا یَعۡرِفُوۡنَ اَبۡنَآءَہُمۡ ۘ اَلَّذِیۡنَ خَسِرُوۡۤا اَنۡفُسَہُمۡ فَہُمۡ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ6:20 Those to whom We have given alKitaab recognize it as they recognize their sons. Those who will lose themselves do not believe.
Do you know what alKitaab is? I think you don't.
6:21 وَ مَنۡ اَظۡلَمُ مِمَّنِ افۡتَرٰی عَلَی اللّٰہِ کَذِبًا اَوۡ کَذَّبَ بِاٰیٰتِہٖ ؕ اِنَّہٗ لَا یُفۡلِحُ الظّٰلِمُوۡنَ 6:21 And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.
If you don't understand this aayat, surely you will come to know soon.
6:22 وَ یَوۡمَ نَحۡشُرُہُمۡ جَمِیۡعًا ثُمَّ نَقُوۡلُ لِلَّذِیۡنَ اَشۡرَکُوۡۤا اَیۡنَ شُرَکَآؤُکُمُ الَّذِیۡنَ کُنۡتُمۡ تَزۡعُمُوۡنَ 6:22 And the Day We will gather them all together; then We will say to those who associated others with Allah , "Where are your 'partners' that you used to claim?"
6:23 ثُمَّ لَمۡ تَکُنۡ فِتۡنَتُہُمۡ اِلَّاۤ اَنۡ قَالُوۡا وَ اللّٰہِ رَبِّنَا مَا کُنَّا مُشۡرِکِیۡنَ6:23 Then there will be no examination except they will say, "By Allah , our Lord, we were not those who associated."
This is the real fitna. And do you understand what these aayaat are about? Or do you think this is for Christians, Jews, Hindus and others? Take it on yourself and see, how it fits perfectly. Because if keeping your rasool besides Allah is not shirk for you? Why we need them for NOW? And finally it is said that "
By Allah , our Lord, we were not those who associated." This happens because you don't consider it as shirk. This is shirk to me, and alhamduliAllah, by my Lord's grace and blessings I am not of mushriks. :hail
6:24 اُنۡظُرۡ کَیۡفَ کَذَبُوۡا عَلٰۤی اَنۡفُسِہِمۡ وَ ضَلَّ عَنۡہُمۡ مَّا کَانُوۡا یَفۡتَرُوۡنَ6:24 See how they will lie about themselves. And lost from them will be what they used to invent.
Yaftaroon.... What ever is invented is going to lost, and many of having invented hadith, rasool, nabi, etc.
6:25 وَ مِنۡہُمۡ مَّنۡ یَّسۡتَمِعُ اِلَیۡکَ ۚ وَ جَعَلۡنَا عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ اَکِنَّۃً اَنۡ یَّفۡقَہُوۡہُ وَ فِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ وَقۡرًا ؕ وَ اِنۡ یَّرَوۡا کُلَّ اٰیَۃٍ لَّا یُؤۡمِنُوۡا بِہَا ؕ حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءُوۡکَ یُجَادِلُوۡنَکَ یَقُوۡلُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اَسَاطِیۡرُ الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ6:25 And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, "This is not but legends of the former peoples."
Green: See how truthful my Lord is...
Red: I am seeing that...
Blue: Wow! So many stories of former people we have... even when it is not in alQuraan actually... SubhanAllah!
Quote
Mr mmKhan - why do I get the feeling you have some other hidden agenda?
Nothing to worry bro... it seems, you see beyond your limits.
10:41 وَ اِنۡ کَذَّبُوۡکَ فَقُلۡ لِّیۡ عَمَلِیۡ وَ لَکُمۡ عَمَلُکُمۡ ۚ اَنۡتُمۡ بَرِیۡٓـــُٔوۡنَ مِمَّاۤ اَعۡمَلُ وَ اَنَا بَرِیۡٓءٌ مِّمَّا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ10:41 And if they deny you, then say, "For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do."
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: huruf on May 31, 2013, 01:09:29 PM
Before anything else, rather than past nor present, what verbs in Arabic indicate is whther the action is completed or uncompleted. Completed or uncompleted actions can be in the past, the present, or the future. It is from other pointers from which the time of the action has to be gathered.
In many cases, for obvious reasons what is most proper int he Qur'an is that what must be valid for all time not be characterised by a fixed and that it should not be adscribed to past present or future.
Salaam huruf,
Can you please get me some aayaat as an example to what you said?
Quote
Assuming that the Prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed was told to say something told to him by God and is so expressed in the qur'an, obviously it was indeed said in the past, the question is whether it is to be valid after that. In that case:
What is the problem that Muhamadun be name or title as far as the Qur'an ins concerned. Or is it being suggested that the Qur'an was revealed to more than one Prophet?
I am really surprise to see that no one bothers to look for to whom alTauraat was revealed. And we are not in trouble even if we don't find anyone mentioned for the same. But when it comes to alQuraan, someone is needed, somehow! Does this really matter? specially when it is not mentioned?
Red: The problem with it is, we will be lying on Allah if we say something that is not said by Allah. Look what Allah says:
10:17 فَمَنۡ اَظۡلَمُ مِمَّنِ افۡتَرٰی عَلَی اللّٰہِ کَذِبًا اَوۡ کَذَّبَ بِاٰیٰتِہٖ ؕ اِنَّہٗ لَا یُفۡلِحُ الۡمُجۡرِمُوۡنَ10:17 So who is more unjust than he who invents a lie about Allah or denies His signs? Indeed, the criminals will not succeed
Is it not dangerous? :& May Allah protect us :pr
Quote
I appreciate that finally translations have been provided, or the understanding of the ayas, but I am still puzzled as to how does that affect the prophet who transmitted the Qur'an to the rest people at large. Is that it, that there was more than one prophet, what is being put forward?
Can you please get me a single aayat mentioning the red highlighted part above? If not, then please remember the above quoted aayat.
Quote
As to the question of he being father of rijal as opposed to daughters, that has been traditionally aknowledged. Is there some other aspect of it that is new and tied to the titleness of Muhammadun and not tied the namness of Muhammadun?
Muhammadun is not the title of any known person or something... but every rasool is Muhammadun.
Quote
On the other hand, rijaal is not necessarily only males, it can be persons of certain standing or eminence or capability in whatever domain, or also any person.
Salaam
Salaam
Sorry, I cannot say anything here on rijaal as I have to study on this subject.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 03:53:01 PM
Mr Khan,
Your original post shows an absolute basic error of Arabic. Why are you obstinately continuing in this, when you clearly know that you do not understand Arabic? If you do not know about Tanween in Arabic, then this does mean you do not understand Arabic. In your last post you had the audacity to suggest that you did not need Arabic.
Brother Chimp,
Do you mean that every person need to do masters in Arabic to understand alQuraan? Do you have any aayat to support your claim? How do you understand 2:185?
2:185 شَہۡرُ رَمَضَانَ الَّذِیۡۤ اُنۡزِلَ فِیۡہِ الۡقُرۡاٰنُ ہُدًی لِّلنَّاسِ وَ بَیِّنٰتٍ مِّنَ الۡہُدٰی وَ الۡفُرۡقَانِ ۚ فَمَنۡ شَہِدَ مِنۡکُمُ الشَّہۡرَ فَلۡیَصُمۡہُ ؕ وَ مَنۡ کَانَ مَرِیۡضًا اَوۡ عَلٰی سَفَرٍ فَعِدَّۃٌ مِّنۡ اَیَّامٍ اُخَرَ ؕ یُرِیۡدُ اللّٰہُ بِکُمُ الۡیُسۡرَ وَ لَا یُرِیۡدُ بِکُمُ الۡعُسۡرَ ۫ وَ لِتُکۡمِلُوا الۡعِدَّۃَ وَ لِتُکَبِّرُوا اللّٰہَ عَلٰی مَا ہَدٰىکُمۡ وَ لَعَلَّکُمۡ تَشۡکُرُوۡنَ2:185 The month of Ramadhan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for the people and clear proofs of guidance and criterion. So whoever sights the month, let him fast it; and whoever is ill or on a journey - then an equal number of other days. Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship and for you to complete the period and to glorify Allah for that which He has guided you; and perhaps you will be grateful.
I am interested to know how do you understand the highlighted part above?
A guidance for alNaasi. How? After learning man made Arabic grammar? Or alNaas does not mean all humans, but referring only to ulamas? I don't see it is mentioned here... Do you have any other aayat to quote on this, please do so, I am open for corrections.
2:2 ذٰلِکَ الۡکِتٰبُ لَا رَیۡبَ ۚۖۛ فِیۡہِ ۚۛ ہُدًی لِّلۡمُتَّقِیۡنَ2:2 That is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for alMuttaqeena
Again, alKitaab guides to alMuttaqeen. Do you want to say, every muttaqee is already done masters in man made Arabic grammar? Think about it bro.
Quote
Can I suggest, if you are that interested in studying Quran, then please learn the language. And not pretend to know a lot and end up misguiding other.
Thank you.
10:108 قُلۡ یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّاسُ قَدۡ جَآءَکُمُ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّکُمۡ ۚ فَمَنِ اہۡتَدٰی فَاِنَّمَا یَہۡتَدِیۡ لِنَفۡسِہٖ ۚ وَ مَنۡ ضَلَّ فَاِنَّمَا یَضِلُّ عَلَیۡہَا ۚ وَ مَاۤ اَنَا عَلَیۡکُمۡ بِوَکِیۡلٍ10:108 Say, "O mankind, the truth has come to you from your Lord, so whoever is guided is only guided for his soul, and whoever goes astray only goes astray against it. And I am not over you a manager."
7:186 مَنۡ یُّضۡلِلِ اللّٰہُ فَلَا ہَادِیَ لَہٗ ؕ وَ یَذَرُہُمۡ فِیۡ طُغۡیَانِہِمۡ یَعۡمَہُوۡنَ7:186 Whoever Allah sends astray - there is no guide for him. And He leaves them in their transgression, wandering blindly.
You see Allah is the one Who misguides , who am I to misguide anyone? But why Allah misguides is the real question...
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 07:51:01 PM
6:20 اَلَّذِیۡنَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُمُ الۡکِتٰبَ یَعۡرِفُوۡنَہٗ کَمَا یَعۡرِفُوۡنَ اَبۡنَآءَہُمۡ ۘ اَلَّذِیۡنَ خَسِرُوۡۤا اَنۡفُسَہُمۡ فَہُمۡ لَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ
6:20 Those to whom We have given alKitaab recognize it as they recognize their sons. Those who will lose themselves do not believe.
Do you know what alKitaab is? I think you don't.
6:21 وَ مَنۡ اَظۡلَمُ مِمَّنِ افۡتَرٰی عَلَی اللّٰہِ کَذِبًا اَوۡ کَذَّبَ بِاٰیٰتِہٖ ؕ اِنَّہٗ لَا یُفۡلِحُ الظّٰلِمُوۡنَ
6:21 And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses? Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.
If you don't understand this aayat, surely you will come to know soon.
6:22 وَ یَوۡمَ نَحۡشُرُہُمۡ جَمِیۡعًا ثُمَّ نَقُوۡلُ لِلَّذِیۡنَ اَشۡرَکُوۡۤا اَیۡنَ شُرَکَآؤُکُمُ الَّذِیۡنَ کُنۡتُمۡ تَزۡعُمُوۡنَ
6:22 And the Day We will gather them all together; then We will say to those who associated others with Allah , "Where are your 'partners' that you used to claim?"
6:23 ثُمَّ لَمۡ تَکُنۡ فِتۡنَتُہُمۡ اِلَّاۤ اَنۡ قَالُوۡا وَ اللّٰہِ رَبِّنَا مَا کُنَّا مُشۡرِکِیۡنَ
6:23 Then there will be no examination except they will say, "By Allah , our Lord, we were not those who associated."
This is the real fitna. And do you understand what these aayaat are about? Or do you think this is for Christians, Jews, Hindus and others? Take it on yourself and see, how it fits perfectly. Because if keeping your rasool besides Allah is not shirk for you? Why we need them for NOW? And finally it is said that "By Allah , our Lord, we were not those who associated." This happens because you don't consider it as shirk. This is shirk to me, and alhamduliAllah, by my Lord's grace and blessings I am not of mushriks. :hail
6:24 اُنۡظُرۡ کَیۡفَ کَذَبُوۡا عَلٰۤی اَنۡفُسِہِمۡ وَ ضَلَّ عَنۡہُمۡ مَّا کَانُوۡا یَفۡتَرُوۡنَ
6:24 See how they will lie about themselves. And lost from them will be what they used to invent.
Yaftaroon.... What ever is invented is going to lost, and many of having invented hadith, rasool, nabi, etc.
6:25 وَ مِنۡہُمۡ مَّنۡ یَّسۡتَمِعُ اِلَیۡکَ ۚ وَ جَعَلۡنَا عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ اَکِنَّۃً اَنۡ یَّفۡقَہُوۡہُ وَ فِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ وَقۡرًا ؕ وَ اِنۡ یَّرَوۡا کُلَّ اٰیَۃٍ لَّا یُؤۡمِنُوۡا بِہَا ؕ حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءُوۡکَ یُجَادِلُوۡنَکَ یَقُوۡلُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اَسَاطِیۡرُ الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ
6:25 And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, "This is not but legends of the former peoples."
Green: See how truthful my Lord is...
Red: I am seeing that...
Blue: Wow! So many stories of former people we have... even when it is not in alQuraan actually... SubhanAllah!
Nothing to worry bro... it seems, you see beyond your limits.
10:41 وَ اِنۡ کَذَّبُوۡکَ فَقُلۡ لِّیۡ عَمَلِیۡ وَ لَکُمۡ عَمَلُکُمۡ ۚ اَنۡتُمۡ بَرِیۡٓـــُٔوۡنَ مِمَّاۤ اَعۡمَلُ وَ اَنَا بَرِیۡٓءٌ مِّمَّا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ
10:41 And if they deny you, then say, "For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do."
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Greeting,
Sorry but this is pitiful excuse of a post. Posting verses is meaningless here. How does this answer charges against you? It doesn't.
See this:
QuoteBecause if keeping your rasool besides Allah is not shirk for you? Why we need them for NOW? And finally it is said that "By Allah , our Lord, we were not those who associated." This happens because you don't consider it as shirk. This is shirk to me, and alhamduliAllah, by my Lord's grace and blessings I am not of mushriks. :hail
I am sorry - but what are you talking about?
This is not the topic under discussion. So why are you switching something else? This is a common avoidance tactic. It will not help you. Either try answering, or leave it.
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 08:42:55 PM
Brother Chimp,
Do you mean that every person need to do masters in Arabic to understand alQuraan? Do you have any aayat to support your claim? How do you understand 2:185?
2:185 شَہۡرُ رَمَضَانَ الَّذِیۡۤ اُنۡزِلَ فِیۡہِ الۡقُرۡاٰنُ ہُدًی لِّلنَّاسِ وَ بَیِّنٰتٍ مِّنَ الۡہُدٰی وَ الۡفُرۡقَانِ ۚ فَمَنۡ شَہِدَ مِنۡکُمُ الشَّہۡرَ فَلۡیَصُمۡہُ ؕ وَ مَنۡ کَانَ مَرِیۡضًا اَوۡ عَلٰی سَفَرٍ فَعِدَّۃٌ مِّنۡ اَیَّامٍ اُخَرَ ؕ یُرِیۡدُ اللّٰہُ بِکُمُ الۡیُسۡرَ وَ لَا یُرِیۡدُ بِکُمُ الۡعُسۡرَ ۫ وَ لِتُکۡمِلُوا الۡعِدَّۃَ وَ لِتُکَبِّرُوا اللّٰہَ عَلٰی مَا ہَدٰىکُمۡ وَ لَعَلَّکُمۡ تَشۡکُرُوۡنَ
2:185 The month of Ramadhan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for the people and clear proofs of guidance and criterion. So whoever sights the month, let him fast it; and whoever is ill or on a journey - then an equal number of other days. Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship and for you to complete the period and to glorify Allah for that which He has guided you; and perhaps you will be grateful.
I am interested to know how do you understand the highlighted part above? A guidance for alNaasi. How? After learning man made Arabic grammar? Or alNaas does not mean all humans, but referring only to ulamas? I don't see it is mentioned here... Do you have any other aayat to quote on this, please do so, I am open for corrections.
2:2 ذٰلِکَ الۡکِتٰبُ لَا رَیۡبَ ۚۖۛ فِیۡہِ ۚۛ ہُدًی لِّلۡمُتَّقِیۡنَ
2:2 That is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for alMuttaqeena
Again, alKitaab guides to alMuttaqeen. Do you want to say, every muttaqee is already done masters in man made Arabic grammar? Think about it bro.
10:108 قُلۡ یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّاسُ قَدۡ جَآءَکُمُ الۡحَقُّ مِنۡ رَّبِّکُمۡ ۚ فَمَنِ اہۡتَدٰی فَاِنَّمَا یَہۡتَدِیۡ لِنَفۡسِہٖ ۚ وَ مَنۡ ضَلَّ فَاِنَّمَا یَضِلُّ عَلَیۡہَا ۚ وَ مَاۤ اَنَا عَلَیۡکُمۡ بِوَکِیۡلٍ
10:108 Say, "O mankind, the truth has come to you from your Lord, so whoever is guided is only guided for his soul, and whoever goes astray only goes astray against it. And I am not over you a manager."
7:186 مَنۡ یُّضۡلِلِ اللّٰہُ فَلَا ہَادِیَ لَہٗ ؕ وَ یَذَرُہُمۡ فِیۡ طُغۡیَانِہِمۡ یَعۡمَہُوۡنَ
7:186 Whoever Allah sends astray - there is no guide for him. And He leaves them in their transgression, wandering blindly.
You see Allah is the one Who misguides , who am I to misguide anyone? But why Allah misguides is the real question...
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Mr Khan,
It is quite apparent that you do not understand even the basics of Arabic. Yet you have come down this path. Now misleading yourself is something else, but, misleading others is very dangerous.
It is not so much everyone needs formal education and degrees in Arabic, no. But they do need expertise in Arabic. And you lack this. I have been greatly disappointed. I have pointed out your basic mistakes. You have chosen not to account for them. Rather, take the somewhat cowardly way out, of posting verses in order to be sanctimonious. Please tell me how does this answer for your not even knowing what tanween is, yet you go on to build a whole narrative upon it? If premise of an argument is proven to be false then the conclusion is automatically false.
Now it NOT my intention to "humiliate" you in anyway. However, stopping this nonsense is. I see clear, basic errors in your understaing. I have pointed them out. Shouldn't you believe in those moralising verses and go and check this out and correct your understanding?
See, here is your ignorance laid bare:
QuoteAfter learning man made Arabic grammar?
You mean, you have a private version of Arabic? In which, what you says goes? Now which verse is this from? How does asking further questions account for you previous mistakes?
QuoteDo you want to say, every muttaqee is already done masters in man made Arabic grammar? Think about it bro.
I am sorry to say, I do not find you a mutaqee. A mutaqee would not, when their mistakes are pointed out, still find excuses to cling to them. A mutaqee would not pretend and give false impressions. How does this account for you, not even understanding the basics such as Tanween? If you are claiming to be such a mutaqee - then why is it rather than learning Arabic - you are wasting time in building such falsehoods? When this is pointed out, then you say Arabic grammar is "man-made"?
QuoteYou see Allah is the one Who misguides , who am I to misguide anyone? But why Allah misguides is the real question...
No, My dear, no. If one walks on the path of MISGUIDANCE then and only then Allah misguidance. Why would Allah misguide a truthful person?
Why is it you coloured this green and left is discounted:
"O mankind, the truth has come to you from your Lord"
Just to make up, whatever?
It is up to you. I would suggest desist from this madness.
Quote6:25 وَ مِنۡہُمۡ مَّنۡ یَّسۡتَمِعُ اِلَیۡکَ ۚ وَ جَعَلۡنَا عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ اَکِنَّۃً اَنۡ یَّفۡقَہُوۡہُ وَ فِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ وَقۡرًا ؕ وَ اِنۡ یَّرَوۡا کُلَّ اٰیَۃٍ لَّا یُؤۡمِنُوۡا بِہَا ؕ حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءُوۡکَ یُجَادِلُوۡنَکَ یَقُوۡلُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اَسَاطِیۡرُ الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ
6:25 And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, "This is not but legends of the former peoples."
Green: See how truthful my Lord is...
Red: I am seeing that...
Blue: Wow! So many stories of former people we have... even when it is not in alQuraan actually... SubhanAllah!
This is called hiding behind make belief. This is absolutely meaningless. How does this answer, you not knowing what Tanween is? This is just absolutely meaningless. What does it mean? Posting random verses? For what reason?
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 08:42:55 PM
Brother Chimp,
Do you mean that every person need to do masters in Arabic to understand alQuraan? Do you have any aayat to support your claim? How do you understand 2:185?
Peace mmKhan,
Those who say you need expertise etc in Arabic in order to understand the Quran, appear to ignore the fact that the Quran is a reminder. If it is a Reminder, it's almost like its getting you back on track about the essentials you should already know. So, even if you barely know any Arabic, you can still understand the core principles and guidance of the Quran. Of course, some verses are contentious, but I think its quite easy to identify these and leave them for the time being in the learning process. considering that the central principles of Islam - belief in one God, the last day and doing good, are all laid out in the Quran translations even. Islam, I also believe, is bookless as others on here have stated. The Signs of Allah swt are everywhere and the Quran is one Sign.
I also find that people who think this way are overlooking the simplicity of Islam. That God swt grants us the morality and understanding in the first place. I find this overlooking of simplicity among atheists too. The fact that Allah swt talks about signs in the world and universe - this is all too simple for atheists. But then where would God place His signs? And if Islam (devotion to the Creator etc) is to be accepted and understood by all people, regardless of education, then what could be more fair than placing the Signs in the world all around you. Very straightforward, Subhan'Allah.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on May 31, 2013, 09:48:35 PM
Peace mmKhan,
Those who say you need expertise etc in Arabic in order to understand the Quran, appear to ignore the fact that the Quran is a reminder. If it is a Reminder, it's almost like its getting you back on track about the essentials you should already know. So, even if you barely know any Arabic, you can still understand the core principles and guidance of the Quran. Of course, some verses are contentious, but I think its quite easy to identify these and leave them for the time being in the learning process. considering that the central principles of Islam - belief in one God, the last day and doing good, are all laid out in the Quran translations even. Islam, I also believe, is bookless as others on here have stated. The Signs of Allah swt are everywhere and the Quran is one Sign.
I also find that people who think this way are overlooking the simplicity of Islam. That God swt grants us the morality and understanding in the first place. I find this overlooking of simplicity among atheists too. The fact that Allah swt talks about signs in the world and universe - this is all too simple for atheists. But then where would God place His signs? And if Islam (devotion to the Creator etc) is to be accepted and understood by all people, regardless of education, then what could be more fair than placing the Signs in the world all around you. Very straightforward, Subhan'Allah.
Salam,
Did you by any chance miss the fact that Mr Khan made basic errors and has been unable to defend other than making
Or do you misunderstand the fact why expertise are needed?
Why do you come out to defend sheer ignorance?
Was it not you who said
Are these 'signs' of yours not from Satan?
Why do you think one needs scholars? If ill, how many times do you reject medical opinion and treat yourself? Medical science is there to benefit all. It benefits everyone. Everyone has access to it. But why do you think "experts" are required?
"Those who say you need expertise etc in Arabic in order to understand the Quran, appear to ignore the fact that the Quran is a reminder. "
If you cannot understand Arabic, then you rely on those who do. Else you cannot understand one word. Which makes this sheer nonsense. Brother, you have done what happens at every forum. You clearly can see this person is misleading with his ignorance and nonsense. Yet, you have come out defend this ignorance. Now, where is your high-flying rhetoric about truth?
" If it is a Reminder, it's almost like its getting you back on track about the essentials you should already know. So, even if you barely know any Arabic, you can still understand the core principles and guidance of the Quran. "
Yes, by reading translations. But if you get bare basics wrong, yet have the audacity and stupidity to preach sheer ignorance, then you are not being "guided". This is about basic honesty and truth. Mr Khan knows he is wrong and he does not understand Arabic and he knows he cannot defend his ignorance. Yet, it appears, he also lacks the basic honesty, humility and truthfulness to admit it and stop spreading ignorance.
"Of course, some verses are contentious, but I think its quite easy to identify these and leave them for the time being in the learning process. considering that the central principles of Islam - belief in one God, the last day and doing good, are all laid out in the Quran translations even. Islam, I also believe, is bookless as others on here have stated. The Signs of Allah swt are everywhere and the Quran is one Sign."
No, on evidence, it is not easy, far from it. Risalah is/was and absolute basic principles of Islam. Look at it? It has been ripped to absolute shreds. With what? With absolute nonsense and sheer ignorance. When mistakes are pointed out, what happens? People start spouting meaningless moralising verses about irrelevant and different subject. Why?
"I also find that people who think this way are overlooking the simplicity of Islam. That God swt grants us the morality and understanding in the first place. "
So, making fundamental mistakes and preaching this ignorance to others, is "simplicity". Isn't this making mockery of Islam. Why do you think hardly ANYONE believes in "quran-only"? Or has ever and will ever believe in this ignorance? Because "quran-only" has no principles whatsoever. It's sheer chaos.
"The fact that Allah swt talks about signs in the world and universe - this is all too simple for atheists."
huh?
"But then where would God place His signs? And if Islam (devotion to the Creator etc) is to be accepted and understood by all people, regardless of education, then what could be more fair than placing the Signs in the world all around you. Very straightforward, Subhan'Allah. "
Here again - you talk about all people as if the majority are in agreement with your position. You are aware that over 99.5% of Muslims do not share the "Quran only" position. You are a very, very very minute sect. You have yet to acquire a single scholar that can stand up. Yes - there is someone like Yuksel. But even someone like Sina bested him.
There is no consistent and clear methodology of interpreting Quran that "Quran only" have developed. Else where is it. This is why, whenever any old oddity speaks up and start to spout the kind of ignorance above, then you have no one that can assess and verify.
I am disappointed by your position - supportpeacenotwar - you have chosen to side with ignorance rather than standing for truth and honesty.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on May 31, 2013, 09:48:35 PM
then what could be more fair than placing the Signs in the world all around you. Very straightforward, Subhan'Allah.
I think it goes deeper than that.
Everything that exists, exists only because God makes it exist out of Its own existence. Nothing is of itself. So it is only logical that everything that exists has His imprint. Nothing can be straneous to Him or come as a surprise or without His names on it. Therefore we recognize, because we also belong in that existence which is His existence.
Nothing exists that is not a sign of His.
The Qur'an is a sign for people who reflect. We may use scholars or we may not, we reflect. We may use one scholar and not the rest. We may think somebody is a scholar and disagree with the rest of the world on that. We reflect. We must reflect if we must learn from God's ayas. And more than scholar we need righteous and sincere people, whether scholars or beggars. Knowledge is not the same thing as scholarship. Virtue is not the same thing as scholarship. And virtue is not learnt by reading scholars, but by following good examples and, above all, by believing in it from the heart.
Adn as per the Qur'an: wherever you turn is the face of Allah. Everything helps and scholars may help, but God there is only one, and of each of us there is only one. Each one must do his or her own reflection, and the best reflection comes from sincerity, from one's own heart that we try to purify as m?s as we can. That task we cannot delegate. It is ours. It is our responsibility. Howe we do it is also our responsibility and our task, and for that we have to know ourselves or try to. It is us who must change, evolve, develop, even more than we may try to change, eolve or develop the world. If we do not have power over ourselves, what can we do for others. However, since we are not isolated beings, the best and most productive is that we deal with each other, and learn from others aobut ourselves. Like the river stones, we shape by rubbing and clashing with the others, and we become polished.
Salaam
Peace huruf,
My point about Signs in the world around us/within ourselves (I should have included that bit as well, it was late, cut me some slack! :P) is really about quoting the Quran without actually quoting it. My point was not to limit the Signs of Allah or say that it isn't deep. The point was directly in relation to the times I have seen many atheists mock the idea that things like the day or night, that stars set in motion, other natural phenomenon that are mentioned in the Quran such as the movement of clouds and so on, that this is all too simple to be a sign of God. That's the direct point I was addressing so it seemed most appropriate to put it like that. Especially since the Quran uses the type of terminology in translation - of Signs of Allah in the world and in themselves.
I agree with you that all of existence reflects God's existence because its made by Him. I made a similar point about God's Signs manifesting on every level in another thread. http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605300.msg326341#msg326341
Quote from: huruf on June 01, 2013, 05:19:36 AM
I think it goes deeper than that.
Everything that exists, exists only because God makes it exist out of Its own existence. Nothing is of itself. So it is only logical that everything that exists has His imprint. Nothing can be straneous to Him or come as a surprise or without His names on it. Therefore we recognize, because we also belong in that existence which is His existence.
Nothing exists that is not a sign of His.
The Qur'an is a sign for people who reflect. We may use scholars or we may not, we reflect. We may use one scholar and not the rest. We may think somebody is a scholar and disagree with the rest of the world on that. We reflect. We must reflect if we must learn from God's ayas. And more than scholar we need righteous and sincere people, whether scholars or beggars. Knowledge is not the same thing as scholarship. Virtue is not the same thing as scholarship. And virtue is not learnt by reading scholars, but by following good examples and, above all, by believing in it from the heart.
Adn as per the Qur'an: wherever you turn is the face of Allah. Everything helps and scholars may help, but God there is only one, and of each of us there is only one. Each one must do his or her own reflection, and the best reflection comes from sincerity, from one's own heart that we try to purify as m?s as we can. That task we cannot delegate. It is ours. It is our responsibility. Howe we do it is also our responsibility and our task, and for that we have to know ourselves or try to. It is us who must change, evolve, develop, even more than we may try to change, eolve or develop the world. If we do not have power over ourselves, what can we do for others. However, since we are not isolated beings, the best and most productive is that we deal with each other, and learn from others aobut ourselves. Like the river stones, we shape by rubbing and clashing with the others, and we become polished.
Salaam
Salam,
This is more pretence. Meaningless sanctimony and preaching. Look at the issue above. A person has posted ignorance - and you are claiming we don't need scholarship? I am sorry, but that is against logic and basic common sense. It is absolute basic - to understand Quran at first hand, you need to know Arabic.
There is no getting around the issue. Else - you end up making some pretty horrendous mistakes. I mean, think about it, here is a book you consider to be divine word of God, written in Arabic, and you cannot be bothered to learn it. What do you do? Make petty excuses. Isn't that just dishonest.
But, one would expect, that the "quran-only" would be foremost in knowing Arabic and the Quran, and that just isn't the case.
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 04:41:18 AM
Salam,
Did you by any chance miss the fact that Mr Khan made basic errors and has been unable to defend other than making
Salaam,
Interesting you pick up on this post of mine, but don't respond to the posts I made that directly addressed you earlier about hadith and everything. I'm only mentioning this because of the tone I'm getting from you. Then again, maybe those discussions would get TOO drawn out and the discussion wears itself down so it might be for the best. Especially if you continue to discuss this way.
Sorry, but I haven't been reading all the posts, that caught my attention because I believe one does not need much or any knowledge in Arabic in order to understand the central principles Quran. I agree that it is important to understand that translations are limited and that sometimes the Arabic is not translated well. But for all the central and primary principles of Islam, I believe we have them already and the Quran is just a reinforcer and reminder, yet another blessings - I'm sure you agree - that God swt will bestow knowledge and understanding upon those seek guidance.
Quote
Was it not you who said
Are these 'signs' of yours not from Satan?
What? Can you explain this? I don't say things are from Satan, and in fact I've said that several times on this forum. :)
QuoteIf you cannot understand Arabic, then you rely on those who do.
Brother, my whole point is about relying on God. Knowledge of Arabic is nice and all but its not necessary. The central principles of faith are laid out in the Quran. Believe in The Deity, the last day, and do good. That is all about 'salvation' as some put it but I don't really use that term.
Quote
Yes, by reading translations. But if you get bare basics wrong, yet have the audacity and stupidity to preach sheer ignorance, then you are not being "guided". This is about basic honesty and truth. Mr Khan knows he is wrong and he does not understand Arabic and he knows he cannot defend his ignorance. Yet, it appears, he also lacks the basic honesty, humility and truthfulness to admit it and stop spreading ignorance.
You have the audacity to say you know the Quran but then you use language and a demeanour like this. I see this is clearly what you learnt was acceptable from the Quran when you read it in Arabic? Calling people stupid, ignorant. My point was not about Mr Khan, I just thought of some points based on what he said.
Quote
No, on evidence, it is not easy, far from it. Risalah is/was and absolute basic principles of Islam. Look at it? It has been ripped to absolute shreds. With what? With absolute nonsense and sheer ignorance. When mistakes are pointed out, what happens? People start spouting meaningless moralising verses about irrelevant and different subject. Why?
The rest of the Quran contains enough hints or you can simply look at whether the verse is encouraging a strange violent response when it does not encourage violence e.g. ''then beat them'' in relation to your wives.
When you call upon God swt for guidance, God swt doesn't restrict Himself to those who know Arabic or the experts and you have to then go through them to get it. Otherwise many people are doomed because they may simply not have access to such expertise. God swt emphasises equality and justice.
Quote
"The fact that Allah swt talks about signs in the world and universe - this is all too simple for atheists."
huh?
I was making a point in general that I thought of when I saw some of what mmkhan was saying. It seems you missed this.
Quote
I am disappointed by your position - supportpeacenotwar - you have chosen to side with ignorance rather than standing for truth and honesty.
I am not siding with anyone. I am trying to follow the Quran as I understand, as God guides me.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 05:53:02 AM
Peace huruf,
My point about Signs in the world around us/within ourselves (I should have included that bit as well, it was late, cut me some slack! :P) is really about quoting the Quran without actually quoting it. My point was not to limit the Signs of Allah or say that it isn't deep. The point was directly in relation to the times I have seen many atheists mock the idea that things like the day or night, that stars set in motion, other natural phenomenon that are mentioned in the Quran such as the movement of clouds and so on, that this is all too simple to be a sign of God. That's the direct point I was addressing so it seemed most appropriate to put it like that. Especially since the Quran uses the type of terminology in translation - of Signs of Allah in the world and in themselves.
I agree with you that all of existence reflects God's existence because its made by Him. I made a similar point about God's Signs manifesting on every level in another thread. http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605300.msg326341#msg326341
Sorry, sister,
I did not mean to point out any lack in your post, I just saw the opportunity of pointing out what I did. I am sure you are aware and conscious of it. But, as I say, it seemed to me particularly to the point, because if we think tawheed means anything, then everything is coherent and harmony and sense will pervade everything that exists and speak to us if we listen.
You seem a very patient person. Best wishes.
Salaam
Salam,
QuoteInteresting you pick up on this post of mine, but don't respond to the posts I made that directly addressed you earlier about hadith and everything.
I am busy and cannot reply to everything. However, if there is something pressing you wish me to answer, I am more than happy to oblige.
QuoteI'm only mentioning this because of the tone I'm getting from you.
And what tone is that?
Quotebecause I believe one does not need much or any knowledge in Arabic in order to understand the central principles Quran. I agree that it is important to understand that translations are limited and that sometimes the Arabic is not translated well.
But this discussion isn't really about understanding the basics is it? No one is questioning that Arabic is not required to be a simple believer and practitioner of Islam.
However, I would have thought Prophethood is a basic and central point of Quran. Yet, it isn't being understood. But look at the basis of the challenge from Mr. Khan. He in proficient in Arabic, yet builds a whole narrative, clearly upon mistakes. Yet when these are pointed out, he spouts meaningless diatribe. And you chose to answer that. Why?
It is essential to know Arabic - if you are going to talk about Arabic and use it. Would you go to a doctor who lacked basic knowledge of medicine? No.
Also this about basic "truthfulness". Which I find to be lacking.
QuoteBut for all the central and primary principles of Islam, I believe we have them already and the Quran is just a reinforcer and reminder
Please elaborate - what primary principles? I would have though Prophethood was basic. Yet look at the way it is being challenged. Again we are not talking about being a simple believer. This person himself build quite an elaborate narrative on Arabic that was clearly wrong.
Yet, he knew that he did not know much Arabic. So why did he do that? And when his mistakes are pointed out. He is not able to defend them other than meaningless diatribe. What I mean is, he could not salvage his Arabic mistakes, which are mistakes and he knows it. Yet still tries to claim credence.
I find that amazing and lacking in honest and sheer stupidity.
QuoteBrother, my whole point is about relying on God. Knowledge of Arabic is nice and all but its not necessary. The central principles of faith are laid out in the Quran. Believe in The Deity, the last day, and do good. That is all about 'salvation' as some put it but I don't really use that term.
This is not about being a simple believer. But when you begin to advocate theology, knowing full well that your Arabic level is poor and likely to be wrong then sure that is deliberately misleading people. Then it does not matter how many irrelevant verses you throw out. Does it.
QuoteYou have the audacity to say you know the Quran but then you use language and a demeanour like this. I see this is clearly what you learnt was acceptable from the Quran when you read it in Arabic? Calling people stupid, ignorant. My point was not about Mr Khan, I just thought of some points based on what he said.
I am sorry, but have you missed something? What demeanour?
And if their evasion is difficult for you, then if you are able to seek a tunnel into the earth or a stairway into the sky to bring them a sign, [then do so]. But if Allah had willed, He would have united them upon guidance. So never be of the ignorant.Do you know how strongly the Quran deals with stupidity, ignorance and spreading falsehood? I don't think there is any point in quoting verses is there.
QuoteThe rest of the Quran contains enough hints or you can simply look at whether the verse is encouraging a strange violent response when it does not encourage violence e.g. ''then beat them'' in relation to your wives.
I did not understand this. Or see how it is relevant.
QuoteWhen you call upon God swt for guidance, God swt doesn't restrict Himself to those who know Arabic or the experts and you have to then go through them to get it. Otherwise many people are doomed because they may simply not have access to such expertise. God swt emphasises equality and justice.
Once again - this is NOT about simple guidance. And it is about expertise. I doubt Allah guides those that lack basic sense of "truth". Do you? How is deliberately spreading falsehood even remotely guidance?
QuoteI was making a point in general that I thought of when I saw some of what mmkhan was saying. It seems you missed this.
No, I didn't. As the main thread of this was about basic honesty and truth, it seems you missed this completely.
QuoteI am not siding with anyone. I am trying to follow the Quran as I understand, as God guides me.
I am sorry to say, fine sentiment, but to my ears it rings very hollow. Shouldn't you be siding with "truth" - rather than whom you perceive to be you fellow? I believe you have the faculties to assess who is telling the truth, in this matter?
"Those who say you need expertise etc in Arabic in order to understand the Quran, appear to ignore the fact that the Quran is a reminder. "
This is taking sides! I don't think you can really deny that. It doesn't matter you did not mention me. The reference IS toward me. Actually, I find that somewhat lacking in courage. And the logic of the line is faulty. Just because something is a "reminder" why would its basic language not matter?
Peace,
I think ignorance and misleading ideas are spread everywhere, however, the intelligent can see through them. One cannot say that disinformation about God and His system is not spread within the Sunni sect because of blind reliance upon hadith and man-made conjecture.
I am not swallowing the ideas of mmnkhan and Bender, but yet here I am following this community as a friend. They are at least reminding us that Muhammad can mean something else other than a name which is true, just like Hassan and Hussein. In the context of these verses which mmkhan highlighted it is higher probability that they are names though or the phrases would sound a bit strange. Yet it is always good to watch everything one knows with a critical eye, even things which are dumbproof. I am not saying mmkhan is right though with his thesis, but I am at least treating him with respect.
On this forum, critical viewing of the Quranic passages has in many cases lead to a better understanding and some have solved inconsistency which was due to misinterpretation. People are not always right, but many times they are. If the idea is flawed it oftenly shows itself and the blessed and guided follower will see it.
And several of the members on this forum are quite skilled at Arabic and you can call them professionals. And uniting the thinking power across them is also boosting the outcome.
I would say that the Quran translations which are not tainted by traditional thinking are among the best ones around. Take a sectarian Quran translation and you will see many errors right away and thus is reflects the "professionalism" of these individuals.
I am not saying I am an expert in Arabic, I need lots of help interpreting the original language, but I do not rely on biased sources. I work together with English translations and the Arabic script simultaneously and occasionally seek enlightenment elsewhere. I trust God will lead me to the true interpretation as long as I am guided.
God bless you
Peace.
I strongly believe that everyone here presented their understanding of a phenomenon from the knowledge that they discovered.
We believe that all phenomena are created in truth by Allah, the Creator. His creations are everywhere, around us and within us. We are descendants of scientists, who seek the truth on every existing phenomena created by Allah.
And He taught Adam the names - all of them. Then He showed them to the angels and said, "Inform Me of the names of these, if you are truthful." (2:31)
Knowledge is what we construct as meanings about an existing reality or a phenomenon. Language is just a tool of communication to enable us to engage in symbolic interaction. What is important is to arrive at the truth, the exact meaning and understanding on that particular phenomenon. This thread is to discuss a phenomenon known as Muhammad.
I strongly believe that the Quran Arabic, in terms of its manifest symbols as Arabic words and the meanings to a particular phenomenon it represents, is the God?s language created in truth for those who seek His guidance.
Most of us are used to imagine Muhammad as a superhuman Arab man, lived 1400 years ago, who is a warrior, negotiator with God (to have five prayer times for his ummah), had many wives and able to predict the future (from hadith literature).
Brother MM Khan has presented what he believes to be the true meaning of the word that represents the phenomenon Muhammad. I respect his understanding and discovery. Some may find it hard to accept.
By the way Muhammad is still a messenger, that doesn?t change.
Seest thou not that Allah sends down rain from the sky? With it We then bring out produce of various colours. And in the mountains are tracts white and red, of various shades of colour, and black intense in hue. (35:27)
And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Those truly fear Allah, from among His servants, who have knowledge (l-ulama). Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving. (35:28). In this context, ulamas are those who study natural phenomena.
Seest thou not that Allah sends down rain from the sky, and leads it through springs in the earth? Then He causes to grow, therewith, produce of various colours: then it withers; thou wilt see it grow yellow; then He makes it dry up and crumble away. Truly, in this, is a Message of remembrance to men of understanding. (39:21)
Quote from: Man of Faith on June 01, 2013, 08:30:53 AM
Peace,
I think ignorance and misleading ideas are spread everywhere, however, the intelligent can see through them. One cannot say that disinformation about God and His system is not spread within the Sunni sect because of blind reliance upon hadith and man-made conjecture.
I am not swallowing the ideas of mmnkhan and Bender, but yet here I am following this community as a friend. They are at least reminding us that Muhammad can mean something else other than a name which is true, just like Hassan and Hussein. In the context of these verses which mmkhan highlighted it is higher probability that they are names though or the phrases would sound a bit strange. Yet it is always good to watch everything one knows with a critical eye, even things which are dumbproof. I am not saying mmkhan is right though with his thesis, but I am at least treating him with respect.
On this forum, critical viewing of the Quranic passages has in many cases lead to a better understanding and some have solved inconsistency which was due to misinterpretation. People are not always right, but many times they are. If the idea is flawed it oftenly shows itself and the blessed and guided follower will see it.
And several of the members on this forum are quite skilled at Arabic and you can call them professionals. And uniting the thinking power across them is also boosting the outcome.
I would say that the Quran translations which are not tainted by traditional thinking are among the best ones around. Take a sectarian Quran translation and you will see many errors right away and thus is reflects the "professionalism" of these individuals.
I am not saying I am an expert in Arabic, I need lots of help interpreting the original language, but I do not rely on biased sources. I work together with English translations and the Arabic script simultaneously and occasionally seek enlightenment elsewhere. I trust God will lead me to the true interpretation as long as I am guided.
God bless you
Salam,
QuoteI think ignorance and misleading ideas are spread everywhere, however, the intelligent can see through them. One cannot say that disinformation about God and His system is not spread within the Sunni sect because of blind reliance upon hadith and man-made conjecture.
Of course it is. However within Sunni Islam there is a system to challenge this and there is not the easy acceptance of "whatever goes". Also, and advantage, a clear advantage, Sunni Islam has is that it has some clear principles and methods, which Quran-only lack.
However, it is not Sunni Islam that is under-discussion. We can make it so. But, right and wrongs of Sunni Islam have no bearing on this.
QuoteI am not swallowing the ideas of mmnkhan and Bender, but yet here I am following this community as a friend. They are at least reminding us that Muhammad can mean something else other than a name which is true, just like Hassan and Hussein.
I am sorry, but when you deliberately set out to mislead with your two-penny's worth then that is severely problematic. Why would some pretend to have knowledge of something they clearly don't.
And the argument that the word "Muhammad" is not a name is build upon clear mistakes. And you cannot cover that up.
QuoteIn the context of these verses which mmkhan highlighted it is higher probability that they are names though or the phrases would sound a bit strange. Yet it is always good to watch everything one knows with a critical eye, even things which are dumbproof. I am not saying mmkhan is right though with his thesis, but I am at least treating him with respect.
Respect? It is not a question of respect. It is question of right and wrong.
QuoteOn this forum, critical viewing of the Quranic passages has in many cases lead to a better understanding and some have solved inconsistency which was due to misinterpretation. People are not always right, but many times they are. If the idea is flawed it oftenly shows itself and the blessed and guided follower will see it.
Care to highlight any? I have missed any so far. I have not been here long. I get the feeling, you tend to bury your head in the sand.
QuoteAnd several of the members on this forum are quite skilled at Arabic and you can call them professionals. And uniting the thinking power across them is also boosting the outcome.
Sadly mmKhan isn't one of them.
QuoteI would say that the Quran translations which are not tainted by traditional thinking are among the best ones around. Take a sectarian Quran translation and you will see many errors right away and thus is reflects the "professionalism" of these individuals.
But this simply shows your prejudice. Upon which basis are you saying:
"I would say that the Quran translations which are not tainted by traditional thinking are among the best ones around."
As for:
"Take a sectarian Quran translation and you will see many errors right away and thus is reflects the "professionalism" of these individuals."
What are you talking about? Is there a quran-only translation? Where?
QuoteI am not saying I am an expert in Arabic, I need lots of help interpreting the original language, but I do not rely on biased sources.
So which sources do you rely on? If I can ask. What are biased/unbiased sources?
Quote from: zone on June 01, 2013, 09:40:11 AM
Peace.
I strongly believe that everyone here presented their understanding of a phenomenon from the knowledge that they discovered.
We believe that all phenomena are created in truth by Allah, the Creator. His creations are everywhere, around us and within us. We are descendants of scientists, who seek the truth on every existing phenomena created by Allah.
And He taught Adam the names - all of them. Then He showed them to the angels and said, "Inform Me of the names of these, if you are truthful." (2:31)
Knowledge is what we construct as meanings about an existing reality or a phenomenon. Language is just a tool of communication to enable us to engage in symbolic interaction. What is important is to arrive at the truth, the exact meaning and understanding on that particular phenomenon. This thread is to discuss a phenomenon known as Muhammad.
I strongly believe that the Quran Arabic, in terms of its manifest symbols as Arabic words and the meanings to a particular phenomenon it represents, is the God?s language created in truth for those who seek His guidance.
Most of us are used to imagine Muhammad as a superhuman Arab man, lived 1400 years ago, who is a warrior, negotiator with God (to have five prayer times for his ummah), had many wives and able to predict the future (from hadith literature).
Brother MM Khan has presented what he believes to be the true meaning of the word that represents the phenomenon Muhammad. I respect his understanding and discovery. Some may find it hard to accept.
By the way Muhammad is still a messenger, that doesn?t change.
Seest thou not that Allah sends down rain from the sky? With it We then bring out produce of various colours. And in the mountains are tracts white and red, of various shades of colour, and black intense in hue. (35:27)
And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Those truly fear Allah, from among His servants, who have knowledge (l-ulama). Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving. (35:28). In this context, ulamas are those who study natural phenomena.
Seest thou not that Allah sends down rain from the sky, and leads it through springs in the earth? Then He causes to grow, therewith, produce of various colours: then it withers; thou wilt see it grow yellow; then He makes it dry up and crumble away. Truly, in this, is a Message of remembrance to men of understanding. (39:21)
Salam Zone,
I am sorry to say, this kind of meaningless spiel doesn't work. I can easily prove mmKhan is wrong and to an extend have done so.
When you say:
"Brother MM Khan has presented what he believes to be the true meaning of the word that represents the phenomenon Muhammad. I respect his understanding and discovery. Some may find it hard to accept."
No he hasn't. he clearly hasn't. Mr Khan has basic issues of truth and honesty. So what is this "discovery" that you respect? Please do share in your own words. A summary?
"By the way Muhammad is still a messenger, that doesn?t change. "
So if this doesn't change, what is the point, what is this new discovery?
"I strongly believe that the Quran Arabic, in terms of its manifest symbols as Arabic words and the meanings to a particular phenomenon it represents, is the God?s language created in truth for those who seek His guidance."
Statements like this are virtually meaningless. What do you mean?
Salaam,
Thanks to supportpeacenotwar, huruf, man of faith and zone for your kind words. May Allah bless you.
People like The_Chimp know only how to shout and claim others are wrong without able to prove it from alQuraan. They could not able to quote a single aayat to prove wrong. But they very well know how to call stupid, ignorant, meaningless sanctimony, horrendous mistakes, dishonest, untruthful, misguiding, I can prove him wrong, I have already proved him wrong, and the list goes on.... but still could not able to prove any of his points.
It is very easy for me to say the same about him, but then I will not be truthful as I don't know him.
What these people actually do is mentioned in 41:26.
41:26 وَ قَالَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا لَا تَسۡمَعُوۡا لِہٰذَا الۡقُرۡاٰنِ وَ الۡغَوۡا فِیۡہِ لَعَلَّکُمۡ تَغۡلِبُوۡنَ
41:26 And those who disbelieve say, "Do not listen to this Qur'an and speak noisily during it that perhaps you will overcome."
So, bring your prove to show me wrong instead of just babbling if you are truthful.
May Allah protect us from such behavior against the aayaat of Allah and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on June 01, 2013, 11:04:47 AM
Salaam,
Thanks to supportpeacenotwar, huruf, man of faith and zone for your kind words. May Allah bless you.
People like The_Chimp know only how to shout and claim others are wrong without able to prove it from alQuraan. They could not able to quote a single aayat to prove wrong. But they very well know how to call stupid, ignorant, meaningless sanctimony, horrendous mistakes, dishonest, untruthful, misguiding, I can prove him wrong, I have already proved him wrong, and the list goes on.... but still could not able to prove any of his points.
It is very easy for me to say the same about him, but then I will not be truthful as I don't know him.
What these people actually do is mentioned in 41:26.
41:26 وَ قَالَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا لَا تَسۡمَعُوۡا لِہٰذَا الۡقُرۡاٰنِ وَ الۡغَوۡا فِیۡہِ لَعَلَّکُمۡ تَغۡلِبُوۡنَ
41:26 And those who disbelieve say, "Do not listen to this Qur'an and speak noisily during it that perhaps you will overcome."
So, bring your prove to show me wrong instead of just babbling if you are truthful.
May Allah protect us from such behavior against the aayaat of Allah and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Salam Mr Kahn,
I am sorry but this is plain wrong:
Quote"People like The_Chimp know only how to shout and claim others are wrong without able to prove it from alQuraan."
When you talk about Arabic and get the basics wrong. Then, it has nothing really to do with the Quran.
QuoteThey could not able to quote a single aayat to prove wrong.
Sadly, this is not true either. For one thing - all the proof you have brought has been dismissed. And if you look back at my posts - I have and can still give references from the Quran.
However, making basic Arabic mistakes has not got much to do with the Quran.
QuoteBut they very well know how to call stupid, ignorant, meaningless sanctimony, horrendous mistakes, dishonest, untruthful, misguiding, I can prove him wrong, I have already proved him wrong, and the list goes on.... but still could not able to prove any of his points.
Again Mr Khan - you are simply wallowing.
I have conclusively shown your Arabic mistakes.
QuoteIt is very easy for me to say the same about him, but then I will not be truthful as I don't know him.
Sorry, but this is not how it works. I note that you have not spend any time in refuting - but in wallowing. And that really does speaks volumes. Also - not a single person, whose names you quoted above, have agreed with your position. Or jumped up and answer on your behalf.
The support they show you is that you are their brother. I am not.
QuoteWhat these people actually do is mentioned in 41:26.
See my friend, what you do is far, far, far worse in my eyes. You use the Quran to justify. That is wrong. See - you have just implied I am a kafir! I have not done so - or even hinted at this against you.
Is it possible for you to answer simple questions? I mean, why do you speak about Arabic - when clearly you are unable to understand even the basics.
QuoteBring your prove to show me wrong instead of just babbling if you are truthful.
I already have. Pretending otherwise will not help you.
Quote from: huruf on June 01, 2013, 06:22:23 AM
Sorry, sister,
I did not mean to point out any lack in your post, I just saw the opportunity of pointing out what I did. I am sure you are aware and conscious of it. But, as I say, it seemed to me particularly to the point, because if we think tawheed means anything, then everything is coherent and harmony and sense will pervade everything that exists and speak to us if we listen.
You seem a very patient person. Best wishes.
Salaam
Peace sister,
Don't worry about it. I know what you mean. Thank you, that's nice of you to say.
May Allah shower you with blessings on the path that leads straight to Him.
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 10:27:57 AM
Salam Zone,
I am sorry to say, this kind of meaningless spiel doesn't work. I can easily prove mmKhan is wrong and to an extend have done so.
Peace The_Chimp.
You have shown your true colors, the sunni character, calling others stupid, ignorant and their ideas meaningless, professing that you are the master of religion.
What do you expect to hear or read in a God Alone Quran Alone community forum? When you witness people discuss the term Muhammad, messenger, hadith, ayah, ulama, shirk, and other Quranic words, using the Quran as a guidance, which are phenomenal to us in becoming a true muslim.
So it is not surprising that you see people here share some basic principles such as:
Allah teach us the Quran
Allah guides us or whomever He wills
Allah knows who are in His straight path
Allah commanded us not to set up masters besides Him
Allah commanded us not to set up partners with Him
Allah said there will be no intercession
Allah commanded us to verify
If you have a better argument, bring forth as an alternative. I would like to see objectivity, consistency and accuracy in your argument with proofs. Stop belittling people who presents differing ideas from what you have.
And if you brought to those who were given the Book every ayat, they would not follow your qiblah. Nor will you be a follower of their qiblah. Nor would they be followers of one another's qiblah. So if you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, indeed, you would then be among the wrongdoers. (2:145)
And fear a Day when no soul will suffice for another soul at all, nor will intercession be accepted from it, nor will compensation be taken from it, nor will they be aided. (2:48)
O you who have believed, believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His Messenger and the Book which He sent down before. And whoever disbelieves in Allah , His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day has certainly gone far astray. (4:136)
Peace The_Chimp,
I actually believe that Muhammad was a man. If mmKhan wants to explore different possibilities, who am I to stop him? I know that I explore different ideas about Ramadan, Shaytan etc. We can all discuss here but it is much better and in the spirit of the Quran and the believer to keep a more civil tone. You said that we don't need to know Arabic to follow the central principles/be a 'simple believer', then you ask me which principles those are? They are the principles of Islam that one can follow without knowing Arabic - as you already agreed to.
I also listed some of the central principles in on the very quotes: believe in God, the last day, do good.
I really have not been following all of this, I read some things and I do not know if there are some flaws in what mmKhan is saying.
In terms of 'stupidity', as we are told not to name call, I would class that as going against the Quran. As well as the fact, it is not necessary. If mmKhan is being truly sincere and seeking Allah's swt guidance along the way, then he is simply seeking the truth as best he can. I am sorry if that answer is not good enough for you. Allah swt is the best Judge.
My point about the Quran and the so called 'beating' verse, was in relation to the point that I believe we don't need to know Arabic to understand the Quran or to find parts of the translations that stand out as more problematic. What is the language of the Quran, is a video I saw and I think the uploader makes some interesting points especially about the magnitude of the point that the Quran is for all mankind... not just Arabic speakers. Not just those most fluent in Arabic either. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLNNZG9Wky0
When we hear the Quran is it just that it speaks to us if we know Arabic, or does it speak to us on a deeper level? As a Muslim... I'm sure you know what I'm getting at with the deeper level part, i.e. the way in which the Quran is very moving when you listen to it in Arabic even if you cannot understand what all the words mean in Arabic itself.
I don't know what reference you are talking about but no - it was not to you. I agree with you that Muhammad was a man and I agree with mmKhan that we don't need to know Arabic in order to understandthe Quran.
The Quran as a reminder: I explained that in my original post. My point is that we do not need to know Arabic to understand the main message of the Quran. We already know of the moral issues, the devotion and sincerity necessary, the logical conclusion that there is one God - with or without the Quran. Of course, the Quran is a blessing and a Reminder to that. So my point is even in translation, we can get at that message that we are already aware of and that we are being reminded about.
Do we need to know a much Arabic to understand any 'finer' points? Only Allah swt knows the answer to that. He bestows understanding and guidance.
I tried to keep this 'short and sweet' as they say and that's one the reasons I didn't quote you, but I found I should explain more. I hope you can appreciate that and that it does not become a source of contention.
Quote from: zone on June 01, 2013, 11:34:03 AM
Peace The_Chimp.
You have shown your true colors, the sunni character, calling others stupid, ignorant and their ideas meaningless, professing that you are the master of religion.
What do you expect to hear or read in a God Alone Quran Alone community forum? When you witness people discuss the term Muhammad, messenger, hadith, ayah, ulama, shirk, and other Quranic words, using the Quran as a guidance, which are phenomenal to us in becoming a true muslim.
So it is not surprising that you see people here share some basic principles such as:
Allah teach us the Quran
Allah guides us or whomever He wills
Allah knows who are in His straight path
Allah commanded us not to set up masters besides Him
Allah commanded us not to set up partners with Him
Allah said there will be no intercession
Allah commanded us to verify
If you have a better argument, bring forth as an alternative. I would like to see objectivity, consistency and accuracy in your argument with proofs. Stop belittling people who presents differing ideas from what you have.
And if you brought to those who were given the Book every ayat, they would not follow your qiblah. Nor will you be a follower of their qiblah. Nor would they be followers of one another's qiblah. So if you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, indeed, you would then be among the wrongdoers. (2:145)
And fear a Day when no soul will suffice for another soul at all, nor will intercession be accepted from it, nor will compensation be taken from it, nor will they be aided. (2:48)
O you who have believed, believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His Messenger and the Book which He sent down before. And whoever disbelieves in Allah , His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Last Day has certainly gone far astray. (4:136)
Zone,
QuoteYou have shown your true colors, the sunni character, calling others stupid, ignorant and their ideas meaningless, professing that you are the master of religion.
Try concentrating on your words:
"You have shown your true colors, the sunni character"
In other words - you already have prejudice against over 1 billion people!
I am sorry - but that is far worse. I have specifically been against Mr. Khan and his views. Have you bothered to read the posts? I have been quite restraint aagainst someone who call me a "Kafir".
A meaningless ideas are just that - meaningless. Ignorance is ignorance. Stupidity is stupidity. Getting basics of Arabic wrong but obstinately advocating a view built upon wrong information is all three.
And I have not proceeded to imply anyone as Kafir.
QuoteWhat do you expect to hear or read in a God Alone Quran Alone community forum? When you witness people discuss the term Muhammad, messenger, hadith, ayah, ulama, shirk, and other Quranic words, using the Quran as a guidance, which are phenomenal to us in becoming a true muslim.
Have you been following this thread? The last thing I expect to see is making mistakes in Arabic and building arguments upon mistakes. Sorry, but have you missed all that. And are you simply trying to "abuse" me for being Sunni? That is what your comments seem to imply.
QuoteIf you have a better argument, bring forth as an alternative. I would like to see objectivity, consistency and accuracy in your argument with proofs. Stop belittling people who presents differing ideas from what you have.
So why are you belittle me? It is clear you have not followed the thread and you are not aware of the argument so far. This is about mmKhan making blatant errors and still claiming credence for his views.
What has this got to do with:
QuoteSo it is not surprising that you see people here share some basic principles such as:
Allah teach us the Quran
Allah guides us or whomever He wills
Allah knows who are in His straight path
Allah commanded us not to set up masters besides Him
Allah commanded us not to set up partners with Him
Allah said there will be no intercession
Allah commanded us to verify
Have the decency and the good grace to be truthful and honest and at least follow the thread, IF you are going to comment. Else do not bother, purely on the basis of bigotry [evidence read the 1st objection above] .
And quoting verses is no argument.
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 11:17:54 AM
Salam Mr Kahn,
I am sorry but this is plain wrong:
When you talk about Arabic and get the basics wrong. Then, it has nothing really to do with the Quran.
Salaam The_Chimp,
Did I talk about Arabic, really? When? Where? Why? Please take a look at how I have started by clicking here (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.0). Do you find me talking about man-made Arabic grammar there? Please point me if you find it.
This is what I was talking, just reverse your sentence and see how it works. "It has nothing really to do with man-made Arabic grammar when we talk about alQuraan".
Quote
Sadly, this is not true either. For one thing - all the proof you have brought has been dismissed. And if you look back at my posts - I have and can still give references from the Quran.
Red: How? How are they dismissed, you just said I am wrong and we have to agree with you.
Blue: Please point me to them again, sorry I missed them.
Quote
However, making basic Arabic mistakes has not got much to do with the Quran.
Wake up brother! Just don't rush... I am discussing alQuraan not man-made Arabic grammar full of errors.
I am not strong enough to judge and deny aayaat of alQuraan based on man-made Arabic grammar. If you can, then please do, I don't have to do anything with it.
Quote
Again Mr Khan - you are simply wallowing.
This is because, you are claiming to be a sunni and I am not at all interested in discussing with any sects. Because they are already set their minds, so nothing can go through their throat. I have experienced it personally many many times. Sorry to say this, but it is you who said to be a sunni about yourself and also you have shown your anger against alQuraan aloners.
Quote
I have conclusively shown your Arabic mistakes.
Sorry, but this is not how it works. I note that you have not spend any time in refuting - but in wallowing. And that really does speaks volumes. Also - not a single person, whose names you quoted above, have agreed with your position. Or jumped up and answer on your behalf.
Please see above.
Red: Did I say that? You see, how you are in rush and making baseless conclusions? Please scroll above and see again what I wrote. Your rush and conclusions are making your wrong, so, please be patient and seek Allah help on every step you take.
Quote
The support they show you is that you are their brother. I am not.
I am happy to see that :yes And my ultimate support is from Allah, alhamduliAllah. :hail
Quote
See my friend, what you do is far, far, far worse in my eyes. You use the Quran to justify. That is wrong. See - you have just implied I am a kafir! I have not done so - or even hinted at this against you.
I am surprise to know that... then what is the purpose of alQuraan? Is it just to get 10 favors for each word read? I don't think so. If you understand the meaning of kafir, then you may agree. Yes, that is because, I am kafir of your deen.
Quote
Is it possible for you to answer simple questions? I mean, why do you speak about Arabic - when clearly you are unable to understand even the basics.
Again??? :o
Where am I talking about man-made Arabic? :hmm
Quote
I already have. Pretending otherwise will not help you.
This is not fair.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
PS.
Please do remember brother, man-made Arabic grammar has nothing to do with Arabic of alQuraan except in few areas.
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 12:12:46 PM
Red: I am sure that alQuraan is the Book of Allah and there is a dialectical problem in it? :hmm
Peace.What I mean is not like this bro mmmkhan.
mmkhan looks like you're expert in arabic but?
Did you know if tanwin "un" is to make clear if that owner of the name is male/mudzakka or female/mussnat.
Example:
مُسلِمُ =muslimun (for male)
مُسْلِمَةٌ=muslimatun (for female)
فَاطِمَةُ=fathimatun (for female)
دَاوُدُ,
يُوْسُفُ , etc
Evidence
that you must see,mmkhan:
إِ
ذْ قَالَ يُوسُفُ لِأَبِيهِ يَا أَبَتِ إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ أَحَدَ عَشَرَ كَوْكَبًا وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ رَأَيْتُهُمْ لِي سَاجِدِينَSee the word Yusuf also using dhammah so it's impossible if Yusuf is not a name.
وَإِذْ يَرْفَعُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ الْقَوَاعِدَ مِنَ الْبَيْتِ وَإِسْمَاعِيلُ رَبَّنَا تَقَبَّلْ مِنَّا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُLook Ibrahim's name also using dhammah too.
مَرَرْتُ بغُلاَمِ زَيْدٍ الفَاضِلِThe word zaid is using kasrah tanwin, but Zaid is not only noun but a male which became noun.So the word Zaid is a mudzakkar name.It's strange if the word Zaid isn't a name.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 01:06:52 PM
Tanween comes on ALL INDEFINITE NOUNS - except those that are Ghair Munsarif, upon whom Tanween is not applicable. For example the name Ibrahim - it doesn't take tanween becuase it is Gahir Munsarif - as non-Arabic names do not accept tanween. As all names are nouns - tanween occurs on them. Just because tanween is upon the name Muhammad that does NOT mean it isn't a name.
Good point by brother the Chimp
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 01:06:52 PM
Mr mmKhan - why do I get the feeling you have some other hidden agenda?
:& :& I hope you're not Christian misionaries who disguised as Muslim like in another online Muslim forum did.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 11:45:49 AM
Peace The_Chimp,
I actually believe that Muhammad was a man. If mmKhan wants to explore different possibilities, who am I to stop him? I know that I explore different ideas about Ramadan, Shaytan etc. We can all discuss here but it is much better and in the spirit of the Quran and the believer to keep a more civil tone. You said that we don't need to know Arabic to follow the central principles/be a 'simple believer', then you ask me which principles those are? They are the principles of Islam that one can follow without knowing Arabic - as you already agreed to.
I also listed some of the central principles in on the very quotes: believe in God, the last day, do good.
I really have not been following all of this, I read some things and I do not know if there are some flaws in what mmKhan is saying.
In terms of 'stupidity', as we are told not to name call, I would class that as going against the Quran. As well as the fact, it is not necessary. If mmKhan is being truly sincere and seeking Allah's swt guidance along the way, then he is simply seeking the truth as best he can. I am sorry if that answer is not good enough for you. Allah swt is the best Judge.
My point about the Quran and the so called 'beating' verse, was in relation to the point that I believe we don't need to know Arabic to understand the Quran or to find parts of the translations that stand out as more problematic. What is the language of the Quran, is a video I saw and I think the uploader makes some interesting points especially about the magnitude of the point that the Quran is for all mankind... not just Arabic speakers. Not just those most fluent in Arabic either. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLNNZG9Wky0
When we hear the Quran is it just that it speaks to us if we know Arabic, or does it speak to us on a deeper level? As a Muslim... I'm sure you know what I'm getting at with the deeper level part, i.e. the way in which the Quran is very moving when you listen to it in Arabic even if you cannot understand what all the words mean in Arabic itself.
I don't know what reference you are talking about but no - it was not to you. I agree with you that Muhammad was a man and I agree with mmKhan that we don't need to know Arabic in order to understandthe Quran.
The Quran as a reminder: I explained that in my original post. My point is that we do not need to know Arabic to understand the main message of the Quran. We already know of the moral issues, the devotion and sincerity necessary, the logical conclusion that there is one God - with or without the Quran. Of course, the Quran is a blessing and a Reminder to that. So my point is even in translation, we can get at that message that we are already aware of and that we are being reminded about.
Do we need to know a much Arabic to understand any 'finer' points? Only Allah swt knows the answer to that. He bestows understanding and guidance.
I tried to keep this 'short and sweet' as they say and that's one the reasons I didn't quote you, but I found I should explain more. I hope you can appreciate that and that it does not become a source of contention.
QuoteI actually believe that Muhammad was a man. If mmKhan wants to explore different possibilities, who am I to stop him? I know that I explore different ideas about Ramadan, Shaytan etc. We can all discuss here but it is much better and in the spirit of the Quran and the believer to keep a more civil tone.
I am sorry, you what? "I actually believe that Muhammad was a man. If mmKhan wants to explore different possibilities" Read that back to yourself!
Look - discussion is one thing. Deliberate dishonesty is something else. I am have not objected the having such discussions in the 1st place. No - the honesty and the truth of it. What would you do if you were in my shoes? And saw someone making errors. Point them out? Expect the person to pay heed. If not - your tone would become harsher. Or would you stand by and not do anything about clear falsehood?
QuoteYou said that we don't need to know Arabic to follow the central principles/be a 'simple believer', then you ask me which principles those are? They are the principles of Islam that one can follow without knowing Arabic - as you already agreed to.
As I pointed out - me and you hold different views on such matter - so I would like to hear what you hold to be the basics? And I would still ike to know.
QuoteIn terms of 'stupidity', as we are told not to name call, I would class that as going against the Quran.
How? Name-calling is something else. Calling stupidity is something different. For example what do you call someone who lies? A liar. Isn't it the Quran that calls out ignorance and stupidity, among other things?
QuoteIf mmKhan is being truly sincere and seeking Allah's swt guidance along the way, then he is simply seeking the truth as best he can. I am sorry if that answer is not good enough for you. Allah swt is the best Judge.
The whole point! It is perfectly clear, he is not being sincere.
QuoteMy point about the Quran and the so called 'beating' verse, was in relation to the point that I believe we don't need to know Arabic to understand the Quran
Look, disagree strongly with this and I do find this as sheer nonsense and stupidity. We do need the Arabic to understand the Quran! That is common sense! I cannot disguise that.
QuoteWhen we hear the Quran is it just that it speaks to us if we know Arabic, or does it speak to us on a deeper level? As a Muslim... I'm sure you know what I'm getting at with the deeper level part, i.e. the way in which the Quran is very moving when you listen to it in Arabic even if you cannot understand what all the words mean in Arabic itself.
If you cannot "get" Quran at primary level, I doubt you can get "deeper depths". Yes some non-Muslims hear it and their heart is changed. But that is not under discussion.
Mr Khan was using Arabic. he started its use, hence why the discussion arose. Why is he building an Arabic langauge argument, when he is not even aware of the basics? It is a perfectly valid question?
QuoteI don't know what reference you are talking about but no - it was not to you. I agree with you that Muhammad was a man and I agree with mmKhan that we don't need to know Arabic in order to understandthe Quran.
To me, that is completely wrong. We do need to know Arabic. Doesn't Quran itself say it is in Arabic? Else you cannot understand one word of Quran.
And please go back and look this up. Why was Mr Khan building an argument out of the language of Quran, when he does not understand it? I would really appreciate an answer.
QuoteThe Quran as a reminder: I explained that in my original post. My point is that we do not need to know Arabic to understand the main message of the Quran.
So how else do you understand it?
QuoteWe already know of the moral issues, the devotion and sincerity necessary, the logical conclusion that there is one God - with or without the Quran.
In other words, because you were brought up in a Muslim house hold and you got that from you parents. Sorry, but this is a circular argument, a likely paradox.
QuoteOf course, the Quran is a blessing and a Reminder to that. So my point is even in translation, we can get at that message that we are already aware of and that we are being reminded about.
All this is somewhat off topic. You cannot understand Quran without the language. As you have yourself said [see above] external perceptions have nothing to do with the Quran. Hence you did not achieve them from Quran. So, to read Quran you need to know Arabic. I am sorry, but that is just common sense!
What you are saying is this:
We do not need a Maths book to know about Maths and its usefulness. However to learn and apply Maths. One does need to learn what the Maths book says.
Hence:
We do not need the Quran book to know about God. However to learn and apply God's instructions. We do need to learn what the Quran says. And we can only get to this knowledge, by learning Arabic.
QuoteDo we need to know a much Arabic to understand any 'finer' points? Only Allah swt knows the answer to that. He bestows understanding and guidance.
Brother, you are confusing the issues here. If the 'finer points' relate to language, then we do need Arabic. As was the case with Mr. Khan's argument.
Why did he start down this path of Arabic. Then when he is pulled up short and is now attempting to move the goal posts by saying that Arabic isn't needed.
Peace Chimp,
If this is going off topic, maybe we should leave it. I was not really brought up in a religious household. Plus, I also left Islam for a bit and then came back. But the point about already knowing morality etc is because God has imbued us with a level of understanding, that is why the Quran is also a Reminder (and a confirmation) - of what we already know (and what has gone before.)
And I am not a brother. I don't know why you are asking me 'how else do you understand the Quran?' - if you don't know Arabic, what would you do? Ask Allah swt for guidance, seek out many translations. Then you can start look at the transliteration where possible as you learn bits of terminology.
Quote from: Earthdom on June 01, 2013, 12:21:14 PM
Peace.What I mean is not like this bro mmmkhan.
mmkhan looks like you're expert in arabic but?
Did you know if tanwin "un" is to make clear if that owner of the name is male/mudzakka or female/mussnat.
Example:
مُسلِمُ =muslimun (for male)
مُسْلِمَةٌ=muslimatun (for female)
فَاطِمَةُ=fathimatun (for female)
دَاوُدُ, يُوْسُفُ , etc
Evidence that you must see,mmkhan:
إِذْ قَالَ يُوسُفُ لِأَبِيهِ يَا أَبَتِ إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ أَحَدَ عَشَرَ كَوْكَبًا وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ رَأَيْتُهُمْ لِي سَاجِدِينَ
See the word Yusuf also using dhammah so it's impossible if Yusuf is not a name.
وَإِذْ يَرْفَعُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ الْقَوَاعِدَ مِنَ الْبَيْتِ وَإِسْمَاعِيلُ رَبَّنَا تَقَبَّلْ مِنَّا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ
Look Ibrahim's name also using dhammah too.
مَرَرْتُ بغُلاَمِ زَيْدٍ الفَاضِلِ
The word zaid is using kasrah tanwin, but Zaid is not only noun but a male which became noun.So the word Zaid is a mudzakkar name.It's strange if the word Zaid isn't a name.
Good point by brother the Chimp
Peace Earthdom,
Please read my post above yours.
Quote
:& :& I hope you're not Christian misionaries who disguised as Muslim like in another online Muslim forum did.
I have nothing to say on this except 25:4.
25:4
وَ قَالَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اِفۡکُۨ افۡتَرٰىہُ وَ اَعَانَہٗ عَلَیۡہِ قَوۡمٌ اٰخَرُوۡنَ ۚۛ فَقَدۡ جَآءُوۡ ظُلۡمًا وَّ زُوۡرًا 25:4 And those who disbelieve say, "This is not except a falsehood he invented, and others have helped him at it." But they have committed an injustice and a lie.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Salam Mr. Kahn,
QuoteDid I talk about Arabic, really? When? Where? Why?
Yes, Read: "I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween"
This is talking about Arabic.
QuoteDo you find me talking about man-made Arabic grammar there? Please point me if you find it.
What is and isn't man-made Arabic? To this day - I am only aware of 1 Arabic. Is there an alternative? Where? So I can learn it too. Does this Arabic have different grammar rules?
QuoteRed: How? How are they dismissed, you just said I am wrong and we have to agree with you.
Blue: Please point me to them again, sorry I missed them.
No - I am not going to do that. This is plainly dishonest. If you wish to start again. Then in a separate post please state you point clearly [nothing else] then I will answer.
QuoteWake up brother! Just don't rush... I am discussing alQuraan not man-made Arabic grammar full of errors.
The vocalize these:
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض
How do you pronounce these funny looking letters? And separately could you also give 5 errors within this "man-made Arabic"?
QuoteI am not strong enough to judge and deny aayaat of alQuraan based on man-made Arabic grammar. If you can, then please do, I don't have to do anything with it.
You mean you do not know any Arabic. And this is just an excuse. Who else is claiming this? Where is your Arabic? I am willing to listen?
QuoteThis is because, you are claiming to be a sunni and I am not at all interested in discussing with any sects. Because they are already set their minds, so nothing can go through their throat. I have experienced it personally many many times. Sorry to say this, but it is you who said to be a sunni about yourself and also you have shown your anger against alQuraan aloners.
I have been patient and courteous - whilst you have implied I am a kafir and whatnot . . what was it? Dumb, blind, etc. Overwhelmingly Muslims have been Sunni for the life of Islam. So it is you who is the sect.
QuoteRed: Did I say that? You see, how you are in rush and making baseless conclusions? Please scroll above and see again what I wrote. Your rush and conclusions are making your wrong, so, please be patient and seek Allah help on every step you take.
Nope, my dear Mr Khan. This is a baseless accusation. You will realise it:
"Also - not a single person, whose names you quoted above, have agreed with your position. Or jumped up and answer on your behalf."
Read this again. All those people you were thanking:
"Thanks to supportpeacenotwar, huruf, man of faith and zone for your kind words. May Allah bless you."
Did not stand by your pet theory that Muhammad is a title.
So where is this baseless conclusion that i have made?
QuoteI am happy to see that :yes And my ultimate support is from Allah, alhamduliAllah. :hail
Everyone claims this. A point of absolutely zero importance and value. The Almighty sustains even those who do not agree he exists!
QuoteI am surprise to know that... then what is the purpose of alQuraan? Is it just to get 10 favors for each word read? I don't think so. If you understand the meaning of kafir, then you may agree. Yes, that is because, I am kafir of your deen.
See - you are happy enough to call others "Kafir"! I doubt the almighty intended a small band of people to attain the "truth" 1,500 years after the advent of Islam. As you imply. Your religion is completely new.
QuoteAgain??? :o
Where am I talking about man-made Arabic?
So which Arabic were you talking about? And what is "Tanween"? I know what it is in er . . . man made Arabic.
Quote from: Earthdom on June 01, 2013, 12:21:14 PM
Peace.What I mean is not like this bro mmmkhan.
mmkhan looks like you're expert in arabic but?
Did you know if tanwin "un" is to make clear if that owner of the name is male/mudzakka or female/mussnat.
Example:
مُسلِمُ =muslimun (for male)
مُسْلِمَةٌ=muslimatun (for female)
فَاطِمَةُ=fathimatun (for female)
دَاوُدُ, يُوْسُفُ , etc
Evidence that you must see,mmkhan:
إِذْ قَالَ يُوسُفُ لِأَبِيهِ يَا أَبَتِ إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ أَحَدَ عَشَرَ كَوْكَبًا وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ رَأَيْتُهُمْ لِي سَاجِدِينَ
See the word Yusuf also using dhammah so it's impossible if Yusuf is not a name.
وَإِذْ يَرْفَعُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ الْقَوَاعِدَ مِنَ الْبَيْتِ وَإِسْمَاعِيلُ رَبَّنَا تَقَبَّلْ مِنَّا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ
Look Ibrahim's name also using dhammah too.
مَرَرْتُ بغُلاَمِ زَيْدٍ الفَاضِلِ
The word zaid is using kasrah tanwin, but Zaid is not only noun but a male which became noun.So the word Zaid is a mudzakkar name.It's strange if the word Zaid isn't a name.
Good point by brother the Chimp
:& :& I hope you're not Christian misionaries who disguised as Muslim like in another online Muslim forum did.
Mr Khan has already said he is not an expert of Arabic. Man made Arabi that is! It appears he has a different version. God knows, what its rules are!
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
Peace Chimp,
If this is going off topic, maybe we should leave it. I was not really brought up in a religious household. Plus, I also left Islam for a bit and then came back. But the point about already knowing morality etc is because God has imbued us with a level of understanding, that is why the Quran is also a Reminder (and a confirmation) - of what we already know (and what has gone before.)
And I am not a brother. I don't know why you are asking me 'how else do you understand the Quran?' - if you don't know Arabic, what would you do? Ask Allah swt for guidance, seek out many translations. Then you can start look at the transliteration where possible as you learn bits of terminology.
Sorry Sister!
But using translations IS relying on Arabic. Only then you are moving to second had resources. I would have thought this reliance on translations would be abhorrent. As for seeking out guidance, doesn't that lead back to Arabic. As the Quran itself says it is in Arabic. Hence, learn Arabic.
"Then you can start look at the transliteration where possible as you learn bits of terminology."
Again, this is going back to learning Arabic!
It does appear that we are not really in conflict. Knowing Arabic is essential.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
Plus, I also left Islam for a bit and then came back.
I hope you don't end like this verse sister :(
4:137 Those who believed, then rejected, then believed, then rejected,
then they increased in rejection; God was not to forgive them nor
to guide them to the path.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
And I am not a brother. I don't know why you are asking me 'how else do you understand the Quran?' - if you don't know Arabic, what would you do? Ask Allah swt for guidance, seek out many translations. Then you can start look at the transliteration where possible as you learn bits of terminology.
As who do know nothing about arab and don't want to know about it, then I recommend you for reading only this translations:
-Free Mind Translation
-Reformist Transaltion
-http://www.sublimequran.org/
-Rashad Khalifa's or another Quranist translations
Remember only read translations by Quran aloners, because this translation is free sectarian and you dont need to worry anymore.
Islam is not about Arab language, fatwas, the more important is your faith, your heart.
2:177 Piety is not to turn your faces towards the east and the west, but pious is one who believes in God and the Last Day, and the angels, and the Book, and the prophets, and who gives money out of love to the relatives, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and those who ask, and to free the slaves; and who upholds the contact prayer, and who contributes towards purification; and
those who keep their pledges when they make a pledge, and those who are patient in the face of hardship and adversity and when
in despair. These are the ones who have been truthful, and these are the righteous
Peace Chimp,
Seeking out guidance could be many many different things, first is with Allah swt who can guide us on how to use our reason and logic, as well as some more 'intuitive' knowledge. Other ways could include finding out more about other people's interpretations, such as coming on here and another way could include finding out more about some of the Arabic terminology in the Quran, yes. This would also go back to the point that the Quran is for the whole of mankind... everyone. So knowledge of Arabic can help but I wouldn't call it essential.
'You alone we worship and from You alone we seek aid' - from Surah Fatiha. Whatever we find and whatever we understand of the Quran, we know that it is ultimately a journey that we constantly ask God swt for help with and that it is God swt who grants us knowledge - and no I'm not talking direct revelations.
I could go into poetic things about the language of the Quran but I don't think that's necessary and like you said, we are going off topic. We should leave it, at least on this thread.
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 12:52:57 PM
Salam Mr. Kahn,
Yes, Read: "I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween"
This is talking about Arabic.
Salaam brother, [this is second time you wrote my name wrongly willingly or unwillingly.]
You are really funny, I am sorry to say that... but did you understand what I wrote above? Am I talking about alQuraan or man-made Arabic grammar?
Quote
What is and isn't man-made Arabic? To this day - I am only aware of 1 Arabic. Is there an alternative? Where? So I can learn it too. Does this Arabic have different grammar rules?
Don't you know of other Arabic? Sad, anyways, let me tell you, there are differences between Saudi Arabic, Syrian Arabic, Misr Arabic, Lebanon Arabic, etc. etc...
But I was talking about Arabic of alQuraan, which is different from all.
Quote
No - I am not going to do that. This is plainly dishonest. If you wish to start again. Then in a separate post please state you point clearly [nothing else] then I will answer.
Fine, I will do the same for you, inshaAllah.
Quote
The vocalize these:
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض
How do you pronounce these funny looking letters? And separately could you also give 5 errors within this "man-made Arabic"?
No - I am not going to do that.
Quote
You mean you do not know any Arabic. And this is just an excuse. Who else is claiming this? Where is your Arabic? I am willing to listen?
Listen alQuraan!
Quote
I have been patient and courteous - whilst you have implied I am a kafir and whatnot . . what was it? Dumb, blind, etc. Overwhelmingly Muslims have been Sunni for the life of Islam. So it is you who is the sect.
Me, called you kafir :nope: Show me where did I call you a kafir?
Brother, please understand, if you do something like kafirs do, then surely you will fall under those aayaats that shows their behavior, so it is not me who is calling you kafir, but Allah is categorizing it. Was it not that Allah said so? Or do you think I made that aayat myself? Check, aayat no. is already given.
Quote
Nope, my dear Mr Khan. This is a baseless accusation. You will realise it:
"Also - not a single person, whose names you quoted above, have agreed with your position. Or jumped up and answer on your behalf."
Read this again. All those people you were thanking:
"Thanks to supportpeacenotwar, huruf, man of faith and zone for your kind words. May Allah bless you."
Did not stand by your pet theory that Muhammad is a title.
So where is this baseless conclusion that i have made?
See again you rush and get to conclusions... Look at the highlighted part above. Is it not a baseless accusation you made :hmm
Quote
Everyone claims this. A point of absolutely zero importance and value. The Almighty sustains even those who do not agree he exists!
Then why don't you say so brother, I would love to listen this from you. :yes
Quote
See - you are happy enough to call others "Kafir"! I doubt the almighty intended a small band of people to attain the "truth" 1,500 years after the advent of Islam. As you imply. Your religion is completely new.
Again! Did I call you a kafir, or did I say I am happy saying that? :nope:
"small band of people"? Well tell me how many were ashab-alKahaf? If you know.
Quote
So which Arabic were you talking about? And what is "Tanween"? I know what it is in er . . . man made Arabic.
If Arabic of alQuraan matched [lets say 50% or so] with man made Arabic, does it mean, you give credit to man-made Arabic over alQuraan? And you try to understand and correct alQuraan through man-made Arabic? Only if you understand.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace Earthdom,
Thanks for your concern, I place my trust in Allah swt and I believe the way I was guided back is almost a sign in itself. That verse you mention about leaving faith, then coming back several times, that could also be about people who call themselves Muslim but they don't really believe and don't really follow through. When I 'left' Islam, I still believed Islam had truth to it, and was a great faith, my personal story is not necessary here though. So i don't know whether technically I believed in some of the Quran and Islam even then... it was a while ago so I can't recall everything entirely but Allah swt knows best.
Yes, Islam is about your faith, intent and actions.
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 12:04:52 PM
Zone,
Try concentrating on your words:
"You have shown your true colors, the sunni character"
In other words - you already have prejudice against over 1 billion people!
I am sorry - but that is far worse. I have specifically been against Mr. Khan and his views. Have you bothered to read the posts? I have been quite restraint aagainst someone who call me a "Kafir".
A meaningless ideas are just that - meaningless. Ignorance is ignorance. Stupidity is stupidity. Getting basics of Arabic wrong but obstinately advocating a view built upon wrong information is all three.
And I have not proceeded to imply anyone as Kafir.
Have you been following this thread? The last thing I expect to see is making mistakes in Arabic and building arguments upon mistakes. Sorry, but have you missed all that. And are you simply trying to "abuse" me for being Sunni? That is what your comments seem to imply.
So why are you belittle me? It is clear you have not followed the thread and you are not aware of the argument so far. This is about mmKhan making blatant errors and still claiming credence for his views.
What has this got to do with:
Have the decency and the good grace to be truthful and honest and at least follow the thread, IF you are going to comment. Else do not bother, purely on the basis of bigotry [evidence read the 1st objection above] .
And quoting verses is no argument.
Peace.
When two conceptual ideas differ, they represent many differing positions, frame of references, premises, methodologies, parameters and origins of knowledge. It just prove that Quran and Hadith do not match, so same to sunnahAllah and sunnahrasul. You your way me mine.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 01:11:41 PM
Peace Chimp,
Seeking out guidance could be many many different things, first is with Allah swt who can guide us on how to use our reason and logic, as well as some more 'intuitive' knowledge. Other ways could include finding out more about other people's interpretations, such as coming on here and another way could include finding out more about some of the Arabic terminology in the Quran, yes. This would also go back to the point that the Quran is for the whole of mankind... everyone. So knowledge of Arabic can help but I wouldn't call it essential.
'You alone we worship and from You alone we seek aid' - from Surah Fatiha. Whatever we find and whatever we understand of the Quran, we know that it is ultimately a journey that we constantly ask God swt for help with and that it is God swt who grants us knowledge - and no I'm not talking direct revelations.
I could go into poetic things about the language of the Quran but I don't think that's necessary and like you said, we are going off topic. We should leave it, at least on this thread.
Salaam supportpeacenotwar,
Just know how to read Arabic or learning Arabic language is totally different than what you experience directly from your Lord. But unfortunately, this is really hard to explain it to others.
I agree with you :handshake:
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: zone on June 01, 2013, 01:18:32 PM
Peace.
When two conceptual ideas differ, they represent many differing positions, frame of references, premises, methodologies, parameters and origins of knowledge. It just prove that Quran and Hadith do not match, so same to sunnahAllah and sunnahrasul. You your way me mine.
Zone,
As I said, please have the decency to follow the argument/thread else not comment. It is clear you haven't. The only reason, it appears, you are having a go at me is due to your prejudice, and nothing more.
" It just prove that Quran and Hadith do not match"
How? This have not been an argument about Hadith and Quran? So how does this proof come about?
Like I keep saying, this has got nothing to do with:
"two conceptual ideas differ, they represent many differing positions, frame of references, premises, methodologies, parameters and origins of knowledge"
You didn't follow the thread. Just demonised me, because you felt I was some how the "enemy". Else what 2 concepts are differing here?
Mr Khan,
QuoteSalaam brother, [this is second time you wrote my name wrongly willingly or unwillingly.]
I am sorry. But it is a basic typo. I didn't notice.
QuoteYou are really funny, I am sorry to say that... but did you understand what I wrote above? Am I talking about alQuraan or man-made Arabic grammar?
Why ask me? What are you talking about. Just state it.
QuoteDon't you know of other Arabic? Sad, anyways, let me tell you, there are differences between Saudi Arabic, Syrian Arabic, Misr Arabic, Lebanon Arabic, etc. etc...
But I was talking about Arabic of alQuraan, which is different from all.
Your responses amaze me! huh? No one was TALKING ABOUT DIALECTIC ARABIC - THAT WAS NOT EVEN UNDER DISCUSSION - EVERYONE SLIGHTLY FAMILIAR WITH ARABIC KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE.
I am sorry for shouting. But talking to you is turning out to be like banging one's head against the wall.
There is only 1 Arabic when Quran is mentioned. Just 1.
QuoteFine, I will do the same for you, inshaAllah.
I will wait - and look forward to it.
QuoteNo - I am not going to do that.
Why not? If your Arabic is different, then why are you not going to share it?
In my er. . . man made Arabic, they are vocalized as Alif, Baa, Taa, Thaa. . . etc.
QuoteListen alQuraan!
Again - what language is that? Quran is book written in classical Arabic. "AlQuran" is not a language. Where are the grammar rules?
QuoteMe, called you kafir :nope: Show me where did I call you a kafir?
Brother, please understand, if you do something like kafirs do, then surely you will fall under those aayaats that shows their behavior, so it is not me who is calling you kafir, but Allah is categorizing it. Was it not that Allah said so? Or do you think I made that aayat myself? Check, aayat no. is already given.
Read above posts - I have already mentioned it.
QuoteSee again you rush and get to conclusions... Look at the highlighted part above. Is it not a baseless accusation you made :hmm
Clearly not. And you are rather good at pretending to know things.
Quote"small band of people"? Well tell me how many were ashab-alKahaf? If you know.
Try not to go off topic, as you do that often, I am interested in this Arabic of yours? Where is it?
QuoteIf Arabic of alQuraan matched [lets say 50% or so] with man made Arabic, does it mean, you give credit to man-made Arabic over alQuraan? And you try to understand and correct alQuraan through man-made Arabic? Only if you understand.
What is this Arabic of yours. Where is it? Please stop playing games. I have asked you plenty of time. And this is going nowhere.
The only Arabic I know is Classical Arabic and its modern variation MSA. However there is only little difference between the two. As for dialectic Arabic. That is NOT under discussion.
Now please stop this nonsense. Either answer or leave it. I do not appreciate tom foolery.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 01:11:41 PM
Peace Chimp,
Seeking out guidance could be many many different things, first is with Allah swt who can guide us on how to use our reason and logic, as well as some more 'intuitive' knowledge. Other ways could include finding out more about other people's interpretations, such as coming on here and another way could include finding out more about some of the Arabic terminology in the Quran, yes. This would also go back to the point that the Quran is for the whole of mankind... everyone. So knowledge of Arabic can help but I wouldn't call it essential.
'You alone we worship and from You alone we seek aid' - from Surah Fatiha. Whatever we find and whatever we understand of the Quran, we know that it is ultimately a journey that we constantly ask God swt for help with and that it is God swt who grants us knowledge - and no I'm not talking direct revelations.
I could go into poetic things about the language of the Quran but I don't think that's necessary and like you said, we are going off topic. We should leave it, at least on this thread.
We come back to the same point repeatedly, sister. If you do not understand Quran through the language, how els do you understand it? There is no other way. You might cover your argument with extraneous points, but we come to this. It is common sense that to read a book, one needs to know the language it is written is. hence it is essential. To say otherwise is "stupidity".
Quote from: mmkhan on June 01, 2013, 01:23:27 PM
Salaam supportpeacenotwar,
Just know how to read Arabic or learning Arabic language is totally different than what you experience directly from your Lord. But unfortunately, this is really hard to explain it to others.
I agree with you :handshake:
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
You do not experience anything directly from Allah. Else why bother with the book? I do not agree. And hold this to be sheer nonsense. There is no other way of putting it.
Peace The_Chimp.
I don't expect you to be like me. To me this is Freemind. I don't use my masters in whatever field I am into to bash people's knowledge. Show the difference that's all. Let Allah be the judge on what we differ.
As for mmkhan position paper, there is now an alternative interpretation. Put yours. If they differ so what? It is not something new such things happen in all fields of knowledge.
Quote from: zone on June 01, 2013, 01:49:46 PM
Peace The_Chimp.
I don't expect you to be like me. To me this is Freemind. I don't use my masters in whatever field I am into to bash people's knowledge. Show the difference that's all. Let Allah be the judge on what we differ.
As for mmkhan position paper, there is now an alternative interpretation. Put yours. If they differ so what? It is not something new such things happen in all fields of knowledge.
You cannot "bash" knowledge. Not understanding basics of something and getting it wrong and then building arguments over it and preaching to others is just wrong. Absolutely wrong. Misinformation is NOT knowledge. Falsehood is not knowledge.
QuoteShow the difference that's all. Let Allah be the judge on what we differ.
I am sorry, but you have made some outlandish judgements against me, just by your prejudice for me. It isn't about showing the difference. It is about basic virtue of right and wrong.
QuoteAs for mmkhan position paper, there is now an alternative interpretation. Put yours. If they differ so what? It is not something new such things happen in all fields of knowledge.
What do you mean so what? This is not about 2 different interpretation. Do you even know what this tread is about? If someone gets their basic Arabic wrong then this is not about 2 different positions. There are no other positions other than Mr Khan's. And that is CLEARLY build on falsehood.
Peace The_Chimp.
This is my last post to you. Are you offended when i highlighted that you are a typical sunni character calling others stupid, ignorant and meaningless when someone present something different from the traditional belief. That is the remarks you made in this thread. I am sure it must be based on your knowledge and wisdom. So I am among the stupid, ignorant, supporter of falsehood. I am okay with that. What else have I not been called by sunnis? Kafr, satan, the demolisher of truth. I am sure when they said this it is not baseless. It must be from the knowledge that they have, the mastery of religion and the Arabic language and the voice of the majority one billion people. If it is true I deserve it. So what?
Quote from: mmkhan on June 01, 2013, 01:23:27 PM
Salaam supportpeacenotwar,
Just know how to read Arabic or learning Arabic language is totally different than what you experience directly from your Lord. But unfortunately, this is really hard to explain it to others.
I agree with you :handshake:
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Salaam mmKhan,
Yes, very true, and one can know Arabic very well they won't appreciate the message of the Quran. There are ex-Muslims who know Arabic for example. As it states in the Quran, Allah swt grants many different types of knowledge. The Prophets like Jacob were given what appears to be an intuitive knowledge - such as when Jacob senses Yusuf and people tell him Yusuf is not here, but Yusuf's coat is in brought in. This may not be the type of knowledge we are given, but I think it shows there are 'intuitive' ways of understanding things. I hope that makes sense!
:peace:
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 02:22:28 PM
Salaam mmKhan,
Yes, very true, and one can know Arabic very well they won't appreciate the message of the Quran. There are ex-Muslims who know Arabic for example. As it states in the Quran, Allah swt grants many different types of knowledge. The Prophets like Jacob were given what appears to be an intuitive knowledge - such as when Jacob senses Yusuf and people tell him Yusuf is not here, but Yusuf's coat is in brought in. This may not be the type of knowledge we are given, but I think it shows there are 'intuitive' ways of understanding things. I hope that makes sense!
:peace:
Sister,
It does not make sense. You are confusing the issues again. Faith is something different. It is absolutely essential to know Arabic. And there are no two ways about it.
Quote from: Man of Faith on May 31, 2013, 02:08:22 AM
Peace Bender,
Not particularly this topic although it is highly controversial a theory. Sounds very far fetched that people for over 1400 years been roaming the Earth falsely believing their prophet was named Muhammad while he was not.
Salaamun alayka,
BLUE: You know what a highly controversial theory is? That it is also a the proper name of the first man who received The Quran
GREEN: No you did not say this :nope:
you were Christian before no? How many years do they believe according to their own sources that Jesus son Mary is God and His son?
QuoteAlthough, hadith mainly refers to him as Allah's apostle and not by his name most of the time.
You think they only name him Allah's apostle? He has according to some of them 99 names just as much as how many names they think Allah has.
here a link with his names: http://www.ezsoftech.com/islamic/infallible1f.asp
There is at least 1 member here on this forum who calls him Lord, that is highly controversial don't you think.
QuoteWell, not matter if your reasoning would be true or not it is still viable to refer to him as Muhammad, if but because it is his title as you claim. Just remember many names in the middle-east have another meaning than simply a name, for example, both Hassan and Hussein have other uses as words, so with your reasoning these people cannot be real persons?
I think you missed the point.
How Mohammed is used in the ayaats of the Quran is not used as a proper name. Just like you can use hassan or mohsin as not proper names.
QuoteI am sure the prophet of Quran is named in the scripture. Maybe his name was Ahmad and changed to Muhammad like Ibrahim was only called Ibram before messengership.
RED: maybe that is just one of many the possibilities for me now.
BLUE: You know that your source for this claim is for me a :nope:
QuoteYou tend to get it wrong though with my and other's tendency to want to stick with the name or nickname Muhammad, that it is due to remnants of idolatry and we want to stubbornly defend this posture until the end. I could not care less about the name of the prophet of Quran, but it is natural that one uses a name to refer to something if but as a codename. We, humans, tend to give names to all sorts of things for easier reference and "prophet of Quran" is an awkward solution.
BLUE: I agree, such person does not exist ;) just joking, I know what you mean. For me as long as I can't proof from the Quran what his/her/their name was then I don't like to give him/her/them a name.
QuoteGive me the true name of the prophet and I will gladly change my usage. You said earlier that the true name might be right in front of our eyes so keep looking and later try to convince me about your discovery. Until then I will use Muhammad if not because this is the way God refers to him (and as you seem to claim, other apostles).
GREEN: sorry don't know
Rest: :handshake:
QuotePhilosophies are always appreciated, brother Bender, but until your theory gains foothold and other evidential backup it is still too controversial to believe. It is like a conspiracy theory. Many people believe you just do everything to nullify the religion of traditional muslims, just like the people around here who cut in the practices of praying, fasting and the likes. I am sure this may not be your intent but you are wary that the Quran is 1400 years old and not correctly understood like the ants of the valley that brother noshirk solved the riddle and meant something else.
How many things do you do different from the Sunni's? why is that not controversial?
QuoteKeep looking and I am open to further philosophies, but until then Muhammad is Muhammad.
God bless you
May Allah bless you too,
Bender
Quote from: zone on June 01, 2013, 02:19:00 PM
Peace The_Chimp.
This is my last post to you. Are you offended when i highlighted that you are a typical sunni character calling others stupid, ignorant and meaningless when someone present something different from the traditional belief. That is the remarks you made in this thread. I am sure it must be based on your knowledge and wisdom. So I am among the stupid, ignorant, supporter of falsehood. I am okay with that. What else have I not been called by sunnis? Kafr, satan, the demolisher of truth. I am sure when they said this it is not baseless. It must be from the knowledge that they have, the mastery of religion and the Arabic language and the voice of the majority one billion people. If it is true I deserve it. So what?
Mr Zone,
QuoteAre you offended when i highlighted that you are a typical sunni character calling others stupid, ignorant and meaningless when someone present something different from the traditional belief. That is the remarks you made in this thread.
Where? Do point it out. This is simply shows your prejudice. And that is it. I have highlighted several dishonest statements of yours. And you have not bothered to answer. You did not bother to read the thread or follow the argument. Just had a go at me! So, you have no room to talk.
QuoteI am sure it must be based on your knowledge and wisdom. So I am among the stupid, ignorant, supporter of falsehood. I am okay with that.
Yes. You have ventured to support falsehood. I have proved it. And now you are turning around trotting off. Good luck
QuoteWhat else have I not been called by sunnis? Kafr, satan, the demolisher of truth. I am sure when they said this it is not baseless. It must be from the knowledge that they have, the mastery of religion and the Arabic language and the voice of the majority one billion people. If it is true I deserve it. So what?
What makes you think I care what others have been calling you? Frankly I am not surprised. Look at the way you behave! I am sorry you have an aversion to truth. But I cannot do anything about it.
Well Good bye and be on your way!
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 02:29:33 PM
Sister,
It does not make sense. You are confusing the issues again. Faith is something different. It is absolutely essential to know Arabic. And there are no two ways about it.
Peace brother,
So would you say that the Quran is mainly for Arabs and fluent Arabic speakers?
Quote from: Bender on June 01, 2013, 02:34:20 PM
Salaamun alayka,
BLUE: You know what a highly controversial theory is? That it is also a the proper name of the first man who received The Quran
GREEN: No you did not say this :nope:
you were Christian before no? How many years do they believe according to their own sources that Jesus son Mary is God and His son?
You think they only name him Allah's apostle? He has according to some of them 99 names just as much as how many names they think Allah has.
here a link with his names: http://www.ezsoftech.com/islamic/infallible1f.asp
There is at least 1 member here on this forum who calls him Lord, that is highly controversial don't you think.
I think you missed the point.
How Mohammed is used in the ayaats of the Quran is not used as a proper name. Just like you can use hassan or mohsin as not proper names.
RED: maybe that is just one of many the possibilities for me now.
BLUE: You know that your source for this claim is for me a :nope:
BLUE: I agree, such person does not exist ;) just joking, I know what you mean. For me as long as I can't proof from the Quran what his/her/their name was then I don't like to give him/her/them a name.
GREEN: sorry don't know
Rest: :handshake:
How many things do you do different from the Sunni's? why is that not controversial?
May Allah bless you too,
Bender
QuoteYou think they only name him Allah's apostle? He has according to some of them 99 names just as much as how many names they think Allah has.
here a link with his names: http://www.ezsoftech.com/islamic/infallible1f.asp
There is at least 1 member here on this forum who calls him Lord, that is highly controversial don't you think.
This shows your ignorance of the issue. None of these are meant as personal names or Prophet Muhammad but names in praise - describing him.
QuoteHow Mohammed is used in the ayaats of the Quran is not used as a proper name. Just like you can use hassan or mohsin as not proper names.
This has has been exposed as completely wrong - repeating a false position is not of any worth.
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 02:37:23 PM
Peace brother,
So would you say that the Quran is mainly for Arabs and fluent Arabic speakers?
Obviously not. I am neither - an Arab nor a fluent Arabic speaker. Arabic can be learned by anyone. In knowing classical Arabic - unless I am speaking to a student of classical Arabic - I tend have more knowledge of classical Arabic than the average Arab.
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 07:36:29 AM
I know Classical Arabic very well. Although a non-Native, I have studied to Masters level.
Salaamun alayka,
nice
QuoteI find it to be meaningless. What "sign" are you talking about?
48:29
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّـهِ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّـهِ وَرِضْوَانًا ۖ سِيمَاهُمْ فِي وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ السُّجُودِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ ۚ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ فَآزَرَهُ فَاسْتَغْلَظَ فَاسْتَوَىٰ عَلَىٰ سُوقِهِ يُعْجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ الْكُفَّارَ ۗ وَعَدَ اللَّـهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًا How do you call this in Arabic? ayaat no?
QuoteThat is beginning of verse verse 48:29. All it says is Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. There is ABSOLUTELY no indication that the word Muhammad is a title of some kind.
Ok thank you for your translation.
Now is that statement valid today or not?
QuoteSo which verse am I not taking as it is? Please do not make petty accusations! In conclusion, you have no evidence for your "signs" and that is very clear. And you have not been able to present any.
RED: from memory 26:105 and 12:2
QuoteAs for the verse 26:105 that is simple and very clear
"The people of Noah denied the messengers"
Noah was the ONLY messenger sent to his people. A messenger point not only to Allah but to the messengers sent before him. Hence, his people denied him and those before him.
BLUE: I hope that I did not understood this correctly
RED: you see, you can not take the ayaat as it is but you have to invent your words in it by force. I already gave you ayaats were BEFORE and AFTER is used.
GREEN: there is nothing to hence, just a hence of your own wish.
QuoteThis is evidenced in the next verse:
"When their brother Noah said to them, "Will you not fear Allah ?"
You will not find a verse where any more messengers are mentioned addressing tribes OTHER THAN Noah. What does that tell you? Noah was the only messenger sent to his people
yes correct, Noah was the only one sent to his people but why then
26:105 "The people of Noah denied the messengers" And pleeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase don't come back with sentences with the word BEFORE in them, thx.
QuoteMight I be so bold to suggest, it is you that lacks expertise in Arabic.
yes you may suggest that :handshake:
salaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on May 31, 2013, 01:06:52 PM
mmKhan,
huh? I don't think you know much Arabic at all. Do you?
Tanween comes on ALL INDEFINITE NOUNS - except those that are Ghair Munsarif, upon whom Tanween is not applicable. For example the name Ibrahim - it doesn't take tanween becuase it is Gahir Munsarif - as non-Arabic names do not accept tanween. As all names are nouns - tanween occurs on them. Just because tanween is upon the name Muhammad that does NOT mean it isn't a name.
Salaamun alayka,
BLUE: Are you still trying to correct Allah?
Are you not afraid of Him :&
2:39
وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَكَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا أُولَـٰئِكَ أَصْحَابُ النَّارِ ۖ هُمْ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَSalaam,
Bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 02:43:50 PM
Obviously not. I am neither - an Arab nor a fluent Arabic speaker. Arabic can be learned by anyone. In knowing classical Arabic - unless I am speaking to a student of classical Arabic - I tend have more knowledge of classical Arabic than the average Arab.
Peace The Chimp,
Ok. When you say Arabic can be learned by anyone, doesn't that mean they will eventually become a fluent Arabic speaker? That is what I am referring to when I say do you think the Quran is for Arabs and Arabic speakers etc.
So how does that fit with: Arabic is essential for knowing the Quran? Arabs, those who know Arabic and/or classical arabic are on a better footing and according to you, they have the number 1 essential thing for knowing the Quran.
Some of here would say the number 1 thing you need is prayer to Allah swt.
Quote from: Bender on June 01, 2013, 02:59:02 PM
Salaamun alayka,
BLUE: Are you still trying to correct Allah?
Are you not afraid of Him :&
2:39 وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَكَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا أُولَـٰئِكَ أَصْحَابُ النَّارِ ۖ هُمْ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَ
Salaam,
Bender
Bender,
huh? You repeat yourself. You have said this before. When challenged you had no reply. Saying:
QuoteBLUE: Are you still trying to correct Allah?
Makes absolutely no sense.
Please explain HOW am I trying to correct Allah?
Ibrahim is a name of Hebrew origin. And it has been Arabicsed - hence it does not take Tanween. That is basic Arabic grammar.
See the sheer stupidity one is up against!
Bender. I have explained this to you. And you have no response. So tell me - what is the point of repeating the above? If you are unable to answer?
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 02:40:40 PM
This shows your ignorance of the issue. None of these are meant as personal names or Prophet Muhammad but names in praise - describing him.
Salaamun alayka,
Really? Maybe you did not know but I was a sunni just like you.
They are called the 99 beautiful names of Holy Prophet Muhammad al-Mustafa (pbuh).
So many praises, is he equal to Allah to whom the ulama also gave 99 names?
QuoteThis has has been exposed as completely wrong - repeating a false position is not of any worth.
where? please show me.
Or just for clarification it is even better if you expose it again in your reply, thank you very much.
salaam,
bender
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 03:03:28 PM
Bender,
huh? You repeat yourself. You have said this before. When challenged you had no reply. Saying:
Makes absolutely no sense.
Please explain HOW am I trying to correct Allah?
Ibrahim is a name of Hebrew origin. And it has been Arabicsed - hence it does not take Tanween. That is basic Arabic grammar.
See the sheer stupidity one is up against!
Bender. I have explained this to you. And you have no response. So tell me - what is the point of repeating the above? If you are unable to answer?
Salaamun alayka,
SubhanaAllah.
If you bring up all your Arabic grammar schoolbooks and that of your teachers and their teachers and their teachers etc etc etc it is 0% evidence against 1 ayaat of The One who created you and me and them all. InshaAllah soon you will understand otherwise I fear for you the consequences.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: mmkhan on May 31, 2013, 08:06:04 PM
Muhammadun is not the title of any known person or something... but every rasool is Muhammadun.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Salaamun alayka brother,
Every Rasulu Allah.
Salaam,
Bender
Peace Bender,
Yes. I used to be Christian or what to say, although I was unitarian, I did not believe in Jesus' divinity. I am not defending the belief in the trinity which I felt was ignorant back then already. I am still in the slightly dangerous seat of favoring Jesus, but it is a healthy admiration I think. By no means I say thank jesus or things like that or believe in any intercession whatsoever.
You got me wrong, brother Bender, I did not defend the validity of the prophet's name with my utterance of the mentions of apostle for Muhammad in hadith. Well, in fact I tried to defend your stand a little.
Brother, I meant by controversial that it is very new and here is no big foundation to go on so far if your theory happened to actually be true. Controversial means it arises intense discussions and attention because it is difficult to believe. It does not say that something being controversial cannot be true.
However, it seems like The_Chimp has a point when it comes to his remarks on the claim that Muhammad was only a title, although I disagree that one should let his tone become harsh against those who may be committing an error. I would like to see the discussion on more friendly and islamic terms and that we could peacefully find a good answer to the issue.
Not defending anyone I am thinking that we should remember what is written in the Quran about proper conduct. Even disbelievers should be met respectfully. We are only showing our fellow Sunni brother that we are no better than his fellowship.
About Muhammad, Hassan etc 's use in Quran I did not misunderstand brother. I mentioned it as an example for us. I mentioned them because I know they are used also as common words.
I know my source for Ibrahim and Ibram is not valid for you. I just wanted to draw a hypothetical parallel. Ahmad it mentioned in Quran, which is basically of same root as Muhammad. Ibram and Ibrahim would also be the same root obviously and that was the parallel I wanted to make. Even if you doubt a source you can think hypothetically and even unreliable sources can carry a potential partial Truth enough to verify something pure.
I pray with prostration and bowing and some other meanings interpreted from Quran. That I do not consider following Sunni islam and the similarity is on a very superficial level to be honest. I searched deeper into the roots of the behavior of prostration and it has broader applicability than only religious purposes in ancient times. Even to bow your head is a sort of semi-prostration while going down on your head is the deepest kind of respect you can show someone. It is more than a ritual for me as you so kindly refer it as but as an obeisance paying homage.
I know I still use the disputable rakah pattern, but it is under investigation by me. I am checking and while I have found signs of invention I have not yet been able to prove it to myself. The roots of the trouble I have been looking for in hadith as off lately and it indeed looks as if the pattern commonly used by traditional muslims is an invention. I may soon change my ways. It seems there is no such pattern but all that counts is your intention and how devoted you would like to be. In the meantime I know I am not to blame for following the pattern in ignorance as I commit no idolatry. Last traces of following traditional islam I guess and I need to look somehow like others when I need to pray here in public in Iran.
Peace be with you brother Bender. No fighting intended.
God bless
Quote from: supportpeacenotwar on June 01, 2013, 02:59:38 PM
Peace The Chimp,
Ok. When you say Arabic can be learned by anyone, doesn't that mean they will eventually become a fluent Arabic speaker? That is what I am referring to when I say do you think the Quran is for Arabs and Arabic speakers etc.
So how does that fit with: Arabic is essential for knowing the Quran? Arabs, those who know Arabic and/or classical arabic are on a better footing and according to you, they have the number 1 essential thing for knowing the Quran.
Some of here would say the number 1 thing you need is prayer to Allah swt.
Salaamun alayki,
GREEN: Quranic Arabic is essential for knowing the Quran. The only one who can learn us this is AlRahmaan. But there are people in here who think they need also schoolarabic and scholars and bukhary.
RED: not only number 1 thing but ONLY thing :yes
salaam,
Bender
Peace Family,
Tanween does not always indicate indefiniteness; tanween is used with people's
proper names and those are always definite nouns. This is just one of the
peculiarities of Arabic.
Examples Muhammad or muhammad(un) مُحَمَّدٌ
Ali "aliyy(un) عَلِيٌّ
Tanween is NOT used for proper names of foreign origin that have more than
three letters.
The only definite singular nouns that take tanween are usually people's first names.
Structure: emphatic passive participle مُفَعَّلٌ
Meaning: much thanked, much praised
The name Muhammad can also appear in compound first names, like:
مُحَمَّد عَلِيّ
Many male proper names which are derived from nouns or adjectives have
(tanween) as their final vowel even though they are DEFINITE.
Example: حَامِدٌ is just ?Hamid?, and not ?a Hamid?
Note: Male names have tanween and hence have (-un) sound in the end.
God Bless
:peace:
Peace The_Chimp,
You are right that Sunni islam was not under discussion, but since you referred to the issues with Quran alone I took the liberty of highlighting flaws with your fellowship too.
Your "advantages" can also be disadvantages as you require consensus which may not always be right due to the hierarchical system of yours. Add over-reliance on hadith for guidance as a further intensifier of the disadvantageous perspective.
Without any better knowledge on the issue and your elaboration on the word usage in Arabic I insist that it is as you say regarding Muhammad. I was very skeptical to begin with, but now it seems even more unlikely. I felt that where the word Muhammad occurs in the Arabic discourse, it can never be any other than a name.
You can treat someone who is wrong with respect too, the Quran shows that possibility pretty clearly. I am not defending mmkhan's alleged bad language and sectarian accusations however. We must all prove we are muslims.
I have limited ability to link to other threads at the moment. However, I can agree with you that there are threads were people are a bit dangerously daring, for example, discussions on prayers and fasting where I do not agree at all. The Quran seems pretty clear on the topics discussed and yet it seems disputed somehow. Worth noting is that this is a free-minded Internet forum though, although taken a Quran only approach is not really bound to any sect or thinking. You choose yourself what you want to soak up.
I have said it before, but I can say it to a Sunni brother too: "Follow the best and ignore the rest".
I know there are very good articles hidden in the mess somewhere. I have read a whole bunch of good threads over the 5 months I have been a member. I think anyone can appreciate some of them, even a muslim with traditional thinking and who does not want to leave their ways.
Prejudiced over sectarian English translations of Quran? Well, I am surely rightly so, no offense intended. I prefer Quran translations without brackets and parentheses (for readability they are okay, but not for preconceived understandings). Adding O Muhammad where it does not exist in the Arabic script is not okay as well as many other examples.
Literal or at least translations not bound to a particular sect are the best ones in my opinion. You cannot come across the perfect translation because there is none, but you can have as neutral translation as possible. As you said, learning Arabic is the best solution and I am doing that on a small scale although it is not all I am doing in this life. I am using Zekr (program) with three translations at the moments plus Arabic text and an Arabic dictionary.
I do not claim I know much Arabic although I can read the script and understand some words and some minor grammatical rules. Apart from your belief I believe that God can enlighten even those with minor knowledge of His language of revelation.
Biased sources are those who twist the translations of Quran so that it does not reflect the original nature of it. There is no unbiased source, but less biased ones in my opinion. Even my more trusted Quran translations contain errors where I have to think for myself.
Anyway, I hope you understand that I am not hostile to your choice of calling yourself Sunni muslim. I hope you understand my reason for disliking some translations of Quran based on what I wrote. I wish all people on Earth could show a muslim-like behavior and there could be eternal peace, but I guess I have to wait and hope I get admitted to Paradise.
Peace be with you, always. Hope God will make it happen if it is according to His will.
God bless you
Peace mmkhan,
I personally think that this has been a great thread, mmkhan poses a question that
has an obvious answer, but is asking us to put some thought into the answer, nothing
wrong with that in a discussion forum. Please calm down and give what you have to
offer and don't forget God.
[49:10] The believers are members of one family; you shall keep the peace within your
family and reverence GOD, that you may attain mercy.
Here is the original article or something like it that the question is drawn from:
http://biblical-islam.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-proper-noun-muhammad-is-not-in.html
God Bless
:peace:
Quote from: The_Chimp on June 01, 2013, 03:03:28 PM
Bender,
huh? You repeat yourself. You have said this before. When challenged you had no reply. Saying:
Makes absolutely no sense.
Please explain HOW am I trying to correct Allah?
Ibrahim is a name of Hebrew origin. And it has been Arabicsed - hence it does not take Tanween. That is basic Arabic grammar.
See the sheer stupidity one is up against!
Bender. I have explained this to you. And you have no response. So tell me - what is the point of repeating the above? If you are unable to answer?
Ibrahim was a Hebrew name, that means he was not an Arab according to brother Chimp. Hence it does not take tanween. If he was non-Arab, why he went to Mecca? Were there people who spoke his language or speak English like today? :hmm
Then Nooh was of Arab origin. And A3ad and Shuaib also... Oh I forgot Loot, they all has tanween on their names. MashaAllah, I learn Arabic grammar today... it is really easy. You all can try it. Where ever you find tanween on any name, remember it is Arabic name, be it Kitaab or Baqara or any other...
Thanks brother Chimp for teaching me basics of Arabic grammar.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: hawk99 on June 01, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
Peace mmkhan,
I personally think that this has been a great thread, mmkhan poses a question that
has an obvious answer, but is asking us to put some thought into the answer, nothing
wrong with that in a discussion forum. Please calm down and give what you have to
offer and don't forget God.
[49:10] The believers are members of one family; you shall keep the peace within your
family and reverence GOD, that you may attain mercy.
Peace Hawk,
Thanks!
Quote
Here is the original article or something like it that the question is drawn from:
http://biblical-islam.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-proper-noun-muhammad-is-not-in.html
God Bless
:peace:
Red: I disagree! How do you know it was taken from that article?
Allah has shown me that when I was studying alQuraan with my friends. Recently I came across this article which was posted on this forum by a member and I like the way he translated 33:40. Hence, I changed it in this thread.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: hawk99 on June 01, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
Peace mmkhan,
I personally think that this has been a great thread, mmkhan poses a question that
has an obvious answer, but is asking us to put some thought into the answer, nothing
wrong with that in a discussion forum. Please calm down and give what you have to
offer and don't forget God.
[49:10] The believers are members of one family; you shall keep the peace within your
family and reverence GOD, that you may attain mercy.
Here is the original article or something like it that the question is drawn from:
http://biblical-islam.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-proper-noun-muhammad-is-not-in.html
God Bless
:peace:
Thank you @hawk99 for this link!
It is very illuminating to me!
Appreciated very much!
Peace
Quote from: mmkhan on June 01, 2013, 06:08:56 PM
Peace Hawk,
Thanks!
Red: I disagree! How do you know it was taken from that article?
Allah has shown me that when I was studying alQuraan with my friends. Recently I came across this article which was posted on this forum by a member and I like the way he translated 33:40. Hence, I changed it in this thread.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan,
No problem :handshake:
Peace.
In my opinion nothing is more enlightening than going through a journey of self discovery though the topic/issue is not new and highly controversial. The truth is out there.
Something for us to ponder:
And when it is said to them, "Follow what Allah has sent down," they say, "Rather, we will follow that upon which we found our fathers." Even if Satan was inviting them to the punishment of the Blaze? (31:21)
But those who disbelieve - for them is misery, and He will waste their deeds. That is because they disliked what Allah sent down, so He rendered worthless their deeds (47:8-9)
When those who disbelieved had put into their hearts chauvinism - the chauvinism of the time of ignorance. But Allah sent down His tranquillity upon His Messenger and upon the believers and imposed upon them the word of righteousness, and they were more deserving of it and worthy of it. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing. (48:26)
You serve not besides Him except names you have named them, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. Legislation is not but for Allah. He has commanded that you serve not except Him. That is the correct Deen/System, but most of the people do not know. (12:40)
They are not but names you have named them - you and your forefathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow not except assumption and what their souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance. (53:23)
And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those will be questioned. (17:36)
:group:
zone
Quote from: zone on June 02, 2013, 02:25:04 AM
Peace.
In my opinion nothing is more enlightening than going through a journey of self discovery though the topic/issue is not new and highly controversial. The truth is out there.
Salaamun a3laika Zone,
Thanks for the aayaat bro.
Red: Very true! I agree with you :handshake: but majority of people don't understand this. They think, they are not allowed to discover anything. If they understand what PATH means in
اِہۡدِ نَا الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِیۡمَ, that will be easy for them to realize that how enlightening are the discoveries. Because on PATH we have to keep on walking, we cannot stop anywhere. Hope these people may understand, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace Family,
"I would prefer to be surrounded by people who are right, rather than people who are wrong."
Hawk
peace:
Quote"I would prefer to be surrounded by people who are right, rather than people who are wrong."
How do you discern between who is right and who is wrong? how does a person know who is best? how can a person tell when somebody is wise enough to take the best decisions?
63:3 this, because [they profess that] they have attained to faith, whereas [inwardly] they deny the truth - and so, a seal has been set on their hearts so that they can no longer understand [what is true and what false].
63:4 Now when thou seest them, their outward appearance may please thee; and when they speak, thou art inclined to lend ear to what they say. [But though they may seem as sure of themselves] as if they were timbers [firmly] propped up, they think that every shout is [directed] against them. They are the [real] enemies [of all faith], so beware of them. [They deserve the imprecation,] "May God destroy them!" How perverted are their minds! (63:5) for, when they are told, "Come, the Apostle of God will pray [unto God] that you be forgiven", they turn their heads away, and thou canst see how they draw back in their false pride.!he who is wise doesn't do what he likes, but what get him the best prize!
Peace -- usage below can only be person's name not an attribute...
33:40 ما not كان he is محمد Muhammad ابا father احد one من from رجالكم rijālikum/gentlemen (i.e. formal usage of men) yours ولكن and however رسول messenger الله the god وخاتم and seal النبىىن the prophets وكان and he is الله the god بكل in every شىء thing علىما know-er of
12:78
قَالُوا يَا أَيُّهَا الْعَزِيزُ إِنَّ لَهُ أَبًا شَيْخًا كَبِيرًا فَخُذْ أَحَدَنَا مَكَانَهُ إِنَّا نَرَاكَ مِنَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ
33:40
مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا
أَبًا (abaa) = against, displeased with
أَبَا (aban) = father
Quote from: mmkhan on June 01, 2013, 12:52:35 PM
25:4 وَ قَالَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اِفۡکُۨ افۡتَرٰىہُ وَ اَعَانَہٗ عَلَیۡہِ قَوۡمٌ اٰخَرُوۡنَ ۚۛ فَقَدۡ جَآءُوۡ ظُلۡمًا وَّ زُوۡرًا
25:4 And those who disbelieve say, "This is not except a falsehood he invented, and others have helped him at it." But they have committed an injustice and a lie.
Sorry mmkhan for accusing you for nothing :handshake: :group: :peace:
Quote from: mmkhan on June 02, 2013, 02:46:14 AM
Salaamun a3laika Zone,
Thanks for the aayaat bro.
Red: Very true! I agree with you :handshake: but majority of people don't understand this. They think, they are not allowed to discover anything. If they understand what PATH means in اِہۡدِ نَا الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِیۡمَ, that will be easy for them to realize that how enlightening are the discoveries. Because on PATH we have to keep on walking, we cannot stop anywhere. Hope these people may understand, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
You are welcome bro. :handshake:
From my experience, I did face challenges in walking on the straight path in eagerness to discover truth and understand how it felt when antagonized. Also as humans I did err in the process. Keep the spirit high with good intention. To Allah alone we seek help, guidance and mercy.
"Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we have forgotten or erred. Our Lord, and lay not upon us a burden like that which You laid upon those before us. Our Lord, and burden us not with that which we have no ability to bear. And pardon us; and forgive us; and have mercy upon us. You are our protector, so give us victory over the disbelieving people." (2:286)
Certainly did Allah confer favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His ayats and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error. (3:164)
Zone.
Quote from: Earthdom on June 03, 2013, 09:44:29 AM
Sorry mmkhan for accusing you for nothing :handshake: :group: :peace:
Salaam Earthdom,
I left that on Allah, and He is the best Judge. I forgive you.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: zone on June 03, 2013, 10:46:58 AM
You are welcome bro. :handshake:
From my experience, I did face challenges in walking on the straight path in eagerness to discover truth and understand how it felt when antagonized. Also as humans I did err in the process. Keep the spirit high with good intention. To Allah alone we seek help, guidance and mercy.
Salaam brother,
It is nice not to rush, as per 10:109 we are asked to be patient until Allah judges for us, so it is always better to be patient and wait for Allah judgement. AlhamduliAllah, I always try to follow it. :)
Quote
"Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we have forgotten or erred. Our Lord, and lay not upon us a burden like that which You laid upon those before us. Our Lord, and burden us not with that which we have no ability to bear. And pardon us; and forgive us; and have mercy upon us. You are our protector, so give us victory over the disbelieving people." (2:286)
Certainly did Allah confer favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His ayats and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error. (3:164)
Zone.
Thanks for the aayaat.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: wrkmmn on June 02, 2013, 03:41:33 PM
peace:
How do you discern between who is right and who is wrong?
Peace wrkmmn,
First, we ourselves must seek knowledge thru patience and supplication.
We will need to gain familiarity with the subjects of interest to us. This
knowledge will enable us to narrow down the possible answers to consistant
sensible choices. We must develop a keen sense of judgement so that those
who are advising us are "adding" to and not munipulating our knowledge.
Secondly, those who we take advice or counsel from must have a proven
track record which should include integrity as a character trait.
In Addition, there is nothing wrong with a second opinion to comtemplate.
Trust your instincts, and be a good listener, think and do not be afraid of the answer.
God Bless
:peace:
Peace,
We learned this kind of thinking back in the school days in my country of origin. Strange some people never learn or that these basics are still not being taught in some countries.
God bless you
The question that most of us ask now, arose before during the time of Muhammad s.a.w; preaching the words of God onto Arabia. Was Muhammad mentioned? This was the question by inhabitants of Arabia towards Jews that embraced Islam. And if we refer to the claim by past Jewish converts, they had quote verses from Isaiah 42.
Lets look at the passages in Isaiah. God address His chosen servants with their names, and in the prophesied verse we see God mention clearly the prophet?s name. Some examples of God mentioning His servant by name.
(My Servant Isaiah, My Servant Eliakim, David My Servant, Jacob My Servant, My Servant Israel, and so in Isaiah 42:1 , God specifically mention My Servant Ahmad)
In Isaiah 42:1, it is deemed not a coincidence upon seeing the writing of both אתמך (Atmc) אחמד (Ahmd). And the word before אתמך (Atmc), is עבדי (Abdi~My Servant). For indeed, it is indicating Ahmad; Abdullah (Ahmad; Servant of God).
Not to mention אתמך (Atmc) happen to be a special term foretelling the coming of a righteous man and is used only ONCE throughout the entire Book. [could this be a copying error or an intended error?]
~~
The prophecy tells about Ahmad; ?Servant of God? whom will war to correct the wrongs and bringing judgement based on the law of God. He will liberate act of worshiping molten images and thus Arabia (wilderness desert, villages and cities) will glorify God since then. As can be seen today, Arabia are worshiping,praising God and singing words of God daily. Inhabitants from all around the world gather there and voice out loud their praise to God.
And we continue reading Isaiah 42:18 ? 25; God remind the ?blind and deaf? about the wrath of God towards Children of Israel, whom neglect the message brought by past Servant of God.
And not to repeat; the same mistake upon the coming of the new Servant of God
[Quran 43:3] We have rendered it an ARABIC Quran, that you may understand.
[Quran 13:37] We revealed these laws in ARABIC, and if you ever acquiesce to their wishes, after this knowledge has come to you, you will have no ally, nor a protector, against God.
[Quran 20:113] We thus revealed it, an ARABIC Quran, and we cited in it all kinds of prophecies, that they may be saved, or it may cause them to take heed.
[Quran 26:195] In a perfect ARABIC language ..
.
[Quran 46:12] Before this, the book of Moses provided guidance and mercy. This too is a scripture that confirms, in ARABIC, to warn those who transgressed, and to give good news to the righteous.
Quote from: submit on July 14, 2013, 01:02:03 AM
The question that most of us ask now, arose before during the time of Muhammad s.a.w; preaching the words of God onto Arabia. Was Muhammad mentioned? This was the question by inhabitants of Arabia towards Jews that embraced Islam. And if we refer to the claim by past Jewish converts, they had quote verses from Isaiah 42.
Lets look at the passages in Isaiah. God address His chosen servants with their names, and in the prophesied verse we see God mention clearly the prophet?s name. Some examples of God mentioning His servant by name.
(My Servant Isaiah, My Servant Eliakim, David My Servant, Jacob My Servant, My Servant Israel, and so in Isaiah 42:1 , God specifically mention My Servant Ahmad)
In Isaiah 42:1, it is deemed not a coincidence upon seeing the writing of both אתמך (Atmc) אחמד (Ahmd). And the word before אתמך (Atmc), is עבדי (Abdi~My Servant). For indeed, it is indicating Ahmad; Abdullah (Ahmad; Servant of God).
Not to mention אתמך (Atmc) happen to be a special term foretelling the coming of a righteous man and is used only ONCE throughout the entire Book. [could this be a copying error or an intended error?]
~~
The prophecy tells about Ahmad; ?Servant of God? whom will war to correct the wrongs and bringing judgement based on the law of God. He will liberate act of worshiping molten images and thus Arabia (wilderness desert, villages and cities) will glorify God since then. As can be seen today, Arabia are worshiping,praising God and singing words of God daily. Inhabitants from all around the world gather there and voice out loud their praise to God.
And we continue reading Isaiah 42:18 ? 25; God remind the ?blind and deaf? about the wrath of God towards Children of Israel, whom neglect the message brought by past Servant of God.
And not to repeat; the same mistake upon the coming of the new Servant of God
People who gather in Arabia are worshipping and glorifying GOD? Not really. Most of them kiss black stone, trow rocks, circulate the black cube 7 times because they believe these are commandments from GOD while performing pilgrimage.
Peace all
We assigned to Abraham a place of the first dwelling place, saying: "Associate not ANYTHING (KAABA, the BLACK STONE, the STONING PILLARS)) with Me; and purify My House لِلطَّائِفِينَ for a faction (a small, organized, dissenting group within a larger one) وَالْقَائِمِينَ and (for) those who support/uphold (monotheism) وَالرُّكَّعِ السُّجُودِ and (for) those who are humble in submission (Al-Hajj: 26)
Thanks
Peace all,
Contrary to the assertion that no proper name is used in the Quran that ends in tanween, we find هُودٌ , صَالِحٌ , شُعَيْبٌ and - albeit not the name of a prophet - زَيْدٌ .
Notwithstanding this, nunation, or the lack thereof, is no measure of a word being classed as a proper name.
"Muhammad" is used as a name of a man in the Quran, and it would take a considerable amount of contextual contortion to assemble a hypothesis contrary to this.
Salaam M. M. Khan,
Do you read Pazuzu's threads?
The tashkeel is Persian invention and innovation to the Book of GOD.
Regards,
Yuliana
The tashkeel is certainly an invention, a very useful invention.
Persian Muslims certainly paved the way for their use, along with the Arab Muslims.
May God rest their souls and reward them for their efforts.
Salaam,
Isnt it like some people said already in this thread ; that the tashkeel was put on the Quran later?
I think some years ago I saw a very old quran in a museum or something, and there were no tashkeel on it.
Peace
Quote from: hawk99 on June 05, 2013, 10:34:42 AM
Peace wrkmmn,
First, we ourselves must seek knowledge thru patience and supplication.
We will need to gain familiarity with the subjects of interest to us. This
knowledge will enable us to narrow down the possible answers to consistant
sensible choices. We must develop a keen sense of judgement so that those
who are advising us are "adding" to and not munipulating our knowledge.
Secondly, those who we take advice or counsel from must have a proven
track record which should include integrity as a character trait.
In Addition, there is nothing wrong with a second opinion to comtemplate.
Trust your instincts, and be a good listener, think and do not be afraid of the answer.
God Bless
:peace:
Those who follow Quran 100% then they are Mohammed and honored by ALLAH.
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
Salaam,
I am wondering how this can be solved. I never found any names in AlQuraan ending with this tanween (http://s16.postimage.org/7g525pigh/dammahtain1.jpg) either two of them, as in Muhammed i.e., (http://s11.postimage.org/61fz5f1nz/Muhammed.png)
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
Fortunately or unfortunately I don't have any evidence, not a single aayat that says that AlQuraan was given to Muhammad. Why there is no such aayat if it was given to him?
Quote from: mmkhan on September 18, 2012, 03:35:23 PM
All explanations, comments, suggestions, critics, advises, support are welcome.
mmKhan
Salam ,
To avoid confusions :I witness by the name of allaah that the word Mohamed محمد is the name of the messenger of allaah who received the quran and i witness who is saying the opposite is fabricating a lie against the teaching of the Qur'an . It will be for more accuracy if people provide witness by the name of allah when the subject start to confuse people
Salaam,
I do not understand the obsession with the name Muhammad. No matter called Muhammad or not, there was a man which the Quran was narrated to/about. Unless you have a better alternative what the fuss about it and why not call him Muhammad disregarding if it is used for praiseworthy or not. He needs a name, right?
All important Messengers in history had names clearly laid forth and why not the Messenger that received the Quran? The Quran hints at that the Quran was written by hand and by a human.
It is madness in my opinion.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on October 24, 2013, 05:41:20 AM
Salaam,
I do not understand the obsession with the name Muhammad. No matter called Muhammad or not, there was a man which the Quran was narrated to/about. Unless you have a better alternative what the fuss about it and why not call him Muhammad disregarding if it is used for praiseworthy or not. He needs a name, right?
All important Messengers in history had names clearly laid forth and why not the Messenger that received the Quran? The Quran hints at that the Quran was written by hand and by a human.
It is madness in my opinion.
God bless you
if Quran was written by a human being then weather you follow quran or hadees or any other book it is a totally madness ...in my opinion no human being can write quran in a perfect arabic language with so precise marking ....
Salaam,
Well. Quran is written by someone's hand, but not this person's own words. The Book was gradually released to this individual's memory and written down. This is at least the common interpretation.
The Quran hints at that it was not sent down from Heaven, but says even if it was people would not believe.
Divine inspiration is a complicated topic for discussion but this is likely what happened to Mr. Muhammad about 1400 years ago and he suddenly with little effort begun to know this information he wrote down. When you receive this kind of inspiration you get almost like an 'aha' sensation.
I also suppose that Muhammad may have been almost like in a trance state when he was writing the book. Like partially under alien control as in science fiction movies.
It is pretty obvious that he did not write his own words if you believe in the mathematical composition of Quran as it would have taken an astronomical amount of attempts to get the combinations right. Even with a computer today it would be difficult. But he had only paper or parchment to write on and he would have needed to start over countless times because of mistakes and he had no calculator. "Anti-code" proponents need not to reply to this as it is not the aim of this post to discuss.
Anyway, part of the test is to believe in the Quran because it was not directly sent down from God but "dictated" to Muhammad as a mediator who wrote down it, to put it in a simplified way. But Quran is the only text which is the exact wordings of God except the revelation to Moses on Mount Sinai.
Lately I have begun to ponder whether God would allow someone to change anything from the original Quran or if it is exactly the way it was those years ago. Well, it has known changes such as the added symbols to make reading easier and and scribe mistakes such as wrong letters at certain places. Despite what was written in the Book it has changes even though minor and they might affect the meaning if you use the extra symbols to interpret it.
I wonder if God meant that He will always preserve the Message. I will look up that verse again which talks about preservation.
But I think the Quran is preserved pretty much as the original and the literal content is the same. The weird passages is due to our problems of reading it after deliberate changing of meaning of the words over the years.
Sorry. This post was not really covering the title of this thread even if it concerned Muhammad as a name and loosely connected to the question in the title.
God bless you
Quote from: Alkitab الكتاب on October 23, 2013, 05:38:31 PM
Salam ,
To avoid confusions :
I witness by the name of allaah that the word Mohamed محمد is the name of the messenger of allaah who received the quran and i witness who is saying the opposite is fabricating a lie against the teaching of the Qur'an . It will be for more accuracy if people provide witness by the name of allah when the subject start to confuse people
1. 2:170 And if they are told: "Follow what God has sent down," they say: "No, we will follow what we found our fathers doing!" What if their fathers did not comprehend anything and were not guided?
Peace wasi.
Who wrote "Qoran"?
Please evidence your answer for us.
Thank you.
Peace to you
Quote from: good logic on October 25, 2013, 01:32:14 PM
Peace wasi.
Who wrote "Qoran"?
Please evidence your answer for us.
Thank you.
Peace to you
THANKS TO ALLAH THERE IS NO AUTHOR OTHERWISE THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN MANY CONTRADICTIONS
IT IS REALLY REALLY NICE THAT EVEN THE AUTHOR DOES NOT HAVE A COURAGE TO WRITE HIS NAME IF HE WAS A HUMAN BEING AS HE
MAY BE HAVING FEAR OF ALLAH
:::IF HE WAS A HUMAN BEING HE WROTE THE QURAN IN ARABIC
AND MENTIONED THAT THE QURAN IS IN ARABIC MANY TIMES IN THE QURAN ITSELF ? SO STUPID
IF I WOULD HAVE WRITTEN A BOOK IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ::::::I WOULD HAVE NEVER TOLD IN MY WHOLE BOOK THAT THIS BOOK IS IN ENGLISH SO COMPREHEND
7:144 He said, "O Musa, I have chosen you over the people with My messages and My speaking. So hold what I have given you and be among the grateful."
7:145 And We wrote for him on the tablets of all things - instruction and explanation for all things, "Hold them strongly and order your people to take the best of it. I will show you the home of the defiantly disobedient."
[Quran 46:12] Before this, the book of Moses provided guidance and mercy. This too is a scripture that confirms, in ARABIC, to warn those who transgressed, and to give good news to the righteous
SURAH KAHF 27 AIYAAT
And recite what has been revealed to YOU of the BOOK of your lord. NONE CAN CHANGE HIS WORDS and NEVER YOU WILL FIND A REFUGE BESIDE HIM
even without the author this book changellenges the world ..that no one can change its words ....i have found many books they are regularly updated with new edition just because the contents need to be added or mistakes need to be corrected ...who wrote this book without errors
i am believer to god and i will not argue
18:54 And We have dispatched in this Qur'an for the people from every example; but human being has always been most argumentative.
5:104 And if they are told: "Come to what God has sent down, and to the messenger;" they say: "We are content with what we found our fathers doing." What if their fathers did not know anything nor were guided?
Peace wasi.
We know from " Qoran" that it was sent by God. There is no argument there.
However ,it was inspired to be written down. The writing was done by the messenger;
The Quran tells us that Muhammad wrote down the Quran as he was receiving it.- Muhammad's contemporaries are quoted as saying,
وَقالوا أَسٰطيرُ الأَوَّلينَ اكتَتَبَها فَهِىَ تُملىٰ عَلَيهِ بُكرَةً وَأَصيلًا
[Quran 25:5] They also said, "Tales from the past that he wrote down; they were dictated to him day and night."
You cannot "dictate" to an illiterate person.
The Prophet's enemies who accuse him of illiteracy abuse Verse 29:48, which relates specifically to previous scriptures.
وَما كُنتَ تَتلوا مِن قَبلِهِ مِن كِتٰبٍ وَلا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمينِكَ إِذًا لَارتابَ المُبطِلونَ
[29:48]
You did not read the previous scriptures, nor did you write them with your hand. In that case, the rejecters would have had reason to harbor doubts.
Finally::
3:1] As the stars fell away.[١:٥٣] وَالنَّجمِ إِذا هَوى
[53:2] Your friend was not astray, nor was he deceived. ما ضَلَّ صاحِبُكُم وَما غَوىٰ
[53:3] Nor was he speaking out of a personal desire. وَما يَنطِقُ عَنِ الهَوىٰ
[53:4] It was divine inspiration. إِن هُوَ إِلّا وَحىٌ يوحىٰ
[53:5] Dictated by the Most Powerful. عَلَّمَهُ شَديدُ القُوىٰ
Of course the words are from God , but the writing was done by a human hand.
Peace to you
Quote from: good logic on October 25, 2013, 02:55:36 PM
We know from " Qoran" that it was sent by God. There is no argument there.
However ,it was inspired to be written down. The writing was done by the messenger;
The Quran tells us that Muhammad wrote down the Quran as he was receiving it.- Muhammad's contemporaries are quoted as saying,
وَقالوا أَسٰطيرُ الأَوَّلينَ اكتَتَبَها فَهِىَ تُملىٰ عَلَيهِ بُكرَةً وَأَصيلًا
[Quran 25:5] They also said, "Tales from the past that he wrote down; they were dictated to him day and night."
You cannot "dictate" to an illiterate person.
The Prophet's enemies who accuse him of illiteracy abuse Verse 29:48, which relates specifically to previous scriptures.
وَما كُنتَ تَتلوا مِن قَبلِهِ مِن كِتٰبٍ وَلا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمينِكَ إِذًا لَارتابَ المُبطِلونَ
[29:48]
You did not read the previous scriptures, nor did you write them with your hand. In that case, the rejecters would have had reason to harbor doubts.
Finally::
3:1] As the stars fell away.[١:٥٣] وَالنَّجمِ إِذا هَوى
[53:2] Your friend was not astray, nor was he deceived. ما ضَلَّ صاحِبُكُم وَما غَوىٰ
[53:3] Nor was he speaking out of a personal desire. وَما يَنطِقُ عَنِ الهَوىٰ
[53:4] It was divine inspiration. إِن هُوَ إِلّا وَحىٌ يوحىٰ
[53:5] Dictated by the Most Powerful. عَلَّمَهُ شَديدُ القُوىٰ
Of course the words are from God , but the writing was done by a human hand.
Peace to you
INTERESTING AIYAT IF MUHAMMED DUTY WAS THE THE MESSENGER AND A SEAL TO PROPHETS
IF MUHAMMED IS SENDING THE ONLY THE MESSAGES OF ALLAH AMONG PEOPLE
THEN WHO IS THIS PERSON WHO IS WRITING THIS DIVINE INSPIRATION
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT MUHAMMED WAS WRITING THE QURAN WEATHER HE IS LITERATE OR ILLITERATE IT DOESNT MATTER
YA I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS REVEALED TO MUHAMMEDIN AS PER 47.2
but i also believe that this divine writing can be revealed on slave of allah as per 18:1
slave of allah cannot only be muhammed
BUT WHO WAS WRITING ?
53 :2,3,4 can be taken upon any reader
are you sure was it muhammed or some other person who has written and passed away before muhammed ...then someone has revealed on the aiyats again. and became the MUHAMMEDUN RASOOL ALLAH :hmm
I already get discussion with anti-Muhammad Quranist both in here and domestic forum and I already make conclusion if they mostly are victims of the harakat system.
Peace
Peace wasi.
I thought we were discussing " writing"i.e putting pen to paper!
The ayats that you are quoting have no " write" in them?
May be you do not believe there was a person called " Mohammed" who received Qoran from God.
I believe that "Nabi Mohammed" received the words of God through - inspiration/Gabriel...- sent by the most high... And he wrote the words as he was receiving them.
He delivered the message. People to this day are still writing "Qoran"--Putting pen to paper.--.
That is the point I was discussing.
As for teaching, understanding, accepting, believing, living... Qoran. These are different
I was only discussing the " Writing".
Peace .to you.
Quote from: good logic on October 25, 2013, 02:55:36 PM
Peace wasi.
We know from " Qoran" that it was sent by God. There is no argument there.
However ,it was inspired to be written down. The writing was done by the messenger;
The Quran tells us that Muhammad wrote down the Quran as he was receiving it.- Muhammad's contemporaries are quoted as saying,
وَقالوا أَسٰطيرُ الأَوَّلينَ اكتَتَبَها فَهِىَ تُملىٰ عَلَيهِ بُكرَةً وَأَصيلًا
[Quran 25:5] They also said, "Tales from the past that he wrote down; they were dictated to him day and night."
You cannot "dictate" to an illiterate person.
The Prophet's enemies who accuse him of illiteracy abuse Verse 29:48, which relates specifically to previous scriptures.
وَما كُنتَ تَتلوا مِن قَبلِهِ مِن كِتٰبٍ وَلا تَخُطُّهُ بِيَمينِكَ إِذًا لَارتابَ المُبطِلونَ
[29:48]
You did not read the previous scriptures, nor did you write them with your hand. In that case, the rejecters would have had reason to harbor doubts.
Finally::
3:1] As the stars fell away.[١:٥٣] وَالنَّجمِ إِذا هَوى
[53:2] Your friend was not astray, nor was he deceived. ما ضَلَّ صاحِبُكُم وَما غَوىٰ
[53:3] Nor was he speaking out of a personal desire. وَما يَنطِقُ عَنِ الهَوىٰ
[53:4] It was divine inspiration. إِن هُوَ إِلّا وَحىٌ يوحىٰ
[53:5] Dictated by the Most Powerful. عَلَّمَهُ شَديدُ القُوىٰ
Of course the words are from God , but the writing was done by a human hand.
Peace to you
Peace brother Good Logic,
Nice to see you back :D
Thanks for the aayaat, but sorry to say that none of the aayaat you quoted above has the word "Muhammad" in it as you claimed in the red highlighted part above of your post.
Please be careful in saying anything about Allah, His punishments are severe :&
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan.
Thank you for the welcome.
The " Ayats" are about the one who received the Qoran, the messenger of God.. It does not mention " Mohammed". But elsewhere in Qoran God says" Mohammed, the messenger of God."
I am trying to be very careful brother. I must follow all "Qoran" not just part of it.
Peace to you brother.
Quote from: good logic on October 26, 2013, 06:14:05 AM
Peace mmkhan.
Thank you for the welcome.
The " Ayats" are about the one who received the Qoran, the messenger of God.. It does not mention " Mohammed". But elsewhere in Qoran God says" Mohammed, the messenger of God."
I am trying to be very careful brother. I must follow all "Qoran" not just part of it.
Peace to you brother.
Peace brother,
You are very welcome :handshake:
Red: Why do you take only Muhammad as the messenger of Allah, when others are also mentioned as the messengers of Allah, like: Musa in 61:5 and Eisa in 61:6?
Peace and may Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Peace brother.
Because God is talking specifically about this messenger in [25:5]:
Let e tell you why?:
[25:7]
وَقالوا مالِ هٰذَا الرَّسولِ يَأكُلُ الطَّعامَ وَيَمشى فِى الأَسواقِ لَولا أُنزِلَ إِلَيهِ مَلَكٌ فَيَكونَ مَعَهُ نَذيرًا
And they said, "How come this messenger eats the food and walks in the markets? If only an angel could come down with him, to serve with him as a preacher!"
Now God talks about the others:
[25:20]
وَما أَرسَلنا قَبلَكَ مِنَ المُرسَلينَ إِلّا إِنَّهُم لَيَأكُلونَ الطَّعامَ وَيَمشونَ فِى الأَسواقِ وَجَعَلنا بَعضَكُم لِبَعضٍ فِتنَةً أَتَصبِرونَ وَكانَ رَبُّكَ بَصيرًا
We did not send any messengers before you who did not eat food and walk in the markets. We thus test you by each other; will you steadfastly persevere? Your Lord is Seer.
Peace to youbrother.
Salaam,
If the Messenger of the Quran is anonymous it must be the only anonymous one in the history of Messengers. Strange considered the Quran's key role.
God bless you
Quote from: good logic on October 26, 2013, 01:37:48 AM
Peace wasi.
May be you do not believe there was a person called " Mohammed" who received Qoran from God.
I believe that "Nabi Mohammed" received the words of God through - inspiration/Gabriel...- sent by the most high... And he wrote the words as he was receiving them.
He delivered the message. People to this day are still writing "Qoran"--Putting pen to paper.--.
That is the point I was discussing.
As for teaching, understanding, accepting, believing, living... Qoran. These are different
I was only discussing the " Writing".
Peace .to you.
YES YES I AM PROUD THAT I DONT BELIEVE IN ANY OF THE FAIRY TALES :::THANKS TO ALLAH WHO HAS GUIDED ME TO THE RIGHT WAY AS I FOLLOW ONLY THE REVELATIONS OF ALLAH
3:84
Say, "We have believed in Allah and in what was revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Descendants, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [submitting] to Him.
SORRY NO MUHAMMED HERE
IF YOU CAN BRING PROOF OR AIYATS FROM THE LORD THAT MUHAMMED WAS WRITING QURAN THEN I NO PROBLEM IN ACCEPTING THAT
OTHERWISE THAT IS THE USE JUST TO SIMPLY BLAME THAT THERE IS ONE NABI MUHAMMED WHO WAS WRTING SO CALLED QURAN
WHICH NOBODY HAS SEEN NOT EVEN THOSE WHO HAVE WRITTEN THOUSANDS OF HADITH ON THAT PERSON:::::
Peace wasi.
Which nabi brought you Qoran?
How did Qoran come about?
What fairy tale are you talking about?
Peace to you.
Salam to all
I know how anti-Muhammad Quranist's methodologis, because I already get discussion both in here and with my fellow countrymen.
They mostly only use harakat, tashkeel and nahwu-sharaf knowledge as their main base and only pick one, two verses not entirely.They reject any historical prespective.
As we know originally Arabic letters has no vowel, harakat but created during Ummayad or Abbasiyah after the dead of Phrophet, this means Phrophet Muhammad himself never ratify this.The system called tashkeel and harakat was inputted in the Quran, so non Arabic speaker can easilly to read it.
I give example:
وما محمد إلا رسول 3:144
That was the original Arabic Quran without tashkeel and notice the red word, how do you pronounce it??Muhammad or Muhammadun?? The answer is can be both of two.
But the current Arabic Quran have harakat inputted on it, then the word محمد became like this : مُحَمَّدٌ.So that's why we pronounce Muhammadun because tanwin in the last huruf.
And because of this too, they claim if Muhammad is a noun, not a name of a person.Of course as we know humans, animals, and another living creatures are included as a noun.
In the corpusquran, the word Muhammad(un) had been categorized as "proper noun".As we know proper noun and proper name is forbidden to be translated into another language and the word Muhammad is of course not an ordinary noun and it refer to a Phrophet we know for long time.
Secondly like @good-logic says if they didn't believe on Phrophet Muhammad, his sira' another connected histories (some of them even didn't believe on existence of Rasyidin Caliphate), then How they know:- the history of the Quran,?? the history of tashkeel and harakat??
Thirdly they always said, "We must believe on Quran only, to believe on history we must also believe on Quran only".
Now the question: Is the Quran a History Book??
The answer is no.The Arabic Quran has no 5W+ 1H (What, Why, Who , When , Which, How). This means the Quran cannot been categorized as historical references.
Quran is a Scripture and the guidance for deen not history and this Book is: -Phropet saying (69:40)
-Confirmation of the previous Kitabs (3:3 etc)
The purpose of verses in the Quran like verses about Phrophets is not for historical knowledge but for the guidance for our faith (read 11:120, 12:3 ,12:111).So thats why Old Testament give history of Phrophets more detail rather than Quran.
This mean to understand the history of the Quran, we may need another narrations like sira'.
There is some evidence proofs if Phrophet Muhammad is Exist : LINK (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604838.msg330377#msg330377)
This post is only my 2 cent, and this is based on my experiences.
Peace
Quote from: Earthdom on October 26, 2013, 11:44:36 AM
I give example:
وما محمد إلا رسول 3:144
That was the original Arabic Quran without tashkeel and notice the red word, how do you pronounce it??Muhammad or Muhammadun?? The answer is can be both of two.
Peace brother,
Blue: Is this not a clear lie on Allah? :&
If not, please bring an evidence and prove it right.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: good logic on October 26, 2013, 06:33:41 AM
Peace brother.
Because God is talking specifically about this messenger in [25:5]:
Let e tell you why?:
[25:7]
وَقالوا مالِ هٰذَا الرَّسولِ يَأكُلُ الطَّعامَ وَيَمشى فِى الأَسواقِ لَولا أُنزِلَ إِلَيهِ مَلَكٌ فَيَكونَ مَعَهُ نَذيرًا
And they said, "How come this messenger eats the food and walks in the markets? If only an angel could come down with him, to serve with him as a preacher!"
Now God talks about the others:
[25:20]
وَما أَرسَلنا قَبلَكَ مِنَ المُرسَلينَ إِلّا إِنَّهُم لَيَأكُلونَ الطَّعامَ وَيَمشونَ فِى الأَسواقِ وَجَعَلنا بَعضَكُم لِبَعضٍ فِتنَةً أَتَصبِرونَ وَكانَ رَبُّكَ بَصيرًا
We did not send any messengers before you who did not eat food and walk in the markets. We thus test you by each other; will you steadfastly persevere? Your Lord is Seer.
Peace to youbrother.
Peace brother,
Thanks for the aayaat.
Remember هٰذَا الرَّسولِ both words represent present time (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604284.msg306146#msg306146) or at least هٰذَا clearly means "this", so how could "this" is referring to THAT rasool who has passed 1400+ years ago.
BTW, it is mentioned AL+Rasool, which was never used with the word Muhammad in alQuraan. You can take a look at this thread (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602494.msg279514#msg279514).
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: Earthdom on October 26, 2013, 11:44:36 AM
Salam to all
I know how anti-Muhammad Quranist's methodologis, because I already get discussion both in here and with my fellow countrymen.
They mostly only use harakat, tashkeel and nahwu-sharaf knowledge as their main base and only pick one, two verses not entirely.They reject any historical prespective.
As we know originally Arabic letters has no vowel, harakat but created during Ummayad or Abbasiyah after the dead of Phrophet, this means Phrophet Muhammad himself never ratify this.The system called tashkeel and harakat was inputted in the Quran, so non Arabic speaker can easilly to read it.
I give example:
وما محمد إلا رسول 3:144
That was the original Arabic Quran without tashkeel and notice the red word, how do you pronounce it??Muhammad or Muhammadun?? The answer is can be both of two.
But the current Arabic Quran have harakat inputted on it, then the word محمد became like this : مُحَمَّدٌ.So that's why we pronounce Muhammadun because tanwin in the last huruf.
And because of this too, they claim if Muhammad is a noun, not a name of a person.Of course as we know humans, animals, and another living creatures are included as a noun.
In the corpusquran, the word Muhammad(un) had been categorized as "proper noun".As we know proper noun and proper name is forbidden to be translated into another language and the word Muhammad is of course not an ordinary noun and it refer to a Phrophet we know for long time.
Secondly like @good-logic says if they didn't believe on Phrophet Muhammad, his sira' another connected histories (some of them even didn't believe on existence of Rasyidin Caliphate), then How they know:- the history of the Quran,?? the history of tashkeel and harakat??
Thirdly they always said, "We must believe on Quran only, to believe on history we must also believe on Quran only".
Now the question: Is the Quran a History Book??
The answer is no.The Arabic Quran has no 5W+ 1H (What, Why, Who , When , Which, How). This means the Quran cannot been categorized as historical references.
Quran is a Scripture and the guidance for deen not history and this Book is: -Phropet saying (69:40)
-Confirmation of the previous Kitabs (3:3 etc)
The purpose of verses in the Quran like verses about Phrophets is not for historical knowledge but for the guidance for our faith (read 11:120, 12:3 ,12:111).So thats why Old Testament give history of Phrophets more detail rather than Quran.
This mean to understand the history of the Quran, we may need another narrations like sira'.
There is some evidence proofs if Phrophet Muhammad is Exist : LINK (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604838.msg330377#msg330377)
This post is only my 2 cent, and this is based on my experiences.
Peace
now pronounce
مُحَمَّدٍوَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ then how about this
Peace mmkhan.
Please allow me to show you that your theory about " this" is wrong.
First do you agree that Moses was from the past. God uses " this " about him as well:
[2634]
قالَ لِلمَلَإِ حَولَهُ إِنَّ هٰذا لَسٰحِرٌ عَليمٌ
He said to the elders around him, "This is an experienced magician.
Peace to you.
Quote from: good logic on October 26, 2013, 01:56:10 PM
Peace mmkhan.
Please allow me to show you that your theory about " this" is wrong.
First do you agree that Moses was from the past. God uses " this " about him as well:
[2634]
قالَ لِلمَلَإِ حَولَهُ إِنَّ هٰذا لَسٰحِرٌ عَليمٌ
He said to the elders around him, "This is an experienced magician.
Peace to you.
Peace brother,
Thank you for the aayat.
This topic of Musa starts from the aayat no.10 of sura 26.
26:10
وَإِذْ نَادَىٰ رَبُّكَ مُوسَىٰ أَنِ ائْتِ الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ26:10 And when your Lord called Musa, "Go to the wrongdoing people
إِذْ clarifies the past instance. So,
هٰذا in 26:34 is a reported speech.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Peace mmkhan.
Te topic of " this" messenger" i.e Mohammed, the one who brought the Qoran starts from[25:1]
تَبارَكَ الَّذى نَزَّلَ الفُرقانَ عَلىٰ عَبدِهِ لِيَكونَ لِلعٰلَمينَ نَذيرًا
Most blessed is the One who revealed the Statute Book to His servant, so he can serve as a warner to the whole world.
No difference , " نَزَّلَ" also certifies the past.
Peace to you.
Brother mmkhan and wasi it's up to you to said what, it's up to you if you accuse me to put lie on God.
My question is "How a religion and scripture exist without any historical track?".You don't need to answer in here, just answer in your mind.
Peace
Quote from: good logic on October 26, 2013, 01:56:10 PM
Peace mmkhan.
Please allow me to show you that your theory about " this" is wrong.
First do you agree that Moses was from the past. God uses " this " about him as well:
[2634]
قالَ لِلمَلَإِ حَولَهُ إِنَّ هٰذا لَسٰحِرٌ عَليمٌ
He said to the elders around him, "This is an experienced magician.
Peace to you.
salaam,
Do you seriously give this ayaat as an example?
salaam,
Bender
Peace Bender.
How are you?
Bare in mind the discussion was about " هٰذا ".
God does not use it for the" present " only!
That was the point of the "ayat".
Peace to you.
Quote from: good logic on October 28, 2013, 01:54:08 AM
Peace Bender.
How are you?
Bare in mind the discussion was about " هٰذا ".
God does not use it for the" present " only!
That was the point of the "ayat".
Peace to you.
Salaam,
I am fine thank you, how are you?
I know what the discussion was about that's why it amazed me.
That verse actually explains very well the usage of "hatha".
Where (time and place) was Musa at the time they said that?
Salaam,
Bender
Peace Bender.
Do you mean Moses was present at that time and place when [26:34] was said.
So was Mohammed ,when [25:5]was said. He was alive ,receiving Qoran and preaching it.
Peace to you.
Quote from: good logic on October 27, 2013, 07:32:57 PM
Peace mmkhan.
Te topic of " this" messenger" i.e Mohammed, the one who brought the Qoran starts from[25:1]
تَبارَكَ الَّذى نَزَّلَ الفُرقانَ عَلىٰ عَبدِهِ لِيَكونَ لِلعٰلَمينَ نَذيرًا
Most blessed is the One who revealed the Statute Book to His servant, so he can serve as a warner to the whole world.
No difference , " نَزَّلَ" also certifies the past.
Peace to you.
Peace brother,
I am really scared of the red part above :& I cannot do that, i.e., I cannot put words into Allah's mouth :&
Anyways, how about 19:2?
19:2 ذِكْرُ رَحْمَتِ رَبِّكَ عَبْدَهُ زَكَرِيَّا
Allah knows how to use names. So, why not عَبدِهِ in 25:1 referring to زَكَرِيَّا as in 19:2?
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: good logic on October 28, 2013, 11:28:32 AM
Peace Bender.
Do you mean Moses was present at that time and place when [26:34] was said.
So was Mohammed ,when [25:5]was said. He was alive ,receiving Qoran and preaching it.
Peace to you.
Salaam,
Maybe you confused the verse number you wanted to give me, because I can not find the word Mohammed in 25:5 not even in 1 verse of chapter 25.
salaam,
Bender
Peace mmkhan.
How do i know Mohammed brought Qoran?;
[47:2]
وَالَّذينَ ءامَنوا وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَءامَنوا بِما نُزِّلَ عَلىٰ مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الحَقُّ مِن رَبِّهِم كَفَّرَ عَنهُم سَيِّـٔاتِهِم وَأَصلَحَ بالَهُم
Nothing to be scared about.!
Peace brother.
The overly strict Quran-aloners reject Muhammad because of how the tashkeels are used in the word محمد.
Guys, tashkeels are just human inventions! Some of earliest Quran manuscripts don't contain tashkeels.
Regards,
Yuliana
QuoteGuys, tashkeels are just human inventions! Some of earliest Quran manuscripts don't contain tashkeels.
Absolutely right
Quoteمُحَمَّدٌ in 33:40
--> مُحَرَّمٌ in 6:139
--> مُنَزَّلٌ in 6:114
--> مُتَبَّرٌ in 7:139
--> مُّمَرَّدٌ in 27:44
--> مُعَلَّمٌ in 44:14
These words are written in exactly same way, then why only Muhammadun is name and others are not? Just think about it.
(http://snag.gy/8kOfF.jpg)
Let them find the same what they quote in the oldest manuscript of the Quran which are kept in the libraries of Tashkent, Istanbul, Cairo, Yemen . If they find all they quoted suffixed by UN AN then they have a valid point to argue or else they should terminate the debate / argument.
Thanks
Quote from: hafeez kazi on October 28, 2013, 01:51:17 PM
Absolutely right
(http://snag.gy/8kOfF.jpg)
Let them find the same what they quote in the oldest manuscript of the Quran which are kept in the libraries of Tashkent, Istanbul, Cairo, Yemen . If they find all they quoted suffixed by UN AN then they have a valid point to argue or else they should terminate the debate / argument.
Thanks
peace
may be it was wrong someone tried to violate the law of allah without inserting marking so allah has kept it in the museum just like firaun body is placed in the museum as the saying of people ...not even a single word i understand from that paper i cant even predict the arabic text of it ...and neither Arabic speaker do that but if all the quran has the word muhammadun than what about that paper will it be having the same or different ? the meaning is definitely going to be translated ....because allah says this
ALLAH has REVEALED the best HADITH, a book its parts resembling each other OFT REPEATED 39:23
Peace mmkhan.
Thank you for ayaat [19:2]
God sometimes mention a name, other times He does not have to, because it is obvious like [17:1]:
سُبحٰنَ الَّذى أَسرىٰ بِعَبدِهِ لَيلًا مِنَ المَسجِدِ الحَرامِ إِلَى المَسجِدِ الأَقصَا الَّذى بٰرَكنا حَولَهُ لِنُرِيَهُ مِن ءايٰتِنا إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّميعُ البَصيرُ
Most glorified is the One who summoned His servant (Mohammad/ Ahmed...) during the night, from the Sacred Masjid to the farthest place of prostration,* whose surroundings we have blessed, in order to show him some of our signs. He is the Hearer, the Seer.
You are going to say I inserted ( Mohammed/ Ahmd..)but:
If it is other than the one who received Qoran, i.e Mohammed/Ahmed...Or whatever name you have for him...I will eat my hat!
Peace to you.
Peace Wasi
(http://snag.gy/qcUmi.jpg)
Hope you will understand something.
Why I have posted this image? Just to make known that the Quran was written without tashkeel and whatever we find in the present Quran as MUHAMMUD UN MUHAMMAD AN is nothing but MUHAMMAD, the name of the messenger. The tashkeel is an insertion to facilitate the reading of the Quran by non Arabic people. If still people argue that MUHAMMAD UN OR AN is not a name of a person / messenger but praiseworthy then it is their choice.
Thanks
Quote from: good logic on October 28, 2013, 11:55:44 AM
Peace mmkhan.
How do i know Mohammed brought Qoran?;
[47:2]
وَالَّذينَ ءامَنوا وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَءامَنوا بِما نُزِّلَ عَلىٰ مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الحَقُّ مِن رَبِّهِم كَفَّرَ عَنهُم سَيِّـٔاتِهِم وَأَصلَحَ بالَهُم
Nothing to be scared about.!
Peace brother.
Peace brother,
That aayat doesn't say it was alQuraan. If you understand what means naazil, inshaAllah, it will be easy for you to understand this subject brother. For example:
4:140 وَقَدْ نَزَّلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الْكِتَابِ أَنْ إِذَا سَمِعْتُمْ آيَاتِ اللَّـهِ يُكْفَرُ بِهَا وَيُسْتَهْزَأُ بِهَا فَلَا تَقْعُدُوا مَعَهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ ۚ إِنَّكُمْ إِذًا مِّثْلُهُمْ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ جَامِعُ الْمُنَافِقِينَ وَالْكَافِرِينَ فِي جَهَنَّمَ جَمِيعًا
9:64 يَحْذَرُ الْمُنَافِقُونَ أَن تُنَزَّلَ عَلَيْهِمْ سُورَةٌ تُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ ۚ قُلِ اسْتَهْزِئُوا إِنَّ اللَّـهَ مُخْرِجٌ مَّا تَحْذَرُونَ
2:231 وَإِذَا طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَبَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ سَرِّحُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ ۚ وَلَا تُمْسِكُوهُنَّ ضِرَارًا لِّتَعْتَدُوا ۚ وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَٰلِكَ فَقَدْ ظَلَمَ نَفْسَهُ ۚ وَلَا تَتَّخِذُوا آيَاتِ اللَّـهِ هُزُوًا ۚ وَاذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَا أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ يَعِظُكُم بِهِ ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on October 28, 2013, 12:11:33 PM
The overly strict Quran-aloners reject Muhammad because of how the tashkeels are used in the word محمد.
Guys, tashkeels are just human inventions! Some of earliest Quran manuscripts don't contain tashkeels.
Regards,
Yuliana
Salaam Yuliana,
I am afraid that you are saying something on Allah that you have no knowledge/evidence of :&
AlQuraan don't support this thing. This is all a big game, spreaded by the writers of hadith that alQuraan was without tashkeels. No human or jinn can add tashkeels in such a way it is used in alQuraan even though if they gather together to help each other. It is not a work of man or jinn.
Please be aware of Allah's punishments on saying something on Allah without holding any evidence about it.
May Allah forgive us and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: hafeez kazi on October 28, 2013, 01:51:17 PM
Absolutely right
(http://snag.gy/8kOfF.jpg)
Let them find the same what they quote in the oldest manuscript of the Quran which are kept in the libraries of Tashkent, Istanbul, Cairo, Yemen . If they find all they quoted suffixed by UN AN then they have a valid point to argue or else they should terminate the debate / argument.
Thanks
Salaam brother,
I believe that this manuscripts are made willingly to misguide people.
Haven't you seen how tashkeel is used in alQuraan? Do you think anyone can write in so perfect way.
Is it really allowed to add something to the Book of Allah?
Or is Allah's Book dependent on humans and cannot be read or understood by others without human's help? :&
Its a pre planned word to misguide people from the path of Allah, because alQuraan never support such claims.
May Allah forgive us and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: good logic on October 29, 2013, 01:37:24 AM
Peace mmkhan.
Thank you for ayaat [19:2]
God sometimes mention a name, other times He does not have to, because it is obvious like [17:1]:
سُبحٰنَ الَّذى أَسرىٰ بِعَبدِهِ لَيلًا مِنَ المَسجِدِ الحَرامِ إِلَى المَسجِدِ الأَقصَا الَّذى بٰرَكنا حَولَهُ لِنُرِيَهُ مِن ءايٰتِنا إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّميعُ البَصيرُ
Most glorified is the One who summoned His servant (Mohammad/ Ahmed...) during the night, from the Sacred Masjid to the farthest place of prostration,* whose surroundings we have blessed, in order to show him some of our signs. He is the Hearer, the Seer.
You are going to say I inserted ( Mohammed/ Ahmd..)but:
If it is other than the one who received Qoran, i.e Mohammed/Ahmed...Or whatever name you have for him...I will eat my hat!
Peace to you.
Peace brother,
Keep a full bottle of distilled water with some salt, because you may find difficult to digest your hat ;)
Where did alQuraan says that it was received by Muhammad/Ahmed?
Peace and may Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: hafeez kazi on October 29, 2013, 06:04:33 AM
Peace Wasi
(http://snag.gy/qcUmi.jpg)
Hope you will understand something.
Why I have posted this image? Just to make known that the Quran was written without tashkeel and whatever we find in the present Quran as MUHAMMUD UN MUHAMMAD AN is nothing but MUHAMMAD, the name of the messenger. The tashkeel is an insertion to facilitate the reading of the Quran by non Arabic people. If still people argue that MUHAMMAD UN OR AN is not a name of a person / messenger but praiseworthy then it is their choice.
Thanks
Salaam Hafeez Kazi, Yuliana and Earthdom,
Why do you bother only for the AN/UN what hapened with the rest of the tashkeel.
With other words why did you not write mIhUmIdA? as far as I can see there are also no tashkeel on those letters.
You know what, let's put it on a test. Does any of you have the courage to write or pronounce the next sentence and say that this is from Allah. :
Mihimmudu risila Alluha (48:29)Another thing, how is it possible that you give authority to a Quran from centuries ago as the true Quran while you doubt about the one you hold today in your hands?
So if you like to discuss with me about the Quran then please use the ones we both share and not one who is in a museum without tashkeels and with big parts missing and even not accesible to the public.
Allah will not call you to account on what was before you but on what is present with you.
Salaam,
Bender
salaam,
And btw even if you neglet the tashkeel, Mohammed is still not a name of a person in at least 48:29.
salaam,
Bender
Salaam,
I actually hold a bit of Bender's slight critical approach in certain cases. Not sure about the constant nagging in Quran about rasuul allah really constantly repeats about just the Messenger.
But I still believe the Messenger was named Muhammad or something like it. It does however not matter much.
God bless you
Peace mm khan, Bender.
Thank you for your efforts.
We are reading the same book? However our understanding differ.
So either you are right and I am wrong, or you are wrong and I am right,
I am not after convincing you, I can see it is a waste of time.
You will not be able to convince me,not after the knowledge that came to me from my Lord
However, I will say wait both of you I am also waiting.
And Peace to both of you
May the Lord bless you both.
Quote from: good logic on October 30, 2013, 01:33:51 PM
Peace mm khan, Bender.
Thank you for your efforts.
We are reading the same book? However our understanding differ.
So either you are right and I am wrong, or you are wrong and I am right,
I am not after convincing you, I can see it is a waste of time.
You will not be able to convince me,not after the knowledge that came to me from my Lord
However, I will say wait both of you I am also waiting.
And Peace to both of you
May the Lord bless you both.
Salaam,
Wait for?
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: good logic on October 30, 2013, 01:33:51 PM
Peace mm khan, Bender.
Thank you for your efforts.
We are reading the same book? However our understanding differ.
So either you are right and I am wrong, or you are wrong and I am right,
I am not after convincing you, I can see it is a waste of time.
You will not be able to convince me,not after the knowledge that came to me from my Lord
However, I will say wait both of you I am also waiting.
And Peace to both of you
May the Lord bless you both.
Peace brother,
Thanks for your clean reply.
Red: InshaAllah, we will wait :handshake:
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Salaam,
Quran was not sent down from Heaven was it? Did someone not write it?
According to what I have understood it was not sent down already with written text on paper/papyrus, so someone was a prophet with a pen, right?
Well, most Messengers and Prophets are mentioned in Quran, but not the actual person that wrote it? Is that not a bit strange?
Ahmed or Muhammad, or Abraham Lincoln, how does it matter really? If now he is anonymous then it should not matter if you give him worthy nicknames, right? Is not Muhammad (praiseworthy) a worthy nickname for the Messenger of Quran? So it is just pointless arguments going on here.
If there came a Messenger now and he did not necessarily come from the Arab countries, then his name would most likely not be Muhammad (praiseworthy) so that would make the verse with Muhammad a bit strange, would it not? That taking into consideration that like almost every Messenger in history was named in the scriptures and legends (and proved through Quran). Why at the advent of Quran would the Messenger suddenly be anonymous? No he was not, he was likely named Muhammad (Praiseworthy) much like Hussein or Hassan which also mean something.
How about Emanuel (contains Iman = Faith)?
God bless you
Peace Bender.
This is what we are waiting for:
[39:69] Then the earth will shine with the light of its Lord. The record will be proclaimed, and the prophets and the witnesses will be brought forth. Everyone will then be judged equitably, without the least injustice.
وَأَشرَقَتِ الأَرضُ بِنورِ رَبِّها وَوُضِعَ الكِتٰبُ وَجِا۟ىءَ بِالنَّبِيّـۧنَ وَالشُّهَداءِ وَقُضِىَ بَينَهُم بِالحَقِّ وَهُم لا يُظلَمونَ
First we will see if prophet Mohammed /Ahmed....Whatever he was called ,will be there.
Secondly I hope we are both in favour with the Lord.
Peace to you.
Quote from: good logic on October 31, 2013, 12:25:58 PM
Peace Bender.
This is what we are waiting for:
[39:69] Then the earth will shine with the light of its Lord. The record will be proclaimed, and the prophets and the witnesses will be brought forth. Everyone will then be judged equitably, without the least injustice.
وَأَشرَقَتِ الأَرضُ بِنورِ رَبِّها وَوُضِعَ الكِتٰبُ وَجِا۟ىءَ بِالنَّبِيّـۧنَ وَالشُّهَداءِ وَقُضِىَ بَينَهُم بِالحَقِّ وَهُم لا يُظلَمونَ
First we will see if prophet Mohammed /Ahmed....Whatever he was called ,will be there.
Secondly I hope we are both in favour with the Lord.
Peace to you.
i think the prophets and the witnesses that are present in the the record will be brought not the one who is outside the record ...i have a doubt on this ............
Peace wasi'
Which prophet received Qoran?
Do you believe in history from Qoran?
Who is God talking about here?:
Is this the Battle of Badr?
3:121
Recall that you (Who?) were among your people when you set out to assign to the believers their positions for battle. God is Hearer, Omniscient.
وَإِذ غَدَوتَ مِن أَهلِكَ تُبَوِّئُ المُؤمِنينَ مَقٰعِدَ لِلقِتالِ وَاللَّهُ سَميعٌ عَليمٌ
3:122
Two groups among you almost failed, but God was their Lord. In God the believers shall trust.
إِذ هَمَّت طائِفَتانِ مِنكُم أَن تَفشَلا وَاللَّهُ وَلِيُّهُما وَعَلَى اللَّهِ فَليَتَوَكَّلِ المُؤمِنونَ
3:123
God has granted you victory at Badr, despite your weakness. Therefore, you shall observe God, to show your appreciation.
وَلَقَد نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ بِبَدرٍ وَأَنتُم أَذِلَّةٌ فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ لَعَلَّكُم تَشكُرونَ
I believe ( Who?) i.e "you" in the ayaat-3-121- is the prophet who received Qoran--Mohammed/Ahmed/ Whatever his name was....- And he will be a witness on he day of judgement.
Peace to you
Quote from: good logic on November 01, 2013, 03:08:36 AM
Peace wasi'
Which prophet received Qoran?
Do you believe in history from Qoran?
Who is God talking about here?:
Is this the Battle of Badr?
3:121
Recall that you (Who?) were among your people when you set out to assign to the believers their positions for battle. God is Hearer, Omniscient.
وَإِذ غَدَوتَ مِن أَهلِكَ تُبَوِّئُ المُؤمِنينَ مَقٰعِدَ لِلقِتالِ وَاللَّهُ سَميعٌ عَليمٌ
3:122
Two groups among you almost failed, but God was their Lord. In God the believers shall trust.
إِذ هَمَّت طائِفَتانِ مِنكُم أَن تَفشَلا وَاللَّهُ وَلِيُّهُما وَعَلَى اللَّهِ فَليَتَوَكَّلِ المُؤمِنونَ
3:123
God has granted you victory at Badr, despite your weakness. Therefore, you shall observe God, to show your appreciation.
وَلَقَد نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ بِبَدرٍ وَأَنتُم أَذِلَّةٌ فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ لَعَلَّكُم تَشكُرونَ
I believe ( Who?) i.e "you" in the ayaat-3-121- is the prophet who received Qoran--Mohammed/Ahmed/ Whatever his name was....- And he will be a witness on he day of judgement.
Peace to you
peace
first of all you are forcefully inserting one particular person in the quran which allah has not at all mentioned
you are teaching allah to insert muhammed forcefully as if allah does not know anything
the word you when i read quran it many times appears to myself then any other particular person
then why allah said that quran is a guidance to all human beings
and why allah said that al kitab is a guidance to mutaqueens
and that battle of badr aiyat if anyone can explain it properly i would be thankfull to him as i dont trust translators
Peace wasi.
Whenever someone says something you disagree with, you blame the translation?
Does that mean that if someone does not understand arabic , he/she will never understand Qoran?
Thanks for your posts.
God bless you.
Peace to you.
Quote from: Man of Faith on October 31, 2013, 11:51:05 AM
Salaam,
Quran was not sent down from Heaven was it? Did someone not write it?
Salaam,
It is strange to see this kind of behaviour from people who believe in alQuraan alone? Either alQuraan was given to Muhammad or the only option left is to sent down/thrown from heavens? :o
Quote
According to what I have understood it was not sent down already with written text on paper/papyrus, so someone was a prophet with a pen, right?
Nope :nope:
Can you give me a single aayat saying that any Allah's book on earth was written by a human prophet/messenger?
AlQuraan never support this understanding. Besides that the way shown to us for giving a Book of Allah is clearly mentioned in 7:145, so that there will not be any option left for later, as it is said that some non-monotheist king/someone added tashkeel to the word of Allah.
Quote
Well, most Messengers and Prophets are mentioned in Quran, but not the actual person that wrote it? Is that not a bit strange?
:hypno:
So strong believe in such a thing which is not mentioned in alQuraan nor it is supported by it in any ways? Yes, it is truly strange.
Quote
Ahmed or Muhammad, or Abraham Lincoln, how does it matter really? If now he is anonymous then it should not matter if you give him worthy nicknames, right? Is not Muhammad (praiseworthy) a worthy nickname for the Messenger of Quran? So it is just pointless arguments going on here.
Again, you cannot be able to give me a single aayat in relation to the word Muhammad with alQuraan, inshaAllah.
Quote
If there came a Messenger now and he did not necessarily come from the Arab countries, then his name would most likely not be Muhammad (praiseworthy) so that would make the verse with Muhammad a bit strange, would it not? That taking into consideration that like almost every Messenger in history was named in the scriptures and legends (and proved through Quran). Why at the advent of Quran would the Messenger suddenly be anonymous? No he was not, he was likely named Muhammad (Praiseworthy) much like Hussein or Hassan which also mean something.
How about Emanuel (contains Iman = Faith)?
God bless you
BTW, who is this Hussein and Hassan and Emanuel?
May Allah bless you and increase our knowledge :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: good logic on November 01, 2013, 03:08:36 AM
Peace wasi'
Which prophet received Qoran?
Do you believe in history from Qoran?
Who is God talking about here?:
Is this the Battle of Badr?
3:121
Recall that you (Who?) were among your people when you set out to assign to the believers their positions for battle. God is Hearer, Omniscient.
وَإِذ غَدَوتَ مِن أَهلِكَ تُبَوِّئُ المُؤمِنينَ مَقٰعِدَ لِلقِتالِ وَاللَّهُ سَميعٌ عَليمٌ
3:122
Two groups among you almost failed, but God was their Lord. In God the believers shall trust.
إِذ هَمَّت طائِفَتانِ مِنكُم أَن تَفشَلا وَاللَّهُ وَلِيُّهُما وَعَلَى اللَّهِ فَليَتَوَكَّلِ المُؤمِنونَ
3:123
God has granted you victory at Badr, despite your weakness. Therefore, you shall observe God, to show your appreciation.
وَلَقَد نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ بِبَدرٍ وَأَنتُم أَذِلَّةٌ فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ لَعَلَّكُم تَشكُرونَ
I believe ( Who?) i.e "you" in the ayaat-3-121- is the prophet who received Qoran--Mohammed/Ahmed/ Whatever his name was....- And he will be a witness on he day of judgement.
Peace to you
Peace brother,
You believe very strongly in hadith/history still.
If the word Ba-Daal-Ra is used in 3:123, does that mean "battle of Badr"? If so, how will you translate a derivative, which is derived from the same root Ba-Daal-Ra in 4:6?
4:6
وَابْتَلُوا الْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُوا النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُم مِّنْهُمْ رُشْدًا فَادْفَعُوا إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ ۖ وَلَا تَأْكُلُوهَا إِسْرَافًا وَبِدَارًا أَن يَكْبَرُوا ۚ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيًّا فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ ۖ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيرًا فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ ۚ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُوا عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّـهِ حَسِيبًا And also please take a look at other translations of 3:123 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=3&verse=123) here. There is no word "victory" in aayat.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on November 01, 2013, 01:52:43 PM
Salaam,
It is strange to see this kind of behaviour from people who believe in alQuraan alone? Either alQuraan was given to Muhammad or the only option left is to sent down/thrown from heavens? :o
Nope :nope:
Why is so strange that with current translations believe that the Qur'an was written down with a pen by a human? Also considering the narration is directed towards a person who is the character in it.
Quote
Can you give me a single aayat saying that any Allah's book on earth was written by a human prophet/messenger?
AlQuraan never support this understanding. Besides that the way shown to us for giving a Book of Allah is clearly mentioned in 7:145, so that there will not be any option left for later, as it is said that some non-monotheist king/someone added tashkeel to the word of Allah.
:hypno:
Okay, so you have a different translation/understanding than I do. With the monotheist translation I get the impression that the Qur'an was written down by a Messenger. There are too many ayat in Quran which seem to fit this idea, look yourself.
Quote
So strong believe in such a thing which is not mentioned in alQuraan nor it is supported by it in any ways? Yes, it is truly strange.
Again, you cannot be able to give me a single aayat in relation to the word Muhammad with alQuraan, inshaAllah.
BTW, who is this Hussein and Hassan and Emanuel?
They are names of people and their names also have some meaning as words. I gave examples and it was no special people I referred to.
Why do I have to provide an ayat when the whole Quran shines with this testimony? And otherwise it does not matter as I said if he is named Jackass or whatever as there was a guy that came or they have to rewrite all the translations I have read. Else I have to paste the whole Qur'an for you right here.
God bless you
Peace mm khan.
The link you gave , here are the translations:
Chapter (3) sūrat āl ʿim'rān (The Family of Imrān)
Sahih International: And already had Allah given you victory at [the battle of] Badr while you were few in number. Then fear Allah ; perhaps you will be grateful.
Pickthall: Allah had already given you the victory at Badr, when ye were contemptible. So observe your duty to Allah in order that ye may be thankful.
Yusuf Ali: Allah had helped you at Badr, when ye were a contemptible little force; then fear Allah; thus May ye show your gratitude.
Shakir: And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were weak; be careful of (your duty to) Allah then, that you may give thanks.
Muhammad Sarwar: God gave you victory in the battle of Badr where your forces were much weaker than those of the enemy. Have fear of God so that you may give Him thanks.
Mohsin Khan: And Allah has already made you victorious at Badr, when you were a weak little force. So fear Allah much [abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden and love Allah much, perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained] that you may be grateful.
Arberry: and God most surely helped you at Badr, when you were utterly abject. So fear God, and haply you Will be thankful.
Have you given the right link?
I found most of them talk about " Victory"?
Peace to you.
Quote from: good logic on November 01, 2013, 05:30:14 PM
Peace mm khan.
The link you gave , here are the translations:
Chapter (3) sūrat āl ʿim'rān (The Family of Imrān)
Sahih International: And already had Allah given you victory at [the battle of] Badr while you were few in number. Then fear Allah ; perhaps you will be grateful.
Pickthall: Allah had already given you the victory at Badr, when ye were contemptible. So observe your duty to Allah in order that ye may be thankful.
Yusuf Ali: Allah had helped you at Badr, when ye were a contemptible little force; then fear Allah; thus May ye show your gratitude.
Shakir: And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were weak; be careful of (your duty to) Allah then, that you may give thanks.
Muhammad Sarwar: God gave you victory in the battle of Badr where your forces were much weaker than those of the enemy. Have fear of God so that you may give Him thanks.
Mohsin Khan: And Allah has already made you victorious at Badr, when you were a weak little force. So fear Allah much [abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden and love Allah much, perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained] that you may be grateful.
Arberry: and God most surely helped you at Badr, when you were utterly abject. So fear God, and haply you Will be thankful.
Have you given the right link?
I found most of them talk about " Victory"?
Peace to you.
hey good logic
if you are a one person with many other hadiths believers will allah not give you victory .......yes allah will give you victory because the whole quran will support you and allah is always with you not with hadiths believers .....
Peace wasi, mm khan,Bender.
Wasi I believe in the " best hadith"!
Those who were not at " badr" have not received any " victory" of that ayaat . Werther they believed in Qoran or hadith!
Did " hadith" exist at the time of "Badr"?
It is fine anyone of you can answer.
Peace to you all.
First of all Lord Mohammed M. Khan, Earliest Qur'an manuscripts ever are without tashkeels. It is the Sunnah lovers and inventors that put the tashkeels. The tashkeel are often used for recitation (and singing) of the Qur'an. COPIES of Qur'an often vary in styles of writings (alphabetical style). So don't accuse me of lying about God.
So you are saying God throws down Qur'an from the sky? How illogical!
There are many verses that say Qur'an were written. The words of Qur'an are inspired by God.
Anyways I don't even know whether I should believe in scriptural faith anymore. I will never believe in Sunnism, Shia, Ahmadiyya etc. However I am also sick of differences in interpretations.
I am sick of people justifying polygamy, sex-slavery in the Qur'an. Is this what intelligent deen about?
I think many of Qur'an aloners, liberal muslims etc are just being apologetic.
Sorry for my crying here.
I know this is not the right place to cry over this.
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 01, 2013, 10:09:51 PM
First of all Lord Mohammed M. Khan, Earliest Qur'an manuscripts ever are without tashkeels. It is the Sunnah lovers and inventors that put the tashkeels. The tashkeel are often used for recitation (and singing) of the Qur'an. COPIES of Qur'an often vary in styles of writings (alphabetical style). So don't accuse me of lying about God.
So you are saying God throws down Qur'an from the sky? How illogical!
There are many verses that say Qur'an were written. The words of Qur'an are inspired by God.
Anyways I don't even know whether I should believe in scriptural faith anymore. I will never believe in Sunnism, Shia, Ahmadiyya etc. However I am also sick of differences in interpretations.
I am sick of people justifying polygamy, sex-slavery in the Qur'an. Is this what intelligent deen about?
I think many of Qur'an aloners, liberal muslims etc are just being apologetic.
Sorry for my crying here.
I know this is not the right place to cry over this.
i think that sunnah lovers and inventors god inspiration to put that particular tanween only on muhammed at every place ....leaving all the other prophets name
6:83 to 6:89
allah took all the names and said
we gave the al kitaab the judgement and prophethood but muhammed is not included
in these passage ....did allah forgot to give al kitaab to muhammed
Quote from: good logic on November 01, 2013, 06:33:55 PM
Peace wasi, mm khan,Bender.
Wasi I believe in the " best hadith"!
Those who were not at " badr" have not received any " victory" of that ayaat . Werther they believed in Qoran or hadith!
Did " hadith" exist at the time of "Badr"?
It is fine anyone of you can answer.
Peace to you all.
peace good logic
my understanding
how did we get this quran
from my parents ....i dont know any history of islam because allah says
1. Ar rahaman is our teacher : 55:2 It is He Who has taught the Qur'an.
2. You are commanded to follow what is sent down from your lord :
3. 7:3 Follow what was sent down to you from your Lord, and do not follow besides Him any supporters. Little do you remember!
4. Majority of the people are FALSE
5. 6:116 And if you obey most of those on the earth they will lead you away from the path of God; that is because they follow conjecture, and that is because they only guess.
every aiyat should satisfy us ........this is my opinion and what does mmkhan n bender say on this
Quote from: Bender on October 30, 2013, 12:46:44 PM
Salaam Hafeez Kazi, Yuliana and Earthdom,
Why do you bother only for the AN/UN what hapened with the rest of the tashkeel.
With other words why did you not write mIhUmIdA? as far as I can see there are also no tashkeel on those letters.
You know what, let's put it on a test. Does any of you have the courage to write or pronounce the next sentence and say that this is from Allah. :
Mihimmudu risila Alluha (48:29)
Another thing, how is it possible that you give authority to a Quran from centuries ago as the true Quran while you doubt about the one you hold today in your hands?
So if you like to discuss with me about the Quran then please use the ones we both share and not one who is in a museum without tashkeels and with big parts missing and even not accesible to the public.
Allah will not call you to account on what was before you but on what is present with you.
Salaam,
Bender
:rotfl:
i agree with your opinion...........
First of all, I was not justifying the existence of Qur'an recipient named Mohammed by using no-tashkeel theory. I was just saying that using tashkeel to disprove Mohammed as a name because of tanween in arguments is weak because tashkeel is man-made inventions to COPIES of Qur'an.
I prefer using history for arguments about Mohammed as a name of a person who received Qur'an.
Recently I have been having doubt either Mohammed ibn Abdullah ibn Abdul Muthalib is the 'Mohammed' that is mentioned in the Qur'an.
Quote from: good logic on November 01, 2013, 05:30:14 PM
Peace mm khan.
The link you gave , here are the translations:
Chapter (3) sūrat āl ʿim'rān (The Family of Imrān)
Sahih International: And already had Allah given you victory at [the battle of] Badr while you were few in number. Then fear Allah ; perhaps you will be grateful.
Pickthall: Allah had already given you the victory at Badr, when ye were contemptible. So observe your duty to Allah in order that ye may be thankful.
Yusuf Ali: Allah had helped you at Badr, when ye were a contemptible little force; then fear Allah; thus May ye show your gratitude.
Shakir: And Allah did certainly assist you at Badr when you were weak; be careful of (your duty to) Allah then, that you may give thanks.
Muhammad Sarwar: God gave you victory in the battle of Badr where your forces were much weaker than those of the enemy. Have fear of God so that you may give Him thanks.
Mohsin Khan: And Allah has already made you victorious at Badr, when you were a weak little force. So fear Allah much [abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden and love Allah much, perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained] that you may be grateful.
Arberry: and God most surely helped you at Badr, when you were utterly abject. So fear God, and haply you Will be thankful.
Have you given the right link?
I found most of them talk about " Victory"?
Peace to you.
Peace brother,
Yes, I have given you the correct link.
It is not about winning between us. I wanted to show you to think on why other translators did not translate it as victory? It means those who translated as victory are based on hadith and trying to fit that badr story into the aayat of alQuraan.
Peace be with you too :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 01, 2013, 10:09:51 PM
First of all Lord Mohammed M. Khan, Earliest Qur'an manuscripts ever are without tashkeels. It is the Sunnah lovers and inventors that put the tashkeels. The tashkeel are often used for recitation (and singing) of the Qur'an. COPIES of Qur'an often vary in styles of writings (alphabetical style). So don't accuse me of lying about God.
So you are saying God throws down Qur'an from the sky? How illogical!
There are many verses that say Qur'an were written. The words of Qur'an are inspired by God.
Anyways I don't even know whether I should believe in scriptural faith anymore. I will never believe in Sunnism, Shia, Ahmadiyya etc. However I am also sick of differences in interpretations.
I am sick of people justifying polygamy, sex-slavery in the Qur'an. Is this what intelligent deen about?
I think many of Qur'an aloners, liberal muslims etc are just being apologetic.
Sorry for my crying here.
I know this is not the right place to cry over this.
Peace Yuliana,
Easy easy, relax!
Red: :& [please don't do shirk by making me your Lord :&]
Blue: I am not accusing you, but wanted to warn you that when your knowledge/understanding don't match with alQuraan, then it is a lying on Allah. So, just wanted to make you aware of it, so that you can say only what you have evidence for.
I cannot believe that sunna lovers or mushriks are so talented to add tashkeel to the book of Allah. If you start understanding the usage of it, then you will come to know, how perfectly it has been set. It is not possible for any human or jinn to add it in such a perfect way.
May Allah bless you and increase our knowledge :pr
mmKhan
Sir Khan,
Like I said before, the styles of writing (i.e. alphabetical styles) in COPIES or PRINTINGS of Qur'an usually differ. The Arabic diacritics were invented because at that time Qur'an had been considered as islamic mantra-singing book.
Why do you keep insisting that Qur'an COPIES are all the same?
Peace wasi.
Quoting what you said:
"allah took all the names and said
we gave the al kitaab the judgement and prophethood but muhammed is not included
in these passage ....did allah forgot to give al kitaab to muhammed"
Who is this Nabi that is included here"Minka"?
33:7
Recall that we took from the prophets their covenant, including you (Who?), Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary. We took from them a solemn pledge.*
وَإِذ أَخَذنا مِنَ النَّبِيّـۧنَ ميثٰقَهُم وَمِنكَ وَمِن نوحٍ وَإِبرٰهيمَ وَموسىٰ وَعيسَى ابنِ مَريَمَ وَأَخَذنا مِنهُم ميثٰقًا غَليظًا
Anyway I am not going to quote [33:40] . You will probably have an explanation for this ayaat as well.?
Peace to you.
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 02, 2013, 02:00:04 AM
Sir Khan,
Like I said before, the styles of writing (i.e. alphabetical styles) in COPIES or PRINTINGS of Qur'an usually differ. The Arabic diacritics were invented because at that time Qur'an had been considered as islamic mantra-singing book.
Why do you keep insisting that Qur'an COPIES are all the same?
Peace Yuliana,
InshaAllah, you will learn soon that old copies of alQuraan/manuscripts are made in purpose by polytheists by removing markings/tashkeel from the aayaat of alQuraan.
They did it on purpose to misguide people and unfortunately they are succeeded.
We don't have to look at other copies of alQuraan, you will be asked from what copy of alQuraan you have given and I will be asked from the copy I am given. So, nothing to worry. One thing is clear that old copies are not for us and we are not going to answer for those copies, so what is the point in arguing for something which we have nothing to do with.
Hope you understand what I am trying to say, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
First of all,
Go learn some history please.
You are still too attached to traditionism.
Do you know what is the purpose of the goddamn diacritics? Traditionists use them to SING al-Qur'an with correct tajweed. That's all.
Much older copies don't contain diacritics. Please learn who invented them. One of the retards who invented them was the tyranny Muawiya.
Salaam,
Chill out Yuliana. I think the discussion with him is pointless if you do not have divine evidence that Muhammad was a Messenger.
God bless you
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 02, 2013, 07:11:44 PM
First of all,
Go learn some history please.
You are still too attached to traditionism.
Do you know what is the purpose of the goddamn diacritics? Traditionists use them to SING al-Qur'an with correct tajweed. That's all.
Much older copies don't contain diacritics. Please learn who invented them. One of the retards who invented them was the tyranny Muawiya.
Salaam,
4:82
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ ۚ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّـهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا27:6
وَإِنَّكَ لَتُلَقَّى الْقُرْآنَ مِن لَّدُنْ حَكِيمٍ عَلِيمٍ10:37
وَمَا كَانَ هَـٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَىٰ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ وَلَـٰكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ In what hadith do you believe, tyranny Muawiya hadith or the ayaats of Allah?
salaam,
Bender
Quote from: good logic on November 02, 2013, 05:18:02 AM
Peace wasi.
Quoting what you said:
"allah took all the names and said
we gave the al kitaab the judgement and prophethood but muhammed is not included
in these passage ....did allah forgot to give al kitaab to muhammed"
Who is this Nabi that is included here"Minka"?
33:7
Recall that we took from the prophets their covenant, including you (Who?), Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary. We took from them a solemn pledge.*
وَإِذ أَخَذنا مِنَ النَّبِيّـۧنَ ميثٰقَهُم وَمِنكَ وَمِن نوحٍ وَإِبرٰهيمَ وَموسىٰ وَعيسَى ابنِ مَريَمَ وَأَخَذنا مِنهُم ميثٰقًا غَليظًا
Anyway I am not going to quote [33:40] . You will probably have an explanation for this ayaat as well.?
Peace to you.
TODAY HOW DOES ALLAH COMMUNICATES WITH US
42:52
And thus we have revealed to YOU an inspiration by our command. YOU did not KNOW what AL-KITAB is nor faith is. But we have made it a light by which we guide whom we will of OUR slaves .And indeed,you guide to the Straight path..
peace good logic
it is very nice to converse with you :) :)
....a year ago i was not even knowing the word Al-kitab ....but today i can find the much difference between al kitab and al quran
if you comprehend the sentences of al kitab properly you can feel as if allah is communicating truely to you...
is there any problem for you to become a nabi .....every past nabi was a human being and there is no problem for us to be a nabi
if we have a courage and move forward for submitting to allah almighty then allah will surely accept us ......
and we are the seal to khatimana nabiyiana
(prophets) i am not so sure but i can say that
muhammadun is not singular
rasoolun is not singular or particular
and
khatimana nabiyiana is not singular
rasoola of 33:40 is different from rasoolu of 61:5 as it is refereed to musa a particular person and next aiyat 61:6 matches with 61:5 as rasoolu
allah knows how to use words but the problem is we are effected by history n corruption of islam we need to be pure in understanding the words properly
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 02, 2013, 02:00:04 AM
Sir Khan,
Like I said before, the styles of writing (i.e. alphabetical styles) in COPIES or PRINTINGS of Qur'an usually differ. The Arabic diacritics were invented because at that time Qur'an had been considered as islamic mantra-singing book.
Why do you keep insisting that Qur'an COPIES are all the same?
BY THE WAY TO MISGUIDE PEOPLE ARABS CAN DO ANYTHING BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT ARAB HAVE A SPECIAL CATEGORY OF AS ALLAH DEFINED IN THE QURAN
9:98
And some ARABI Look upon their payments as a fine and watch for disasters for YOU: on them be the disaster of evil: for Allah is He that hearer knowledge.
WILL YOU WANT TO TRUST THE PEOPLE OF ARABS AFTER LOOKING TO THIS AIYAT
AND ARABIS ARE HAVING A STRONG DISBELIEVING HEART WITH ALLAH
9.97
The ARABA are more hard in disbelief and hypocrisy, and more likely to be ignorant of the limits which Allah hath revealed unto His messenger. And Allah is knower, Wise.
MAY BE THEY HAVE WANTEDLY WRITTEN BY SEEING THE ORIGINAL QURAN WITH TASHKEEL TO WITHOUT TASHKEEL AND ALLAH HAS TAKEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTING THIS BOOK AS WE CAN CLEARLY SEE WITH OUR EYES:::WHY THOSE MUSEUM PAPERS ARE NOT WITH US AND WHY THIS QURAN IS IN YOUR HANDS
i am not so sure but i can say that
muhammadun is not singular
rasoolun is not singular or particular of 3:144
if muhammed was the messenger of allah a particular person then the sencentence could have been
muhammadha rasoolu aallahiii ....but the fact is this person has not came to people as allah did not said in the meeting..... like how allah said ....musa came in 61:5
and when musa said:
and said among his people rasoolu allahi
and
do you find a speech like this
i muhammed declares my self as i am the rasoolu allahi and SEAL NABI AND THIS AL QURAN IS WRITTEN OR GIVEN TO ME :::::::NOT KHATIMANA NABIYINAAA
khatimana nabiyiana is not singular
rasoola of 33:40 is different from rasoolu of 61:5 as it is refereed to musa a particular person and next aiyat 61:6 matches with 61:5 as rasoolu
when rasoolu comes it comes with allahi
and why muhamadin is used in 47:2 why not muhammedun the names cannot be changed in prounication n spelling
but
I AM PRETTY MUCH CONFUSED ON THIS ISSUE MAY ALLAH CLEAR EVERYTHING
[/quote]
Dear Wasi,
I don't trust Arabs for my arguments that diacritics are innovations. Those are based on facts.
The diacritical marks make no significance to our salvation.
You can barely show your proofs that real Qur'an was without the goddamn tashkeel.
I am tired of stubborn people on here.
If there are always new prophets, so who the hell is / are the seal of prophets?
Quote from: wasi on November 02, 2013, 11:42:50 PM
i am not so sure but i can say that
muhammadun is not singular
rasoolun is not singular or particular of 3:144
Peace wasi -- they are singular, it is obvious...
3:144 وما and not محمد Muhammad الا only
رسول messenger (singular) قد hence خلت passed من from قبله before him
الرسل the messengers (plural)33:40 ما not
كان he is (singular masculine) محمد Muhammad ابا father احد one من from رجالكم menfolk yours ولكن and however
رسول messenger (singular) الله the god وخاتم and seal
النبىىن the prophets (plural)47:2 والذىن and the ones امنوا believe they وعملوا and do they الصالحات the righteous works وامنوا and believe they بما in what نزل descended على on محمد Muhammad
48:29
محمد Muhammad رسول messenger(singular) الله the god والذىن and the ones معه with him اشداء tough على on الكفار the rejecting رحماء affectionate (plural) بىنهم among themselves
If Qur?an was revealed or given to know as spoken word, the tahskeel does not make any difference. The sounds would be learn and any tashkeel would have to conform to the sounds. The question is there has been transmitted only one version of Qur'an, either spoken or written, that is there are not variations (the ones there are are minuscule and do not change anything). So tahskeel or no tashkeel, what we have is what we have. If we think the sounds have been changed we can also think ayas and whole lots of the Qur'an may have been changed, that is, we would have no Qur'an.
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on November 03, 2013, 03:18:58 AM
If Qur?an was revealed or given to know as spoken word, the tahskeel does not make any difference. The sounds would be learn and any tashkeel would have to conform to the sounds. The question is there has been transmitted only one version of Qur'an, either spoken or written, that is there are not variations (the ones there are are minuscule and do not change anything). So tahskeel or no tashkeel, what we have is what we have. If we think the sounds have been changed we can also think ayas and whole lots of the Qur'an may have been changed, that is, we would have no Qur'an.
Salaam
Salaam,
Red: Please take a look at my reply # 375 or click here (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.msg340532#msg340532).
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: diamantinehoneybunch on November 03, 2013, 01:45:21 AM
Dear Wasi,
If there are always new prophets, so who the hell is / are the seal of prophets?
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
well whoever may be the prophet first till last there duty is one n the same ......no one has violated the rule of allah ....the chain can never be gone in different way
Once there was a person X lived and his Truthfulness, Loyalty Brought the Attention of Allah. So he sent the messenger Zibreil to person X and Quran is revealed. Since the Person is most suitable by Allah, HE named the Person as Mohammed. We respect Mohammed who is truthful and Great Implementer of Quran. Now also Who Implements Quran in real Life By the Satifaction of Allah, I dont doubt Allah will elevate him to the level of Mohammed.
So Mohammed is Gods Property and not Man Made Claims..Unless HE names Who is Mohammed and there are no man made Mohamed.
We see millions of muslims by the name of Mohammed and Ahmeds.
Quote from: jhonsonmustafa on November 03, 2013, 10:15:58 AM
Once there was a person X lived and his Truthfulness, Loyalty Brought the Attention of Allah. So he sent the messenger Zibreil to person X and Quran is revealed. Since the Person is most suitable by Allah, HE named the Person as Mohammed. We respect Mohammed who is truthful and Great Implementer of Quran. Now also Who Implements Quran in real Life By the Satifaction of Allah, I dont doubt Allah will elevate him to the level of Mohammed.
So Mohammed is Gods Property and not Man Made Claims..Unless HE names Who is Mohammed and there are no man made Mohamed.
We see millions of muslims by the name of Mohammed and Ahmeds.
but if that x person can be called as muhammed
then we can also be called as muhammed because quran is revealed on every human being
Quote from: wasi on November 03, 2013, 04:45:21 PM
but if that x person can be called as muhammed
then we can also be called as muhammed because quran is revealed on every human being
Might Be if we follow 100% Quran and follow HIS guidance and Allah is satisfied with our dignity and truthful, Sujth, Chastity , broad mindedness and all the proprieties of Allah... Its not a easy task.. But Allah recognizes the efforts...
Definitely Allah will give good for efforts by changing the Characters from bad to Good...
Its a Great Task....
:group:
oh people! those who have been confused with this post
my kind word to them
allah has created you from nothing your with each n every cell in your
body precisely placed ..your eyes at perfect size shape and correct place
your nose n your heart everything is correctly and precisely placed
has made you from childhood to adult precisely
and you see the world around you the sky the earth and its rotation
the day and the night precisely shifting from time to time
do you find any fault a single small minute fault in his creation
and given you the book in your hands which contains the truth precisely
do you find any mistakes or faults in its writing accepts the
words and understanding of allah precisely as he has kept every
favor upon you precisly with no faults...let there be no misunderstanding
between you and the one who created you...and make your connection precisely with
your lord
i love my lord and i feel that my lord cannot create any fault nor in his creation nor in
his writing its all people who has been misguided themsleves and kepts there hearts to follow
a nothing but conjecture, and that is because they only guess or a man made religion they follow
:group:
Two Russian mathematician working for decades on the problems of history. Unfortunately all the information on the Russian. I'll translate some of their discoveries, and you, if you would be interested, able to read their method of discovery. It's easy, considering that at this moment I am writing in Russian through Google translator.
http://www.chronologia.org this is their website.
So:
Anatoly Fomenko, Gleb Nosovskii
New Chronology of Islam
http://www.arhimed007.narod.ru/h_islam-hronology.htm
"This article is a selected passages (about Islam) from the works of Fomenko and G.V.Nosovskogo series "New Chronology." More information about these authors and their books can be found on the official website of the "New Chronology? (http://chronologia.org)."
"From the book "Empire"
Orthodoxy and Islam ... were united under one religion. Then a deep division between Orthodoxy and Islam was not. Islam initially, as is well known, was over Christian - Nestorianism. The difference in the rites, etc. accumulated for a long time before the split. As a result of these two branches of Christianity then strongly diverged. But this was already in the XV century."
"Division ... was the result of religious schism beginning of the XV century AD Orthodoxy, Islam and Catholicism.
And ... what George the Victorious and Muslims, only confirms our reconstruction that in the XIV century Islam had not yet stood out from Orthodoxy.
History of Islam ... today it already begins with the presentation of the VII century BC Therefore, this history actually been lengthened compared to reality, at least three-four years.
Islam ... Islam had already been forced to extend its history in the past."
"From the book "Mathematical chronology of biblical events"
Chapter 4. Application sequence BIBLE phantom phantom-REAL EVENTS EUROPEAN MIDDLE AGES
6. WHY ERA GEDZHARY reckoned names from VII century AD?
6.1. OVERVIEW"
"At the same time, chronology, recorded in the Quran, sometimes significant controversy and biblical chronology. For example, the Koran apparently believes ARON = Aria (?) - Uncle of gospel Jesus. Therefore, Moses and Aaron according to the Koran are in the generation immediately preceding Jesus Christ, that, of course, at odds with Scaliger's point of view on a few hundred years."
http://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arhimed007.narod.ru%2Fh_islam-hronology.htm&act=url
QuoteInformation on the Hajj , the pilgrimage that is the shrine in the Middle Ages is very vague and sketchy . After a pilgrimage to the remnants of a meteorite Harun al -Rashid , allegedly VIII century AD , comes a break in the Hajj . Then , allegedly in the X century AD Carmathians besieged Mecca and took with them to Hedger "heavenly stone" , thinking to attract crowds of pilgrims to her. However , after some time, some of the fragments of the "heavenly stone" returned to Mecca. Maybe these medieval pilgrimage Ark of the Covenant and are reflected in the Bible, specifically describing the abduction Ark enemies , his " moving " from place to place , after which he was returned back (1 Samuel 5-7). As in the case of the Muslim Kaaba , "kidnapping Ark " occurred only once ( in the Bible ) .
Only since the alleged X-XI centuries AD begins more or less authentic period Scaligerian history of Hajj . By the way, in the XVIII century religious war broke out , which Scaliger historians hastened to explain the complete absence of Mecca and Medina, any credible tombs of the Prophet and his companions. Allegedly , when in 1803 , Saud took Mecca , he ordered to kill all the servants of the Kaaba and bulldoze ALL tombstones family members of Mohammed. But not created specifically whether this legend to somehow "explain" the lack of reliable graves here ?
well i want to say only two thing for who are interested in history
as a living person i myself cannot write the history properly of my own even though if a could able to recall it by looking at my own pictures ....i dont want to see or hear or listen to any other persons history ....
i also believe that there is none in this world who can show the history properly except the creator of this world
12:102 That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal, to you. And you were not with them when they put together their plan while they conspired.
only my lord is the best know er of history .....
secondly who cares of HISTORY i am more and more interested not even with my history but with my future as my lord teaches me the best ...
"O you who have believed! Fear Allaah. And let every soul look to what it has put forth for tomorrow" [Quran 59: 18] :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay:
Quote from: onlyquran01 on March 10, 2014, 06:27:29 PM
Two Russian mathematician working for decades on the problems of history. Unfortunately all the information on the Russian. I'll translate some of their discoveries, and you, if you would be interested, able to read their method of discovery. It's easy, considering that at this moment I am writing in Russian through Google translator.
http://www.chronologia.org this is their website.
So:
Anatoly Fomenko, Gleb Nosovskii
New Chronology of Islam
http://www.arhimed007.narod.ru/h_islam-hronology.htm
"This article is a selected passages (about Islam) from the works of Fomenko and G.V.Nosovskogo series "New Chronology." More information about these authors and their books can be found on the official website of the "New Chronology? (http://chronologia.org)."
"From the book "Empire"
Orthodoxy and Islam ... were united under one religion. Then a deep division between Orthodoxy and Islam was not. Islam initially, as is well known, was over Christian - Nestorianism. The difference in the rites, etc. accumulated for a long time before the split. As a result of these two branches of Christianity then strongly diverged. But this was already in the XV century."
"Division ... was the result of religious schism beginning of the XV century AD Orthodoxy, Islam and Catholicism.
And ... what George the Victorious and Muslims, only confirms our reconstruction that in the XIV century Islam had not yet stood out from Orthodoxy.
History of Islam ... today it already begins with the presentation of the VII century BC Therefore, this history actually been lengthened compared to reality, at least three-four years.
Islam ... Islam had already been forced to extend its history in the past."
"From the book "Mathematical chronology of biblical events"
Chapter 4. Application sequence BIBLE phantom phantom-REAL EVENTS EUROPEAN MIDDLE AGES
6. WHY ERA GEDZHARY reckoned names from VII century AD?
6.1. OVERVIEW"
"At the same time, chronology, recorded in the Quran, sometimes significant controversy and biblical chronology. For example, the Koran apparently believes ARON = Aria (?) - Uncle of gospel Jesus. Therefore, Moses and Aaron according to the Koran are in the generation immediately preceding Jesus Christ, that, of course, at odds with Scaliger's point of view on a few hundred years."
http://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arhimed007.narod.ru%2Fh_islam-hronology.htm&act=url
Could you please summarize somewhat the main point of those Russians, because even after reading that translation that you linked to with Google translation I couldn't discern anything logical or orderly?
Looks like a schizophrenic bubbling.
Thank you
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 02:19:02 AM
Could you please summarize somewhat the main point of those Russians, because even after reading that translation that you linked to with Google translation I couldn't discern anything logical or orderly?
Looks like a schizophrenic bubbling.
Thank you
Salam
Their website on english http://www.chronologia.org/en/index.html
Quote from: mmkhan on November 03, 2013, 04:03:33 AM
Salaam,
Red: Please take a look at my reply # 375 or click here (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604387.msg340532#msg340532).
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
I have looked at that message to forward me, but I see no answer in it to my question. Whatever you have in mind, I think you do expect from people a lot of guessing at what you are thinking of.
Salaam
Quote from: onlyquran01 on March 16, 2014, 06:11:54 AM
Salam
Their website in English http://www.chronologia.org/en/index.html
Thank you for the answer.
But could you summarize their point please?
Thanx
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 07:42:29 AM
Thank you for the answer.
But could you summarize their point please?
Thanx
Peace.
Sorry, but it is difficult me to write in English. See this link:
http://www.chronologia.org/en/history.html
Quote from: onlyquran01 on March 16, 2014, 08:16:50 AM
Peace.
Sorry, but it is difficult me to write in English. See this link:
http://www.chronologia.org/en/history.html
Thank you
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 08:25:55 AM
Thank you
Also what I found on english:
New Chronology Fomenko in English 1992
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQweLQMyylM
History: science or fiction?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNYIIPkzdEE
History: Fiction or Science? Part 3: Methods (English Subtitles)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbQMplPvA7k
FOMENKO & The Rotten Lie called - HISTORY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiBaXZSR07Y&list=PLBaa2RJIJKupa9OtXb9N10bC6ZfO8697d
Jerusalem-Rome-Constantinople-Moscow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oskt7FQfTm8&list=PLDE1DF215E66C7E2A
Quote from: onlyquran01 on March 16, 2014, 08:48:46 AM
Also what I found on english:
New Chronology Fomenko in English 1992
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQweLQMyylM
History: science or fiction?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNYIIPkzdEE
History: Fiction or Science? Part 3: Methods (English Subtitles)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbQMplPvA7k
FOMENKO & The Rotten Lie called - HISTORY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiBaXZSR07Y&list=PLBaa2RJIJKupa9OtXb9N10bC6ZfO8697d
Jerusalem-Rome-Constantinople-Moscow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oskt7FQfTm8&list=PLDE1DF215E66C7E2A
Thank you very much!
It is informative.
There IS truth in everything, the perception of it usually depends on the subconscious programming of the person perceiving it.
But I wonder now why everybody tries to establish Jerusalem in their own garden? It seems that they claim that Jerusalem is Moscow :rotfl:
2:42 Do not confound the truth with falsehood, nor shall you conceal the truth, knowingly.
3:3 He sent down to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming all previous scriptures, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.
(Qur'an would be ininteligible without the Bible)3:18 God bears witness that there is no god except He, and so do the angels and those who possess knowledge. Truthfully and equitably, He is the absolute god; there is no god but He, the Almighty, Most Wise.
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 09:44:22 AM
Thank you very much!
It is informative.
There IS truth in everything, the perception of it usually depends on the subconscious programming of the person perceiving it.
But I wonder now why everybody tries to establish Jerusalem in their own garden? It seems that they claim that Jerusalem is Moscow :rotfl:
2:42 Do not confound the truth with falsehood, nor shall you conceal the truth, knowingly.
3:3 He sent down to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming all previous scriptures, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel. (Qur'an would be ininteligible without the Bible)
3:18 God bears witness that there is no god except He, and so do the angels and those who possess knowledge. Truthfully and equitably, He is the absolute god; there is no god but He, the Almighty, Most Wise.
I'm not Russian. To me, it seemed too biased, watching these videos in Russian year ago. But when I am faced with its explanation of Islam and prophet, I am very troubled as you are - at that time I was still a Sunni ...
Therefore, your reaction is normal. Keep looking and reading, you will discover many wonderful things.
Regards.
Thank you again.
Regards
To the person who started this thread...
You may be onto something. However, if anyone would care to explain, when it speaks about ahmadu, assuming this word is a PROPER NOUN denoting the name of a being, how can it be the qurans deliverer? By this I mean, Isa has said that there will come a messenger who's name is ahmadu, so would that not imply that the qurans messenger was the next messenger after Isa? What would happen then to all the messengers that came in between if that's not the case?
Also could someone please give a definitive answer as to whether the theory is true or false, providing undeniable evidence of either one.. It is really annoying having to sift through 50 plus pages trying to find a few relevant posts with people drifting off topic.
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 09:44:22 AM
3:3 He sent down to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming all previous scriptures, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel. (Qur'an would be ininteligible without the Bible)
Peace GODsubmitter
With regards to what you wrote, the Holy Quran was sent down as an authority over the Book [which comprises of the Torah and Injeel]. It is not the other way round.
AQ 05:48
And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Book [Bible] and as an AUTHORITY over it. So judge between them by what ALLAH has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had ALLAH willed, HE would have made you one nation [united in religion], but to test you in what He has given you; so race to good. To ALLAH is your return all together, and HE will inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.Peace MMKhan
The Holy Quran is
1. PERFECTED - AQ 11.01 A.L.R. This is a book whose verses have been perfected?
2. CLEAR PROOF - AQ 06:155-157 This (Quran) too is a blessed Book that we have revealed; you shall follow it and lead a righteous life, that you may attain mercy. Now you can no longer say, "The Book was sent down to two groups before us (Jews and Christians), and we were unaware of their teachings"
Nor can you say, "If only a scripture could come down to us, we would be better guided than they." Now there has come to you a
?Bayyinah? (clear proof) from your Lord and a beacon, and a mercy.
Now, who is more evil than one who rejects these proofs from God, and disregards them? We will commit those who disregard our proofs to the worst retribution for their heedlessness? 3. EASY TO COMPREHEND - AQ 44:58 We have made it (the Quran)
COMPERHENSIBLE and in your own tongue (language) that you may take heed?
4. WITHOUT CROOKEDNESS - AQ 39:28 "An Arabic Quran, without any crookedness, that they may take heed"
With the above quality of the Holy Quran, you still cannot comprehend OR you refuse to believe that the recipient of the Holy Quran was the seal of the prophets, Muhammad?
And to ALL who read...
AQ 06:112-116
And thus We have made for every prophet an enemy - devils from mankind and jinn, inspiring to one another decorative speech in delusion. But if your Lord had willed, they would not have done it, so leave them and that which they invent.
And [it is] so the hearts of those who disbelieve in the Hereafter will incline toward it and that they will be satisfied with it and that they will commit that which they are committing.
Seeking judgement other than ALLAH while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We [previously] gave the Book know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
And the word of your LORD has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.
And if you obey most of those on earth they would mislead thee far from ALLAH's way. Indeed, they follow but assumption, and they do but guess.Peace
Quote from: Hizbullah on March 18, 2014, 12:07:58 AM
Peace GODsubmitter
With regards to what you wrote, the Holy Quran was sent down as an authority over the Book [which comprises of the Torah and Injeel]. It is not the other way round.
AQ 05:48
And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Book [Bible] and as an AUTHORITY over it. So judge between them by what ALLAH has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had ALLAH willed, HE would have made you one nation [united in religion], but to test you in what He has given you; so race to good. To ALLAH is your return all together, and HE will inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.
Peace!
Yes, but more than half of the Qur'an is the repetitions and material already exposed in the Bible, I do not see how could it be the other way round if the Qur'an is based on Bible, and confirms it?
It's just plain common sense which should not be lost because of any religious fervor!
Thanx
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 18, 2014, 11:37:03 PM
Yes, but more than half of the Qur'an is the repetitions and material already exposed in the Bible, I do not see how could it be the other way round if the Qur'an is based on Bible, and confirms it?
It's just plain common sense which should not be lost because of any religious fervor!
Thanx
If the Quran is base on bible than why ALLAH rejected the bible and why did HE sent down the Quran? There is no religious favour on my part, I am very sure of that!
?The Qur'an based on the Bible? ?Wht: did God need any base to reveal to anyubody whatever He wanted? The Qur'an mentions hapennings and events that are mentioned in the books of the Bible because amongst the people the Qur'an was first revealed those stories were common knowledge and God reminds them of them and points the lessons to be gained from those events. Also, there are prophets and events that do not appear in the Bible, so it is too daring to say that the Qur'an is based on the Bible, rather the Qur'an used the stories that were common knowledge amonst the people it came for its own purposes.
Salaam
Peace be upon you.
I suggest to brother mmkhan if you study Quran please don't depend too much on diacritic.
To understand a word in the Quran, don't see it's diacritic first, but see the root of that word, because there are some possiblility if the word have another meaning which we don't expecting before.
Quote from: huruf on March 19, 2014, 03:52:49 AM
The Qur'an mentions hapennings and events that are mentioned in the books of the Bible
Agreed
Peace,
The audience of the Quran also included the people of the Book, hence the references to the previous Books to
make clear to them the authenticity of God's revelation. Also the Ayat that begins with "They ask thee " is a
challenge offered to Muhammad to prove that he was a messenger.
8/183 They ask thee concerning Zul-qarnain. Say, "I will rehearse to you something of his story."
2/101 And when there came to them a messenger from Allah, confirming what was with them, a
party of the people of the Book threw away the Book of Allah behind their backs, as if (it had been something)
they did not know!
God bless
:peace:
Quote from: GODsubmitter on March 16, 2014, 01:27:05 PM
Thank you again.
Regards
http://www.chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/index.html
Chapter 5. THE EPOCH OF THE XV CENTURY
13. MOSES BEGINS THE OSMAN CONQUEST IN THE XV CENTURY. 'PASSAGE OVER THE SEA' IS THE PASSAGE OVER THE RIVER ICE.
14. THE OSMAN CONQUEST AND AUSTERE ANICONISM (In religion, opposition to the use of icons or visual images to depict living creatures or religious figures ? Translator's note)
15. IRON CHARIOTS, HORNETS AND THE BRAZEN SERPENT IN THE BIBLE ARE CANNONS
16. THE MEDIAEVAL GEOGRAPHY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
17. MOSES AND JOSHUA BEN NUN
18. CONQUEST OF AMERICA BY RUSSIA-HORDE AND OSMAINA-OTTOMANIA IN THE XV CENTURY. BIBLICAL PATRIARCH NOAH IS CHRISTOPHER COLOMBUS
19. THE BOOK OF MORMON ABOUT THE CONQUEST OF AMERICA BY NOAH-COLUMBUS
20. THE 'ANCIENT' BOOK POPOL VUH' ABOUT THE COLLONIZATION OF AMERICA IN THE XV-XVI CENTURIES
21. THE CLOSE TIES BETWEEN 'ANCIENT' AMERICA AND 'ANCIENT' EURASIA ARE WELL-KNOWN. BUT THEY BEGAN ONLY IN THE XIV-XV CC
22. MYSTERIOUS CENTRE WHICH THE WAVES OF THE GLOBAL MIGRATIONS WERE SPREADING FROM
23. THE COLOSSAL DIVISION OF THE WORLD BETWEEN 'CASTILE' AND 'PORTUGAL'
24. HOW AND WHEN THE HISTORY OF AMERICA WAS FALSIFIED
25. THE DISTRUCTION OF THE AMERICAN INDIANS
26. THE KORAN AND THE BIBLE.
27. MEHMED II THE CONQUEROR AND THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD. YAROSLAVL METEOR OF 1421.
28. THE ARAB CONQUEST.
29. THE BLOODSTAINED RIGHT HAND ? THE RELIGIOUS SYMBOL IN ISLAM.
30. JANISSARY.
31. YAROSLAVL METEOR OF 1421 IN THE BIBLE.
32. DAMASK STEEL.
33. THE STONE DEBRIS IS PRESERVED IN THE MUSLIM KAABA IN MEMORY OF YAROSLAVL METEOR.
34. THE BIBLICAL TABERNACLE.
35. AYYUB SULTAN.
Quote from: huruf on March 19, 2014, 03:52:49 AM
?The Qur'an based on the Bible? ?Wht: did God need any base to reveal to anyubody whatever He wanted? The Qur'an mentions hapennings and events that are mentioned in the books of the Bible because amongst the people the Qur'an was first revealed those stories were common knowledge and God reminds them of them and points the lessons to be gained from those events. Also, there are prophets and events that do not appear in the Bible, so it is too daring to say that the Qur'an is based on the Bible, rather the Qur'an used the stories that were common knowledge amonst the people it came for its own purposes.
Salaam
Very interesting. Agreed. Read and watch the video Fomenko. I at this time for myself realized that the word "arabiyyun" does not mean the language or people.
Quote from: David Saidi on March 19, 2014, 12:39:53 PM
Peace be upon you.
I suggest to brother mmkhan if you study Quran please don't depend too much on diacritic.
To understand a word in the Quran, don't see it's diacritic first, but see the root of that word, because there are some possiblility if the word have another meaning which we don't expecting before.
Peace be upon you too brother,
Thanks for your concern.
But I very strongly believe that diacritics of alQuraan is set by Allah.
And that is how it explains EVERYTHING in detail.
I agree with you about roots of words and its different possible meanings. And roots surely help, but they are limited to its meaning but diacritics explains further and further. It has been set so precisely that no jinn or ins can bring such Book.
May Allah blessings be with you :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
Are diacritics not added later to make old languages easier to understand?
How are they in that case part of God's revelation and not be affected by human error?
Same with Hebrew or Aramaic. The languages were written with no vowels and it was a disadvantage later of course. Even there they have later added diacritics to make understanding and reading easier.
I think the diacritics lead to a lot of conjecture. I would not rely on them, not to 100% anyway.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on March 22, 2014, 01:17:57 PM
Are diacritics not added later to make old languages easier to understand?
Peace - earliest text is shorthand perhaps to save space without diacritics need to use context ...
ام or/mother
ومن and from/whom
ذكر the male/reminder
اخوه brothers/brother his
Peace,
Sorry I did not understand at all, brother Noon waalqalami?
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on March 22, 2014, 04:04:24 PM
Peace,
Sorry I did not understand at all, brother Noon waalqalami?
God bless you
Peace, strip out markings and many words are written identical as with examples given ...
4:11 ىوصىكم directs you الله the god فى in اولادكم children yours
للذكر to the male/remembrance (use context)
54:17 ولقد and indeed ىسرنا made easy we القران the Qur?an
للذكر to the male/remembrance (use context)
Peace noon,
Okay. I did not read enough. I did not say that diacritics are not useful, only that if they may or may not have been part of the original compilation.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on March 22, 2014, 01:17:57 PM
Peace,
Are diacritics not added later to make old languages easier to understand?
How are they in that case part of God's revelation and not be affected by human error?
Same with Hebrew or Aramaic. The languages were written with no vowels and it was a disadvantage later of course. Even there they have later added diacritics to make understanding and reading easier.
I think the diacritics lead to a lot of conjecture. I would not rely on them, not to 100% anyway.
God bless you
Peace brother,
I very strongly believe that all diacritics are original sent down with the text.
If anyone says that diacritics are added later, I have some questions:
- Why Allah did not sent down His message with diacritics, any possible reason?
- If diacritics are added later by humans, then why should I not doubt the Book of Allah?
- How can call it the Book of Allah when human interference is involved in it?
- As brother Noon has given examples [there are many more], how do people understand what exactly Allah wanted to say? Hence, it could not be called the Book of guidance which confuses more.
Many more questions may rise. Until we study it and study the patterns and structures set by Allah using diacritics in the Book, it is really hard to understand/believe that all in the Book is from Allah.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Peace,
Okay. Thanks for your thoughts, mmkhan.
God bless you
Quote from: Man of Faith on March 23, 2014, 07:03:57 AM
Peace,
Okay. Thanks for your thoughts, mmkhan.
God bless you
Peace brother,
You are very welcome :handshake:
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
From http://www.doverchiv.narod.ru/morozov/6-01-01.htm
QuoteSo the temple of the Kaaba I will call Meteor stone temple , as the nature of his meteoric now proved Medina as its residents - Yathrib Pharaoh - firgaunom and himself Mohammed, just a prophet , because Muhammad , as I have said many times , is not name, and the posthumous nickname meaning " illustrious ." Actually his name - as they say we do these primary sources - was Abul- Kazem , son of Abdullah , the grandson Mutalib , it is quite difficult for our pronunciation , and simply translated means : Father of the Universe ( Cosmos ), 1 son Bogosluzhitelya Grandson of penalties .
- As brother Noon has given examples [there are many more], how do people understand what exactly Allah wanted to say? Hence, it could not be called the Book of guidance which confuses more.
You did not explain why a book with human interference can not be a book of guidance?
- If diacritics are added later by humans, then why should I not doubt the Book of Allah?
Actually, this is a question you should ask yourself: do
you doubt the Book of Allah, and why do you not doubt it, if we assume diacritics are added later by humans?
- Why Allah did not sent down His message with diacritics, any possible reason?
How did Allah sent his message, anyway? Do you believe a physical book fell from heaven to earth, and that you are reading the exact same book?
- How can call it the Book of Allah when human interference is involved in it?
Is the book you are reading not already, without doubt, involved with human interference? (think about manufacture, copy of an older copy, smartphone app developer, ...)
In fact, although unknown many digital Quranic copies contain many errors:
Quote from: Tanzil Project
Since the appearance of the first digital copy of the holy Quran, there had been substantial effort to produce an accurate Quran text, but due to some difficulties (some of which are listed below), these efforts were unsuccessful in many of the cases, and unfortunately, the Quran texts appeared in a majority of Quranic websites and applications were suffering from lots of errors and typos.
These erroneous Quran texts were so rapidly spread over the Internet that finding the correct form of Quranic verses had became almost impossible without referring to a verified printed manuscript. For example, in early 2008, when somebody was searching Google for the verse 38 of Sura Al-Qalam which reads إِنَّ لَكُمْ فِيهِ لَمَا تَخَيَّرُونَ, the first result that he or she was receiving was a wrong form ending with the word يَتَخَيَّرُونَ as shown in the picture to the right.
This terrible situation made us to launch the Tanzil project to produce a highly verified error-free Quran text, and make this text available to the Quranic websites and applications to prevent further spreading of the erroneous Quran texts.
Source: http://tanzil.net/wiki/Tanzil_Project
Does your digital Quran copy contain any of these typo's in chapter two?
http://tanzil.net/pub/doc/typos/baqara.pdf
Diacritics may not have been written, but they were there, because they were pronnounced. The prophets did ot hand around, handsheets with written text to diseminate amongst the public. It was all speech, and speech certainy has all its vowels in it. That is why the Qur'an as we have is, as far as I can ascertain, compoletely guranteed, because only the present versions have reached us. If there had been several hands in it, we would have myriad of texts, as it happens with hadith. The slight variants in some vowelling or words do not change the value and meaning of the text, merely make it wider or clearer, do not destroy each other.
The written text is for the sake of a litterate population. As people become litterate they rely more and more on the written word and less and less on the spoken word. Material means also change habits from relaying on memory to relying on the printed text. In today's world, printed matter is cheap, pervading. But it was not so in the past. paper or papyrus or pergamen were far costlier to make. So was with lack of printing and relaying on hand copying, which itself wa prone to mistakes.
So printed diacritics might not be there, but the sounds were surely there.
Salaam
Peace,
The Quran at first was oral, then later written. It has been preserved the very same way
since the beginning and that is thru memory recitation. Many Muslims I know can recite parts
of the Quran, I also know two brothers who can recite the entire Quran from memory.
This is not uncommon in the Muslim world but a common practice that goes back to the time of Muhammad.
For instance, if someone incorrectly recited Surah Al-Ikhlas most muslims would recognize the error.
This is how the Quran is preserved. Or if I were to say, " Qul huwa allahu ahad" what verse comes next?
That is how the Quran is protected.
list taken from Wiki: This is a list of notable people who have completely memorized the Quran. Estimates
of how many Hafiz
(memorizers of the Quran) there have been range into the millions, across many ethnic, socioeconomic, and
geographical divisions.
This is not a representative sampling of Hafiz.
1st century AH
Abu Bakr
Umar bin Al-Khattab
Uthman Ibn Affan
Ali Ibn Abu Talib
Muadh ibn Jabal
Ubay Ibn Ka'ab
Zayd ibn Thabit
Sa'd ibn Mua'dh
Ubayda ibn as-Samit
Abdullah ibn Masud
Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfa
Tamim al-Dari
Abu 'Ubaydah
Uqbah ibn Amir
Majma' Ibn Jaariyah
Abu Zayd[disambiguation needed]
Abdullah ibn Umar
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ[15:9]We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly
guard it (Hafiz=guardian)
[25:32] Those who disbelieved said, "Why did not the Quran come through him all at once?"
We have released it to you gradually, in order to fix it in your memory. We have recited
it in a specific sequence.
"And (it is) a Quran which I have divided into parts in order that you (Muhammad) may
recite لِتَقْرَأَهُ (litaqra-ahu) it to the people gradually, and I have revealed it by successive revelation."
[Noble Quran 17:106]
God bless
:peace:
Salaam,
Before my questions there was a line saying "If anyone says that diacritics are added later,
I have some questions:". That means I was expecting
answers instead of questions. Anyways, I will write what I believe inshaAllah.
QuoteYou did not explain why a book with human interference can not be a book of guidance?
The answer is in
4:82 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=82).
QuoteActually, this is a question you should ask yourself: do you doubt the Book of Allah, and why do you not doubt it, if we assume diacritics are added later by humans?
If you say diacritics are added later by humans, I surely doubt such book. But I strongly believe the hard copy which I have is undoubtedly from Allah alone. It is not possible for humans or jinns to write such Book even if they help each other.
QuoteHow did Allah sent his message, anyway? Do you believe a physical book fell from heaven to earth, and that you are reading the exact same book?
I am surprised to see such questions from alQuraan aloners.
There is no need to throw the Book from heavens but the way of giving is already shown in
7:145 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=7&verse=145).
QuoteIs the book you are reading not already, without doubt, involved with human interference? (think about manufacture, copy of an older copy, smartphone app developer, ...)
In fact, although unknown many digital Quranic copies contain many errors:
I follow my hard copy of alQuraan instead.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: huruf on March 25, 2014, 04:26:18 AM
Diacritics may not have been written, but they were there, because they were pronnounced. The prophets did ot hand around, handsheets with written text to diseminate amongst the public. It was all speech, and speech certainy has all its vowels in it. That is why the Qur'an as we have is, as far as I can ascertain, compoletely guranteed, because only the present versions have reached us. If there had been several hands in it, we would have myriad of texts, as it happens with hadith. The slight variants in some vowelling or words do not change the value and meaning of the text, merely make it wider or clearer, do not destroy each other.
The written text is for the sake of a litterate population. As people become litterate they rely more and more on the written word and less and less on the spoken word. Material means also change habits from relaying on memory to relying on the printed text. In today's world, printed matter is cheap, pervading. But it was not so in the past. paper or papyrus or pergamen were far costlier to make. So was with lack of printing and relaying on hand copying, which itself wa prone to mistakes.
So printed diacritics might not be there, but the sounds were surely there.
Salaam
Salaam,
Red: Unfortunately, alQuraan does not approve this claim.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: hawk99 on March 25, 2014, 10:52:01 AM
Peace,
The Quran at first was oral, then later written. It has been preserved the very same way
since the beginning and that is thru memory recitation. Many Muslims I know can recite parts
of the Quran, I also know two brothers who can recite the entire Quran from memory.
This is not uncommon in the Muslim world but a common practice that goes back to the time of Muhammad.
For instance, if someone incorrectly recited Surah Al-Ikhlas most muslims would recognize the error.
This is how the Quran is preserved. Or if I were to say, " Qul huwa allahu ahad" what verse comes next?
That is how the Quran is protected.
Peace,
Red: Such a big claim without any evidence? :hmm
Quote
list taken from Wiki: This is a list of notable people who have completely memorized the Quran. Estimates
of how many Hafiz
(memorizers of the Quran) there have been range into the millions, across many ethnic, socioeconomic, and
geographical divisions. This is not a representative sampling of Hafiz.
1st century AH
Abu Bakr
Umar bin Al-Khattab
Uthman Ibn Affan
Ali Ibn Abu Talib
Muadh ibn Jabal
Ubay Ibn Ka'ab
Zayd ibn Thabit
Sa'd ibn Mua'dh
Ubayda ibn as-Samit
Abdullah ibn Masud
Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfa
Tamim al-Dari
Abu 'Ubaydah
Uqbah ibn Amir
Majma' Ibn Jaariyah
Abu Zayd[disambiguation needed]
Abdullah ibn Umar
I don't know who they are nor alQuraan says anything about them.
Quote
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
[15:9]We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (Hafiz=guardian)
[25:32] Those who disbelieved said, "Why did not the Quran come through him all at once?"
We have released it to you gradually, in order to fix it in your memory. We have recited
it in a specific sequence.
"And (it is) a Quran which I have divided into parts in order that you (Muhammad) may
recite لِتَقْرَأَهُ (litaqra-ahu) it to the people gradually, and I have revealed it by successive revelation."
[Noble Quran 17:106]
God bless
:peace:
Red: I don't know who translated the word "fuaad" as memory. Please take a look at other translations of
25:32 (http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=25&verse=32).
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on March 25, 2014, 11:22:55 AM
Red: Such a big claim without any evidence? :hmm
Peace mmkhan,
Are you suggesting that the revelation was first revealed in written form? :nope:
Quote from: mmkhan on March 25, 2014, 11:22:55 AM
I don't know who they are nor alQuraan says anything about them.
Who said that those folks were in the Quran, I am surprised by the weakness of your reply :o
Quote from: mmkhan on March 25, 2014, 11:22:55 AM
Red: I don't know who translated the word "fuaad" as memory. Please take a look at other translations of
Please learn the meaning of "allegory"
God bless
:peace:
Quote from: hawk99 on April 05, 2014, 07:09:33 PM
Peace mmkhan,
Are you suggesting that the revelation was first revealed in written form? :nope:
Peace brother,
Yes I do believe that the original alQuraan/alKitaab was in written form. :yes
Quote
Who said that those folks were in the Quran, I am surprised by the weakness of your reply :o
Please learn the meaning of "allegory"
:hmm
Quote
God bless
:peace:
May Allah bless you too :pr
mmKhan :peace:
Salaam,
To understand more about tanween or nunation on Arabic words, please click here (http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606552.msg350564#msg350564).
InshaAllah, this will also show you that diacritical marks in alQuraan is original with the text, and not added by any human being. Because it is not possible for any human to add those marks with so perfection.
May Allah bless you :pr
mmKhan
Salaam,
When I was reading this verse, 3:84, I was confused and thought why is there no Mohammad name here? Though, I saw God mentioning "Prophets", so I just thought God did not call him by name specifically but said there were other Prophets meaning Mohammad in these prophets as well. I have been reading this topic and across another similar one as well, it is shocking. It reminds me of the time when I read about NWO conspiracy theory and was shocked. I do find the history from outside sources regarding Mohammad a little suspicious.
However, does it really matter what was the last Prophet's name to whom this, Qur'an, was revealed to? As long as we are following what God has told us in this book, we will be fine with God's guidance. Even if we believe Mohammad is a person and believe Mohammad is but a messenger in 3:144 like we do now, we are still believing the same way in case if Mohammad is not a person's name and God is saying "Praised (whoever this praised messenger real name might be) is but a messenger." Whoever that messenger is, we are calling him a praised person weather that is his name or him as the praised person, or we can just call him, "the last Prophet of God." Easy, no need to name him to be safe if we feel unsure what was his name. God knows our intentions and God only knows the best.
Khatam i snot last, the words are not synonims. Whether he is the last or not, is one question, but khatam an-nabiyin, he is. Nothing prevented the Qur'an if God wanted us to know that he was to be last to put it so.
Salaam
People swear that khatam means seal/end, but I doubt so.
Without finished studies I find that it means that he was made among the group of nabi.
Of course, also, the ones who call themselves Muslim do not want to see another prophet for then their lies and deception would be exposed.
Be of one with God
In any case, the identity of the person to whom the quran was inspired, is irrelevant as far as the message is concerned. The message is a message with a purpose, not a tale for amusement without purpose. The name, location, deeds, preferences of a prophet is not important to the message because the message is infinitely greater than any messenger. All the stories of prophets, what they did, whom they were related to, from where they hailed, what their names were... are just speculations. It's history, and history is NOT facts. It's stories that we call history. They are just images in our heads. When we hear stories of prophets, we make images in our minds, and then we ASSUME this is what happened, as if we have seen a video documentary. NO! It's just images in our minds that we have constructed based on the stories we've heard. These stories in turn are told based on other peoples images... and so it goes on and on.
Even if people and places and a certain scenario in a context are used to tell something, it is only the POINT, the MESSAGE, which is of value. People, situations and events are USED only to CONVEY a message. The events and characters themselves are unimportant. It's like algebra. If we call the variable x or y or q doesn't matter. What matters is the value represented by the variable. It's not important whether the variable is a latin, greek or arabic letter, or whether or not it is a vowel or consonant. It's irrelevant.
Religion is typically too much about people and places, which come alive and become their own center point... and the core message is disregarded and forgotten.
...unless of course your life is all about matter... human beings... prophets... things that perish.
Leave religion and approach God! Religion is all about conjecture and guessing, and battles of the ego, to cling to and defend an identity.
Peace
I feel like crying when you said My Master Muhammad Al-Mustafa Sallahu Alaihi Wa Aaleh Wasalam never existed. This is the limit of stupidity.
:brickwall:
Quote from: sword of tashayyu on September 20, 2014, 09:02:07 AM
I feel like crying when you said My Master Muhammad Al-Mustafa Sallahu Alaihi Wa Aaleh Wasalam never existed. This is the limit of stupidity.
Your Master is ALLAH, the Eternal.
So, don't be sad, don't hurt yourself. :)
Salām.
Quote from: sword of tashayyu on September 20, 2014, 09:02:07 AM
I feel like crying when you said My Master Muhammad Al-Mustafa Sallahu Alaihi Wa Aaleh Wasalam never existed. This is the limit of stupidity.
:brickwall:
How many masters do you have?
And God is my Master. Muhammad may have been an upright man in service to God.
Be of one with God
sometimes I m scared about people thoughts ,, sunni and shia preffered calips on one another and try to find the things which other caliphs did ,, to degerade eachother ,,, I dnt give a shit about their views as it comes from secondary sources ,,,
but about quranist(submitters) so if sunnis r glorifying Muhammad(pbuh) let them do,, its their headache...
why everybody pointing out things which is confusing and contradicting due to sunnis believe we dnt need to draw a line and point out these illogical statements ,,, its mean there is no diff between submitter and sunni one is trying to glorify prophet from secondary sources,,, and one try to not glorify him from quran ,,, even declairing and asking show us a verse in which we know this quran is sent down to Muhammad..is it a sect fight or what,,,
I dnt want to give my explaination apart from just one thing...
whoever point out the word Muhammad and ahmed both names have a meaning "praised one" ok we accept for a while that whoever is our last prophet is a praised one... mashAllah when allah is addressing that person a "praised one" there is no point left ,,, praised one.... beautiful name for any human in this world given by our lord ,,, now if we learn quranic language Allah is addressing his messengers by diff names and qualities like Abraham is a friend to allah,,, mosa is like a speaker to allah ,, isa is like messiah for the people,,, and Muhammad,,,, the last one the praised one ..... when there is praised ,,, its mean praise in frdship praise in leadership praise in completing the mission , praise in doing it at the age where people usually retired from work,, as we know he started prophethood t 40 ,,, so whoever he is ,,, its sure he is praised one(muhammad) in sight of allah as well as insight of humans all of them... so praise him due to the works he did for the sake of Allah.. dnt think me wrong I m not saying anybody to worship the praised one ,,, but respect the praised one,,,
Quote from: JavaLatte on September 20, 2014, 11:24:15 AM
Your Master is ALLAH, the Eternal.
So, don't be sad, don't hurt yourself. :)
Salām.
there is only one master ,,, the same master that all the prophets have and we know its our creator ... almighty allah no offence.. the creator who is telling the mechanism of this universe. as we know some scientific fact just recently that already in the creators book for about more than 14 hund years ago,,, so my brother Allah is ur master and Allah is the master of every created thing.living thing as well as non living thing
Quote from: imrankhawaja on October 26, 2015, 05:16:26 AM
so my brother Allah is ur master and Allah is the master of every created thing.living thing as well as non living thing
Bold: I agree,
but, I'm not a brother. :)
Peace.
What is important about prophets, messengers, is that they confirm something which is included in the meaning of the root of the word rasul r-s-l-, which is to flow. We are flowing fromour source, from the ultimate reality, the source of everything, we are all and everything is rasul, but the messengers, rusulullh are the most conscious of tht fact which is the real fact of existence, of our existence. Rusul are meant to remind us of that,tobe themselves a walking demostration of that.
They are not mere postmen like some have sid at times. Postmen usually do not know what is in the messages they hand, but the rusul, they know the message and they try to confirm that message with the behaviour. The Qur'an order us to believe in the messengers. So very important, because when we believe in he messengers we may believe in our own messengership, our own existence as flowing fromour source and feel the infinite love that realiation should move us to feel.
The messengers are not mere shells that e sbould crack open and discard, they are us. It is interesting in this respect how in some traditions the followers of a prophet are called disciples or others denominations. Those of Muhammad are called companions. Se should remind ourselves of that and try toe worthy companions of every prophet and ofeveryperson that tries to realise the companionship of prophethood.
Salaam
Quote from: JavaLatte on October 26, 2015, 06:23:18 AM
Bold: I agree,
but, I'm not a brother. :)
Peace.
haha salam sister I was directing it to the person ,,, who was hurting himself so I called him brother ,,, and
jazakallah for the bold wordings ,, may Allah increase our knowledge to let us understand what he actually want us to tell.
rab e zidne elma,,,
:welcome: :welcome:
My dear Mazhar,Huruf.Bender and others,
the arabic word , kana , does not mean just ,"is"
mostly it is used as ,"was" try looking kana at other places in quran,and for the Ayat, ma kana Mohammad......."was" for kana is more suitable,
May I add that ,some scholars say, that this ayat is not a quranic ayat,if we take kana as "was" but some translators have translated kana as was.so better if we analyze the word, "kana" first.thanks
كن (or ك و ن ) can also mean "become".
Be safe
Amenuel
If I ever said kaana means is, I was referring to the virb as such, just as we say the ber to be,in Arabic the verb is denominated, that is the name of the verb is the complete sense. So I have never said kaana mean is or was or anything like that in the sense of the veerbal tense, because it is the completed tense in the third person masculine. The uncompleted tense in the same person is yakun.
Onething is the name of the verb, another thing is the tense and it depends on a lot of things which tense is used when.
Salaam
salam to all, Islaamic Awareness, has done dome research on the name Mohammad,scholars suggest that the name Mohammad was a given name to prophet of islam many years after his death,while he was on earth he was not called Mohammad,because archchief and history book suggest that this name came into light much later,it is not on the wriotings of dome of rock,it not in the engravings on rock in Saudi Arab area, whereas names of many Sahaba are mentioned,even early islamic coins have to kalma or this name,but it was inserted later,if any one needs to have some more references he can contact me on my email address, thanks.
Peace be with you all
Khataman Nabiyin = " Seal of the Prophets " which is Muhammad. And Muhammad is, anyone of the countless messengers who posses(ed) exemplary character and conduct, who is fair and just and always uphold justice where-ever he was/is in dealing with people and the environment. Allah is precise in his use of words if he says "khatam" he means just that .......(seal/stamp), and if Allah wants to say "akhir" or last, he would have said so and not say khatam.
This is my personal understanding of the verse under discussion and I am happy with it until Allah guides me to a better understanding.
Peace
Quote from: Man of Faith on November 10, 2015, 11:58:34 AM
كن (or ك و ن ) can also mean "become".
Be safe
Amenuel
peace. what leads you to this conclusion?
Quote from: almarh0m on November 21, 2015, 07:37:25 PM
Peace be with you all
Khataman Nabiyin = " Seal of the Prophets " which is Muhammad. And Muhammad is, anyone of the countless messengers who posses(ed) exemplary character and conduct, who is fair and just and always uphold justice where-ever he was/is in dealing with people and the environment. Allah is precise in his use of words if he says "khatam" he means just that .......(seal/stamp), and if Allah wants to say "akhir" or last, he would have said so and not say khatam.
This is my personal understanding of the verse under discussion and I am happy with it until Allah guides me to a better understanding.
Peace
I agree with that. For a long time I hvve upheld that khatam is seal or stamp, and concerning the khataman-nabiyin it is attributed to the transmitter of Qur'an, which is itslef a khatam of scriptures in the sense that you use a stamp like for gold if it passes the test it is indentedif it does not it is not, so with the Qur'an in hand any other purported scripture can be tken as such to whatver extend or discrded as such to whatever extent. The Qur'an has been reserved precisely so that all scriptures can be preserved in what they hold of truth an real divine guidance. Not just those tht sprung in the MIddle East but in the whoe wide world.
Salaam
We should remember that in the prevailing Bedouin culture of 6th century Arabia, men were referred to by their kunya which in English is a surname. (I use surname here in the archaic definition of the word to mean "a name, title, or epithet added to a person's name, especially one indicating their birthplace or a particular quality or achievement" as defined in The New Oxford English Dictionary).
It is reported that Muhammad had a son who died in childhood, his son's name was Ibrāhīm. As such, it is not improbable that Muḥammad was referred to as Abū Ibrāhīm for most of his adult life.
You will notice the same to be the case for many succeeding generations of Arabs who were called by their surname and their proper names. Example, Abū Ḥāmid (referring to Al-Ghazālī), Abū Al-Walīd (referring to Averro?s), Abū Naṣr (referring to Al-Fārābī).
Alternatively, some people of the time may have been given a laqab which in English is a cognomen, such as Ta'abbaṭa Sharrā, or Anf Al-Nāqa.
Alternatively still, some people of the time may have been called by their nabaz which in English is a nickname, such as Babba.
In my experience of today's Arab culture (specifically in the Peninsula), men are still called by their surname (as defined above) as a sign of respect and to confer some sense of deference to him.
I find it very unlikely that Muḥammad would have been called by his first name even by his peers. It is most likely that he would have been called by his surname. However, in today's Arab culture (specifically in the Peninsula), when one is asked for one's name, one mentions one's first name, surname, and family name.
The point I'm trying to make is that if there are a lack of historical sources that indicate Muḥammad's proper (first) name, then it could be on account of the above explanations.
Irrespective of all the above, I suffice myself with 47:2 in believing that the name of the man to whom God revealed the Quran was Muḥammad.
Quote from: uq on January 23, 2016, 06:46:25 PM
I find it very unlikely that Muḥammad would have been called by his first name even by his peers. It is most likely that he would have been called by his surname. However, in today's Arab culture (specifically in the Peninsula), when one is asked for one's name, one mentions one's first name, surname, and family name.
The point I'm trying to make is that if there are a lack of historical sources that indicate Muḥammad's proper (first) name, then it could be on account of the above explanations.
Irrespective of all the above, I suffice myself with 47:2 in believing that the name of the man to whom God revealed the Quran was Muḥammad.
I agree with that.
Salaam
Quote from: uq on January 23, 2016, 06:46:25 PM
Irrespective of all the above, I suffice myself with 47:2 in believing that the name of the man to whom God revealed the Quran was Muḥammad.
yeh no doubt,,, even the book fellows(ahle kitab) called him muhammad,,, mean praised one,,, exactly what has been written in both new and old testamant,,, the
proclaimmed one ,, both jews and christians still think their messiah will come ,,, without knowing it already came 1400 years ago,,,
Quote from: uq on January 23, 2016, 06:46:25 PM
We should remember that in the prevailing Bedouin culture of 6th century Arabia, men were referred to by their kunya which in English is a surname. (I use surname here in the archaic definition of the word to mean "a name, title, or epithet added to a person's name, especially one indicating their birthplace or a particular quality or achievement" as defined in The New Oxford English Dictionary).
It is reported that Muhammad had a son who died in childhood, his son's name was Ibrāhīm. As such, it is not improbable that Muḥammad was referred to as Abū Ibrāhīm for most of his adult life.
You will notice the same to be the case for many succeeding generations of Arabs who were called by their surname and their proper names. Example, Abū Ḥāmid (referring to Al-Ghazālī), Abū Al-Walīd (referring to Averro?s), Abū Naṣr (referring to Al-Fārābī).
Alternatively, some people of the time may have been given a laqab which in English is a cognomen, such as Ta'abbaṭa Sharrā, or Anf Al-Nāqa.
Alternatively still, some people of the time may have been called by their nabaz which in English is a nickname, such as Babba.
In my experience of today's Arab culture (specifically in the Peninsula), men are still called by their surname (as defined above) as a sign of respect and to confer some sense of deference to him.
I find it very unlikely that Muḥammad would have been called by his first name even by his peers. It is most likely that he would have been called by his surname. However, in today's Arab culture (specifically in the Peninsula), when one is asked for one's name, one mentions one's first name, surname, and family name.
The point I'm trying to make is that if there are a lack of historical sources that indicate Muḥammad's proper (first) name, then it could be on account of the above explanations.
Irrespective of all the above, I suffice myself with 47:2 in believing that the name of the man to whom God revealed the Quran was Muḥammad.
Peace bro,
Thanks for sharing your understanding.
I don't think Allah follows what Bedouin Arabs use to call a messenger.
Secondly 47:2 says "...
وَآمَنُوا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلَىٰ مُحَمَّدٍ..." which does not mean alQuraan.
And please note that the word
مُحَمَّدٍ has tanween on it.
I don't see any clear aayat saying that alQuraan was given to Muhammad.
Few points just to ponder upon :)
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 24, 2016, 04:58:54 AM
yeh no doubt,,, even the book fellows(ahle kitab) called him muhammad,,, mean praised one,,, exactly what has been written in both new and old testamant,,, the proclaimmed one ,, both jews and christians still think their messiah will come ,,, without knowing it already came 1400 years ago,,,
Peace bro,
This 1400 years thing is not supported by alQuraan. It is hadith based.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Quote from: mmkhan on January 25, 2016, 02:53:24 PM
Peace bro,
This 1400 years thing is not supported by alQuraan. It is hadith based.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
Agree.
Another question. What evidence is there to support the sectarian claim of who the tomb in Madinah belongs to? Is it a man called Muhammad ibn Abdullah?
Since Muhammad cannot be a name but a description and Quran does not reveal the identity of the true messenger of Quran, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah who was born in the pagan city of Makkah and died in Madinah cannot have been the messenger who was given Quran. This man, if his identify can be proved, was nothing more than an impostor who was used to hijack Quran. There is also no historical records of a major city called Makkah either. The stone cube idol, forgiving black stone, holy zamzam water and Abrahams footprint (maqam Ibrahim) in Mecca were early fabrications by Bukhari & Co to create what we today know as the religion of Islam and the holy city of Mecca.
This theory makes sense because Bukhari & Co could not have achieved such mega deception without turning muhammad from a general description to a name to create their fake character and use an impostor known as Muhammad ibn Abdullah who was born in this pagan city of Mecca. If many of the wars such as the battle of Khaibar this supposed Muhammad ibn Abdullah lead can be proven to have happened, this theory may become a reality.
Peace all,
The contention that محمد is not a proper name on account of being fully declinable is grammatically unfounded. I have addressed this point time and again throughout this forum and so I don't feel the need to reproduce the argument here.
Regarding the presence or absence of historical artefacts, monuments, or buildings, I reckon these to be subsidiary to the Quranic assertions on this subject and to the identity of the prophet himself.
Quote from: mmkhan on January 25, 2016, 02:53:24 PM
Peace bro,
This 1400 years thing is not supported by alQuraan. It is hadith based.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path :pr
mmKhan
inshAllah may Allah increase our knowledge,,, its hadith based or you can say that in easy words ,,, history based,,,
whatever it is history hadith quran..all of them firmed on muhammad,,,
and you guys are so intelligent and you want from allah to write a quran with exact dates,,, 13.7 billions years ago big bang happen,,,
4.7 billion year ago earth formed,,,
date of adam birth,, 01 01 01,,
date of noah birth 02 02 02 let say...
jesus birth ,,,name of the brother sister father mother of every prophet,,,
the video clips of perfoming salat and abolution,,,
the video proof of creation,,,
now i am asking one thing,,, may be one day somebody will say this book is not from allah,,,
ok its from Allah which Allah,,, Allah of adam or moses or david or jesus,,, or muhammads,,,
same how athiest ask which god,,, what type of discussion is this ,,, i dnt really know,,, when you understand the motif of quran,,,
for asking the questions of crreation,,, science is working on it,,, ask from them,,,,
for knowing the scriptures historians and history tell us the names and characters,,,
for knowing the movement of universe astronomy is there,,,
people who thinks that God will write a line in a quran like this,,, we sent down this quran on muhammad,,,, awww so you expect a grammer mistake everybody know its revelead on muhammad,,, Allah dnt need to mention it in book,,, what he thinks is important to mention he did it already ,,, he dnt need to full fill ur wishes and give you every single answers of every single thing,,, whats our work left then,,,
and btw one third quran talk indirectly with the last prophet,,,
Quote from: mmkhan on January 25, 2016, 02:52:21 PM
And please note that the word مُحَمَّدٍ has tanween on it.
mmKhan
what so special in tanveen,, if u r language expert and if u have knowledge regarding history shall i tell u the zeer zabar,, paish tanveen, all these things are not original writing of arabic,,, these characters are man made ,,, not allah made,,,
i want to ask you a question are you trying to say that this book is not sent down to any prophet,,, or its a magical book that comes by some super natural powers,,, or who is that person ,,, who Allah addresses on battles,,, prediction of victories,,, seal of prophets,,,, we know him by muhammad ,,,,means praised one,,,,
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 25, 2016, 03:46:14 PM
Since Muhammad cannot be a name but a description and Quran does not reveal the identity of the true messenger of Quran, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah who was born in the pagan city of Makkah and died in Madinah cannot have been the messenger who was given Quran. This man, if his identify can be proved, was nothing more than an impostor who was used to hijack Quran. There is also no historical records of a major city called Makkah either. The stone cube idol, forgiving black stone, holy zamzam water and Abrahams footprint (maqam Ibrahim) in Mecca were early fabrications by Bukhari & Co to create what we today know as the religion of Islam and the holy city of Mecca.
any proof ,,, first time i m hearing something,,, hahaha the one who deliever quran,,, become hijacker,,, good show,,,
may i ask ur level of education and interest in history then i will talk with you according to your knowledge,,,,by meaning history i mean to say all the means of history,,,
historical records show,,, this hijacker,,, never take any money or advantage for publishing and spreading the quran,,,
historical records show about this hijacker,,, that people used to entrust their things to him,,,, because this hijacker never cheat and did dishonesty,,,
historical records show that this hijacker even forgives his enemy for the sake of God,,,
lot of other things history tell us,,, and history is not only written by hadith makers,,, there are some other historians there at that time,,,
Quote from: mmkhan on January 25, 2016, 02:52:21 PM
I don't see any clear aayat saying that alQuraan was given to Muhammad.
mashAllah ,,, clear ayat,,, meaning unclearly its given to muhammad
did you see any clear ayat in quran tht is telling to you about the messenger on which that book revealed,,,
jesus,,,moses,,, abraham,,, david,,,or none of them,,, there is no body,,, this must be a magic book that comes up without any human interferance,, and with tanveen and other writting stuff,,, just like drown plane moves without pilot,,, thats what this my brother want to tell us,,, thanx for sharing ur knowledge by the way,,, now i realse why muslims never invent anything in last 500 yrs,,,, because they invent ideas like that,,,who was muhammad,,, his height ,,, age ,,, wifes,,, everything,,,, and doing discussion on him is the fav topic for every sect of muslim,,,
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 26, 2016, 01:58:08 AM
what so special in tanveen,, if u r language expert and if u have knowledge regarding history shall i tell u the zeer zabar,, paish tanveen, all these things are not original writing of arabic,,, these characters are man made ,,, not allah made,,,
i want to ask you a question are you trying to say that this book is not sent down to any prophet,,, or its a magical book that comes by some super natural powers,,, or who is that person ,,, who Allah addresses on battles,,, prediction of victories,,, seal of prophets,,,, we know him by muhammad ,,,,means praised one,,,,
Hi,
I am not mmkhan, but I think that he is trying to say that with ONLY The Quran you can NOT prove many claims people take as facts about Mohammed.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 26, 2016, 01:58:08 AM
i want to ask you a question are you trying to say that this book is not sent down to any prophet,,, or its a magical book that comes by some super natural powers,,, or who is that person ,,, who Allah addresses on battles,,, prediction of victories,,, seal of prophets,,,, we know him by muhammad ,,,,means praised one,,,,
If you want to believe the messenger of Quran was a man of war receiving military briefings and killing methods from a God known as Allah, then that is entirely up to you.
What kind of God and messenger would that be???
Muslims are to "arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere" (Sura 9:5) for them. They are to "seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly" (Sura 4:90). "Fight them until Islam reigns supreme" (Sura 2:193). "Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers" (Sura 8:12).
There is no way to put these verses "back into context" without hadith books in order to brush them away as peaceful verses that have been misunderstood. You can be certain that anything that encourages violence and sectarianism isn't from the supreme intelligence you may know as Allah.
Quoteany proof ,,, first time i m hearing something,,, hahaha the one who deliever quran,,, become hijacker,,, good show,,,
You might want to reread my post again. It was a theory and no, I don't have ground breaking evidence to support it. I could be wrong, but then again, I couldn't care less about that. If you claim to want the truth while not willing to accept anything that contradicts your current belief system, you'll get nowhere.
Quotemay i ask ur level of education and interest in history then i will talk with you according to your knowledge,,,,by meaning history i mean to say all the means of history,,,
As for my sectarian background, I was raised a Muslim, went to madrasa, memorised most of Quran and studied Islamic fiqh.
Quotehistorical records show,,, this hijacker,,, never take any money or advantage for publishing and spreading the quran,,,
Historical records from who exactly? From the kuffar you cannot trust or the authentic hadith upheld by Muslims? If it's historical records from Muslims, then you are dead wrong. If it's from kuffar sources, then I'd love to see them.
Quote
historical records show about this hijacker,,, that people used to entrust their things to him,,,, because this hijacker never cheat and did dishonesty,,,
historical records show that this hijacker even forgives his enemy for the sake of God,,,
Your claim that this Muhammad Ibn Abdullah was a "trustworthy man" who "never cheated" are according to Muslim sources also known as hadith.
Muhammad Ibn Abdullah who was born an orphan and grew up to become a trustworthy man of war are hadith tales.
Quote
lot of other things history tell us,,, and history is not only written by hadith makers,,, there are some other historians there at that time,,,
Funny because the same so called history you claimed can only be found in the hadith books of Bukhari & Co.
QuoteMuslims are to "arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere" (Sura 9:5) for them. They are to "seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly" (Sura 4:90). "Fight them until Islam reigns supreme" (Sura 2:193). "Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers" (Sura 8:12).
The word qatal in the verses is the problem. Its been twisted. Reading the verses by keeping logic in the head can reveal how some of their interpretations have been changed.
Indeed Qatal is twisted. They can easily find in old Classical Arabic lexicons that it has indications to say defeat/master and now that is not kill. You cannot use the same word to say both kill and fight, that would create opportunity for confusion of what a person says.
Goliath was defeated by David is what Quran says.
And in many portions of Quran it says in the sectarian translation that "slayed or dies" but it is supposed to say "is defeated or dies".
And in chapter two it says they have to "defeat their own persons" rather than "kill themselves". It is obvious what it means. It has to do with the conflict within yourself when you choose between the World or your Origin. One has to choose because the temptation of Satan is great.
You can also verbally defeat a person and this was what Moses tried to do in Egypt (Mesr). He never killed a man unrighteously without investigating the source of the quarrel between the two men. Moses began to speak up against the falsehood of the existing religion and did not get anyone to hearken unto his words and they drove him away so much he literally had to flee. Not even the Children of Israel did listen to him initially. Much was due to his controversial faith preaching just like people had a hard time believing in Jesus because his choice of conveying the truth. I can also feel myself in their shoes some days with my continuation of their legacy with "I am who am I". Moses was believed by many as he came back reinforced by the marvels of Rabb.
I am not trying to defeat you here but help you realize you have to defeat yourselves.
Be safe
Amenuel
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 26, 2016, 09:11:44 AM
Funny because the same so called history you claimed can only be found in the hadith books of Bukhari & Co.
Greek source for Muhammad is Theophanes, a 9th-century writer. The earliest Syriac source is the 7th-century writer John bar Penkaye.
the question regarding ur knowledge of history is very weak,,, ur username oops i mean ur knnowledge is invalid,,,
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 26, 2016, 09:11:44 AM
As for my sectarian background, I was raised a Muslim, went to madrasa, memorised most of Quran and studied Islamic fiqh.
when i ask you regarding ur knowledge and understanding about history u ,,, give me this reply,,,, inlight of ur reply i realised u dnt even know what history is,,, how it works,,, and how its get verified,,, and u r telling me ur knowledge about the hadith books,,, madrassa and tis stuff,,, now i understand its not ur fault ,,, becoz the mulla of these madrassas are unaware about ,,, science ,,, advice to you go read history again,,, hadith is a part of history not a history,,, pyramids are symbol of histroy not history,,,, ancient culture what we found are the ways to verify history,,, common i dnt want to teach you history ...
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 26, 2016, 09:11:44 AM
You might want to reread my post again. It was a theory and no, I don't have ground breaking evidence to support it. I could be wrong, but then again, I couldn't care less about that. If you claim to want the truth while not willing to accept anything that contradicts your current belief system, you'll get nowhere.
first time i m watching some theorist who dnt have evidence and assurity by himself ,,, so i let it on you,,, this type of scientist whose theories are invalid like flat earth,,, everybody know whats their rating infront of genuine theorist,,,
and literally theory means ,,, idea not a fact,,, so ur idea hold no water ,,, when fact banged it up....
as far i concern several people have several theories some are rateable some are throwable,,, now you can do with your theory whatever you want,,, and when u get some ground evidence i ll be ready to catch u up again,,,
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 26, 2016, 09:11:44 AM
Historical records from who exactly? From the kuffar you cannot trust or the authentic hadith upheld by Muslims? If it's historical records from Muslims, then you are dead wrong. If it's from kuffar sources, then I'd love to see them.
in last five hundred years of history ,,, i dnt think so any muslim play anypart in the history with respect to the science which everybody rely .....
history of big bang fact,,, completed by kuffar,,,, (was in book(quran) already)
history of expanding universe fact,,, discovered by kuffar ( was in book already)
water cycle ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, discoverd by who,,,
electricity history and facts discovered by who......
rotation of celestical bodies,,, discovered by who,,,,,
lot of more things,,, from kuffar sources ,,, the facts every body accept ,, from history whether its from muslim or kuffar,,,history dnt see things by religion ,,,
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 26, 2016, 09:11:44 AM
If you want to believe the messenger of Quran was a man of war receiving military briefings and killing methods from a God known as Allah, then that is entirely up to you.
What kind of God and messenger would that be???
Muslims are to "arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere" (Sura 9:5) for them. They are to "seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly" (Sura 4:90). "Fight them until Islam reigns supreme" (Sura 2:193). "Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers" (Sura 8:12).
There is no way to put these verses "back into context" without hadith books in order to brush them away as peaceful verses that have been misunderstood. You can be certain that anything that encourages violence and sectarianism isn't from the supreme intelligence you may know as Allah.
this was out of topic,,,, but for your satisfaction ,,, i m going through it,,, and once you start a thing its better to finish it instead of leaving half work behind like,, unsuccessful or losers,,, so let me complete what you didnt complete....
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.
But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. ch 9 verse 5....
from bold word but,,, i think its enough to make somebody understand that it is exactly from supreme intelligence,,,,
and now i want you to read the chapter 9 from first verse to last verse then you will realise who these people are who allah is addressing,,,
changeez khan is raping somebody mother and sister,,, infront of his eyes,,, and robbing their monies and vanish,,, and plan to come back,,, what the party will gona do,,, they will make themself prepare for taking revange and the revenge they will take will be the horrible most what they can imagine,,, so this full chapter is talking about the people who break contracts do cheating and troubles in society like hitler and changeeskhan,,,and other so called people ,,, what u expect from them ,,,, will they throw the flowers on them when they will come again to robbing and killing them,,, i hope you got the answer...
you are talking about fingertips,,, if somebody is being raped or robbed u dnt even imagine what they will gona cut,,,, history of pholan devi from india any body know,,,, ok little bitt brief,,, once 9 thakurs(landlords) raped her,,, and left her half dead,,, she gain an army of dacoits and every single person who raped her ,,, she give them punishment which i cant able to write here,,,, a special way to cut their private parts of these landlords who raped her,,, and then throw chillies and salt on harmed wounds of,,,lol thats how she take revange,,, and if somebody want to kill us try to rape our womens what you expect from muslim to do,,, if quran is telling this thing,,, whats so wrong,,, its right,,, if a muslim want to save his life and kill somebody automatically he become a terrosist,,, because quran said us to do self defence,,,, common man,,, these things everybody need to understand what is the subject of the that topic of quran,,, quran is not a random book,,,
@ man of faith
and where as word qatal ,,, i dnt think so its murder by death,,, arabic is a classical language,,, and have it own vocablary,,, you can say qatal also mean to convince somebody,,,, but whatsoever it means ,,, if we put ourself in a situation where somebody intends to kill us,,, what possible we gona do,,, making ourself safe we will probably no definately kill him,,, kill him how,,,, thats the question,,, thats allah set on you,,, kill them by imprison... kill them by making disable,,,, kill them by life.... kill them by brain,,,(modern army tecniques to wash memory)... kill is a an action,,, and where there is action its totally on action hero whether he want to kill him or spare him,,, so Allh actually grants you a permission in these situations to kill them if u can,,, its up to you how you kill them...
Quote from: Bender on January 26, 2016, 08:10:52 AM
Hi,
I am not mmkhan, but I think that he is trying to say that with ONLY The Quran you can NOT prove many claims people take as facts about Mohammed.
Salaam,
Bender
allright but what i understand he is denying to accept the personality of praised one(muhammad) and about the claims its the headache of history and historian,,, like the claim moon was splitted in hadith book look false,,, because praised one never show any miracle,,, he was the live miracle who deliver us a miracalous book,,, and every single day new discoveries become facts that are comapatible with quran,,,
and we need to understand the era when muhammad was there it was the starting of literiture era,,, histories(apart from hadith) still tell us at that time these people were like to involve in poetry and they are very proud of it,,, but when quran revelaed the poets get answerless from this unique style of writting,,,
what we need to understand is ,,, that was final revelation so it must be unique for all ages and all times thats why quran never talk with you exact dates,,, quran rather talk about periods,,, so it tells you about creation but didnt tell u 13.7 billions years,,, because that what Allah is,,, he is not bound of time and space and laws what we measure from our understanidng ,,, Allah talk big things,,,, and Allah want you to enjoy of these discovries that are already behind curtain,,, whenever a scientist discover something its already there,,, but our understanding take a long way to understand that discovery...
a recent example,,,, i was watching a news on bbc about a week ago scientist discover nineth planet they named it x,,,, as we know pluto used to b a planet for long time ,,, but recent discovries in 2006 disqualified pluto as a planet,,, its a dwarf planet now,,, but they discoverd another planet x,,
so if we look in the light of quran,,, quran also talk about planets,,, early scholars translate it as,,, the moving and hiding stars,,,, did Allah ever tell us how many they are,,, may b some hadis book tell you ,,, lol but quran is a light and ALLAH want you to take advantage of this light,,,
by the way topic is going on other side,,, what i want to say whatever somebody attribute to muhammad its not our headache,,, as people attributr things to everybody,,, and about his claims,,, he never claimed any miracle,,, miracles are for the nations who dnt know the properties of universe and matter,,, like we can say that noah made a ship,,, it was a miracle for that era,,, mosa had a lighting stick ,,,,zulqarnain was scientist who build a wall with strategy,,, jesus was a doctor who repair bad illness ,,, at this age all miracles are somehow equliant to the old age miracles,,, so they are not a miracle for us nymore,,,,,
this book quran is a live miracle if,,, somebody understand,,,
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 27, 2016, 06:58:15 AM
so if we look in the light of quran,,, quran also talk about planets,,, early scholars translate it as,,, the moving and hiding stars,,,, did Allah ever tell us how many they are,,, may b some hadis book tell you ,,, lol but quran is a light and ALLAH want you to take advantage of this light,,,
"Read/Comprehend! Your Lord is the most Generous, the one who taught by the pen, taught men what they initially knew not"
(96)
Muhammad is not the light
Quran is not the light
Allah is the light
The Quran didn't talk about planet
Allah shed a light about planet and solar system.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about galaxy
Allah shed a light about galaxy.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about electromagnetic
Allah shed a light about electromagnetic.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about quantum entanglement
Allah shed a light about quantum entanglement.. many years after Quran was written down.
And the list goes on and on..
The amount of revelation / new knowledge known to man in the past two century alone has far exceeded the amount of revelation / new knowledge gained by human during it's 200,000 years of history. God's revelation hasn't ended, it's infact accelerating with exponential rate.
Allah sent His revelation to ANYONE He chooses, through ANY MEANS He chooses.
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 27, 2016, 06:58:15 AM
allright but what i understand he is denying to accept the personality of praised one(muhammad)
Hi,
Yes and he gave his reasons and founded them with his knowledge of the book.
I am very sure that he will accept your understanding over his own, if he feels that your reasoning is better then his.
salaam,
Bender
Quote from: Jafar on January 27, 2016, 12:27:27 PM
"Read/Comprehend! Your Lord is the most Generous, the one who taught by the pen, taught men what they initially knew not"
(96)
Muhammad is not the light
Quran is not the light
Allah is the light
The Quran didn't talk about planet
Allah shed a light about planet and solar system.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about galaxy
Allah shed a light about galaxy.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about electromagnetic
Allah shed a light about electromagnetic.. many years after Quran was written down.
The Quran didn't talk about quantum entanglement
Allah shed a light about quantum entanglement.. many years after Quran was written down.
And the list goes on and on..
The amount of revelation / new knowledge known to man in the past two century alone has far exceeded the amount of revelation / new knowledge gained by human during it's 200,000 years of history. God's revelation hasn't ended, it's infact accelerating with exponential rate.
Allah sent His revelation to ANYONE He chooses, through ANY MEANS He chooses.
exactly,,,,, u r write ,,, as i can see u have sound knowledge mashallah,,,
but light is a creation of allah,, like other creations,,, and obviously when i was saying quran is the light its the light of Allah,,, from the lips of praised one,,, no doubt,,, saying Allah is light is not correct as we know there is nothing we can compare with Allah chap 112 verse 4.
i remeber my mother used to tell me Allah is the light of heavens and earth ,,according to sura noor,,, but she was imagining allah as a creation of light,,,, which is contradictory,,so i cleared her,,,
apart from that i want to discuss with you the 200000,, history of mankind,,, its quite interesting,,,,topic,, as we know the age of earth is somewhere between 4.7 billion years,,, but the age of humankind,,, the history of human kind started from adam,,, although according to quran,, species were already on earth,,, when asked from them about the trust,,, and there is another stage,,,evolution and creation are two diff things,, but alhamdulliah both are compatible with quran understanding,,,
i was watching an documnetry in which the archealogist found bones of 50000 years old creature the named it homosaphen(something similar) like ape,,, but from adam till today the oldest civilisation whatever we found is not more than 20000 years old,,,
we can say the history of mankind(creation) with trusted authority issued somewhere between 20000 years,,, but the history of evolution somehere started long ago,,, and it was in stages ,,,possibly two stages,,, the position was may be like trees moutains,, animals ,,, (what i imagine is a bulk of mudy creature that moves slowly and have no freewill and no thinking hearing and watching ) Allah knowws best,,, we can only imagine .... but the interesting thing i find out in that documentry ,,, all the fossils and bones from last 1000 years to 65 million years ago,,,, the dna of all these creatures have no programmed mind like we human have,,, the humans from adam,,, even the homosaphen have not the exact dna what describe and distinguish human from animal...
darwin said from one single cell everything came into being,,, but there is a missing link reagarding to human ,,,
ancient aliens theorist claims its aliens who come and programmed human mind and give them wisdom,,,( ancient aliens are more likely jinn,,, becuse the exact tecnology from america to asia to europe to australia even easter island,,, there are some masterpieces which we have no knowledge off where how and why these came from,,, dnt get confused,,, little bit what i remeber about solomon he travel around the world and let jinn do work for him and make some amazing things,,, throughout the world,,, but science didnt beleive in quran,, ,,,)
the human with programmed mind by intelligent design civilisation is not more than like 15000 years old the last earliest known records of archeolgy,,, civilisation like maya ,,, atlantis and even monjadaro are lot more are not older than ten thousand years,,,
i want your views about it,,, i will be happy if you will discuss this subject with me,,,,its quite knowledgeable,,,
peace
Quote from: Bender on January 27, 2016, 03:26:54 PM
Hi,
Yes and he gave his reasons and founded them with his knowledge of the book.
I am very sure that he will accept your understanding over his own, if he feels that your reasoning is better then his.
salaam,
Bender
hi peace brother,,, and may allah guides us all to the straight path,,, but logically if somebody denies praised one,,, its very very dangerous,,, the whole concept of authentication,, become false,,, on other words we must have to respect love and and believe in praised one along all the prophets and messengers of Allah,,, otherwise it quite impossible to drive a car without driver,,,same way its impossible to get certified revelation from allah without prophet,,, Allah always talk through prophets,,, we need to undersrtand this thing,,, no doubt the person whoever he was,,, must be an amazing person,,,
i sometimes read sura kosar in which there is something Allah want to tell us,,, regarding the muahammad,,, and thats the shortest chapter as well,,, in which allah blessed him kosar,,, and address his enemies...a message and a prediction,,,
the historical records show his progeny never continue(quran confirms it as well) and people around him make a fun ,,, as we know till today if someboody have no son ,,, people show sympathy or some make fun... then Allah say something in that sura,,, Indeed, your enemy is the one cut off.
this person ahmed who was granted kosar and granted a name from his lord which have meaning the one who is praised(muhammad),,,
even though he have no desendent,,, but from last 1400 years his praises are never finsih,,, surprisingly when some non muslims call him ,,, they call him by muhammad,,, haha automatically they priased even when they try to make his claims untrue,,, but alhamdulliah the claims of quran are still standing winning,,,, now lets about the people who make a fun of them the biggest one was abu lahab (mention inn quran) as well,,, what happened with him,,, nobody know him by his original name ,,, the quranic name abu lahab mean ,, the dweller of fire,, so he have no follower as well,,, no body want too show his real progeny that leads towards abu lahab,,, on the other hand,,, everybody know praised one have no sons,,, but still people are claiming they are from prophet progeny,, syed people and hashmi and qureshi and lot more,,, in the end i must say he deserved to be praised,,,
Light is not generated without an energy discharge or chemical direction (which released energy is light). Light is also in different spectra but they all need a source. Light is not generated by itself but a consequence of something. Hence you cannot be a light as it is practically impossible.
Just the same, nothing can be made of fire either, so there is a logical error in saying "Jinn are made of fire" as it is impossible. Jinn could however be constructed by the energy as one can see in quantum physics. It is what keeps the integrity of matter.
Not strange since Jinn means "the outer layer" of the world, i.e. its construction "material" is Naar.
Be safe
Amenuel
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 26, 2016, 01:58:08 AM
what so special in tanveen,, if u r language expert and if u have knowledge regarding history shall i tell u the zeer zabar,, paish tanveen, all these things are not original writing of arabic,,, these characters are man made ,,, not allah made,,,
Peace,
If so, then I don't believe in such quraan with human interferences.
You are trying to say that alQuraan was not sent completely and human addition is needed to read it properly :brickwall:
May Allah protect us. :pr
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 26, 2016, 02:50:49 AM
mashAllah ,,, clear ayat,,, meaning unclearly its given to muhammad
did you see any clear ayat in quran tht is telling to you about the messenger on which that book revealed,,,
jesus,,,moses,,, abraham,,, david,,,or none of them,,, there is no body,,, this must be a magic book that comes up without any human interferance,, and with tanveen and other writting stuff,,, just like drown plane moves without pilot,,, thats what this my brother want to tell us,,, thanx for sharing ur knowledge by the way,,, now i realse why muslims never invent anything in last 500 yrs,,,, because they invent ideas like that,,,who was muhammad,,, his height ,,, age ,,, wifes,,, everything,,,, and doing discussion on him is the fav topic for every sect of muslim,,,
Peace,
I believe that this book is needed by all human beings.
Hence, it is available since Adam. No magic needed.
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 26, 2016, 02:08:18 AM
may i ask ur level of education and interest in history then i will talk with you according to your knowledge,,,,by meaning history i mean to say all the means of history,,,
Peace,
I am really sorry to see you asking this question.
You are trying to judge the level of eimaan of a person with the level of eduction and his interest in history? :brickwall:
I would be happy to hear if you would have asked how close do you feel yourself to Allah?
How many times do you remember Allah?
How the way you get your answers from Allah when you call Him?
etc. etc...
Please answer these questions to yourself bro. Please don't take me wrong, no offend intended.
Sorry if you feel hurt. May Allah forgive us.
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 27, 2016, 11:35:28 PM
i sometimes read sura kosar in which there is something Allah want to tell us,,, regarding the muahammad,,, and thats the shortest chapter as well,,, in which allah blessed him kosar,,, and address his enemies...a message and a prediction,,,
Peace,
There is no mention of Muhammed in this sura.
I am not quite certain of the overall feel but surely you guys are kidding.
There's no way that you are arguing about whether Muhammad was the name of the last prophet.
If that is the case, I am afraid many have slipped under the shelter.
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 27, 2016, 11:35:28 PM
hi peace brother,,, and may allah guides us all to the straight path,,, but logically if somebody denies praised one,,, its very very dangerous,,, the whole concept of authentication,, become false,,, on other words we must have to respect love and and believe in praised one along all the prophets and messengers of Allah,,, otherwise it quite impossible to drive a car without driver,,,same way its impossible to get certified revelation from allah without prophet,,, Allah always talk through prophets,,, we need to undersrtand this thing,,, no doubt the person whoever he was,,, must be an amazing person,,,
i sometimes read sura kosar in which there is something Allah want to tell us,,, regarding the muahammad,,, and thats the shortest chapter as well,,, in which allah blessed him kosar,,, and address his enemies...a message and a prediction,,,
the historical records show his progeny never continue(quran confirms it as well) and people around him make a fun ,,, as we know till today if someboody have no son ,,, people show sympathy or some make fun... then Allah say something in that sura,,, Indeed, your enemy is the one cut off.
this person ahmed who was granted kosar and granted a name from his lord which have meaning the one who is praised(muhammad),,,
even though he have no desendent,,, but from last 1400 years his praises are never finsih,,, surprisingly when some non muslims call him ,,, they call him by muhammad,,, haha automatically they priased even when they try to make his claims untrue,,, but alhamdulliah the claims of quran are still standing winning,,,, now lets about the people who make a fun of them the biggest one was abu lahab (mention inn quran) as well,,, what happened with him,,, nobody know him by his original name ,,, the quranic name abu lahab mean ,, the dweller of fire,, so he have no follower as well,,, no body want too show his real progeny that leads towards abu lahab,,, on the other hand,,, everybody know praised one have no sons,,, but still people are claiming they are from prophet progeny,, syed people and hashmi and qureshi and lot more,,, in the end i must say he deserved to be praised,,,
Hi,
Ok thank you.
If you take some external sources as help for understanding the verses of the book then your reasoning is I believe sound.
But some people here are trying to depend their understanding as less as possible on external sources.
And then a lot of things are not so self-evident as they looked like in the first place.
Salaam,
Bender
Quote from: mmkhan on January 28, 2016, 01:56:23 PM
Peace,
There is no mention of Muhammed in this sura.
so who Allah addressing here?,,,
answer is the one who recieved ,,,, this revelation...
who recieve,,, ?
the one who is praised one,,,
answer,,,,,Recall that we took from the prophets their covenant, including you
(Who?), Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary. We took from them a solemn pledge. chap 33 verse 7
3:121
Recall that you
(Who?) were among your people when you set out to assign to the believers their positions for battle. God is Hearer, Omniscient.
who is praised one,,,
according to quran praised one is muhammad where Allad directly and clearly address him,,, in the light of verse 2:101, 2:143, 2:151, 3:32, 3:81, 3:144, 3:164, 4:79-80, 5:15, 5:41, 7:157, 8:01, 9:3, 33:40, 48:29, and 66:09.... go for all of them,,,,
so final result in light of facts and observation,,, praised one is the last prophet and his name is muhammad,,, and 4 ayat clearly show name muhammad,,, its another thing if u are unprovenly claim muhammad is not a name,,,, but my friend you are check mate,,, dnt try to make innocnet people distract,,,,
Quote from: mmkhan on January 28, 2016, 01:32:04 PM
Peace,
I believe that this book is needed by all human beings.
Hence, it is available since Adam. No magic needed.
very interesting first of all claiming a very big thing without the certificationof allah is shirk,,, do toba first,,,
second thing,,, yesterday i look at all the posts from last two years ,,, and i realise lot of times you are unable to prove you any of the claim regarding tanveen,,, and everything ,,, from several people ,,, but you are still stuck on repeating answers,,, it make me laugh not
"hurt"you claims,,, there is a tanveen on muhammad name,,,
your claim two,,, there is no prophet by name muhammad or ahmad or praised one,,,
your claim three quran was sent to adam or it was there since adam...
first of all i realise one thing arabic is not ur language and you are fighting with experts of arabic,,, on the wrong conception of tanveen,,
and they shows you examples as well in the reply of these proofs you are unable to mention anything,,,
its something like that ,,, if a student of literature is arguing with medical doctor how to operate a surgery,,,,,
and when docotor tell him exact procedure they start saying doctor wrong ,, and say him to get it done from motor mechanic,,,, if you are a patient,,, who you gona listen,,,, i think you will start abusing the literature student,,,
in light of this,,, i m not wasting my time anymore ,,, in my last post i address you all the verses go and read them,,, inshAllah this is will help you,,, and i dnt need to ask ur knowledge redarding history ,,, i realise already ur knowledge on the language you are arguing,,,tanveeen lolzz,,,,
one more thing for reading urdu or arabic we dnt need to use tanveen and other stuff,,,people who put these things its for reciting in a tone,,, now see i m gona telling you about media knowledge now,,, people realise if we make a tone language and use some symbols that present this voice tone how it feel,,, and when they put it,,, it was amazing and alhamdulliah this date the diff reciation of quran are in millions by millions people,,, although this knowledge of tanveen and other stuff and how it works come from history,,,not from allah,,,and if i will provide you a proof of old quran copy without tanveen stuff ,,, u will say me its fake,,, or ur answer will be probably somebody made it...
NOTE i hope you have no hidden agenda ,,, who try to point out mistakes from quran from last 1400 years,,, to distract people,,, becuse real believer never behave like you are behaving and claiming shirkia things ,,, or second possibilty its a human ego he never accept lose,,, once rk was suffering from this disease as well,,,, and he get himself killed due to this shirk,,, allah knows better,,,,
peace my brother ,, i m not gona talk on this topic anymore i provide more than enough proofs and reasonings,,, as duty of sharing accurate knowledge,,,, believing on it is ur responsibilty,,, no body can force no body ,,,
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 28, 2016, 06:38:51 AM
Light is not generated without an energy discharge or chemical direction (which released energy is light). Light is also in different spectra but they all need a source. Light is not generated by itself but a consequence of something. Hence you cannot be a light as it is practically impossible.
Just the same, nothing can be made of fire either, so there is a logical error in saying "Jinn are made of fire" as it is impossible. Jinn could however be constructed by the energy as one can see in quantum physics. It is what keeps the integrity of matter.
Not strange since Jinn means "the outer layer" of the world, i.e. its construction "material" is Naar.
Be safe
Amenuel
actually for making ourself understand,,, allah is saying jinns are the creation of energy,,,, early scholars translated is as fire ,,, as we know at that time the source of energy availaible was fire,,, but early scholars use fire word as the materia,,, as we know we cant see jinn,,, but we can see fire,,, now scholars translated it smokelss fire as welll,,,, we know fire never be a smokeless,,, so conclusion is this we have no knowledge of the matierial that is used for energy to crate jinns,,,, as far human being we know we have elements of dust in our bodies,,, but about jinns we didnt do experiments on them,,,so we have no knowlege of the material of that energy,,,and how can we get knowledge and understand that material which is invisible,,, unless we develope some scietific things to see the shape and properties of jinss,,,
like gamma rays and x rays that go inside the thing and check whats in their,,, but we always check material based things which is visible to eyes,,, but these type of depth random person dnt know,,, so scholars translate it as fire to make random person understand ,,,
Imran,
For your information, we are made of Naar and our bodies are of the Jinn. But of course one is free to believe what they like.
All matter in the universe's range is made of this energy. It is what causes animation and keeps everything's integrity. If you study a bit of quantum physics you would realize this.
Angels are not physical. This is a mistaken assumption.
Be safe
Amenuel
man of faith,,, sorry my brother i dnt know ur real name ..
actually what i m trying to say here is ,,, its our concept and ideas of understanding things,,, human beings,,, their functions speed intelligence will affect according to the properties we bestowed,,,,so for our understanding it (visible material) same for our understanding the properties from which God create jinn are advance compare to us so we may understand it (energy) but still we have upper hand in intelligence,,, thats what the argument and jealousy that make iblees and his followers asking question regarding us ,,, they still know the properties of dust arrrrgg why should we bow down to him,,, even till now our process start from a liquid and then it become solid,,,, thats y he was feeling it strange or arrogance due to which he get kicked off,,, anyway now come to the angels,,, for our understanding we comapare them with light ,,, as we know that the fastest thing we can see ,,, so angels are step ahead from jinns,,,
now question is this we are still in material visible invisible or energy even light is the product of universe that travel like 186000 miles per sec still we r in limit,,, our sources are in limit,,,, but in reality angels jinss are invisible so exempt them to understand by accurate math and formulas of chemical equations,,, these math equations are for visible bodies and then verified through process inn front of our eyes,,, now we can easily understand our body contain all the elements from dust and our body comprises more thn 60 per of water,,, but we cannot calculate the properties of exact energies of these beings(angels and jinn) ,,, because its out of our mind ,,, our mind have not granted such abilities in this wordly life to do analysis on it,,,
and i know about quantum physics my brother ,,, i was high school student,,, when i first time heared about it,,, through my teachers,,, but its still a theory ,,,not a fact and modern science rectify some errors ...but overall i can understand what u try to say here... by referring this ,,, and quantum physics is basically talk about the source of energy,, what we found in earthly material and atoms and protons bla bla ,,,these are very complicated understanding,,, for understanding let say we say human being is creation from mud,, yeh,,, but what mud created of,,, what is the source of mud/dust to keep its shape ... and what the age of that material,,, as far the age of earthly materials they are like 4.7 billion years old,,, and the age of light may 13.7 at this point our understanding stopped,,, from the starting of big bang ,,, but what was that matter come from what was the shape of that matter ... how it developed,,, we dnt have answers,,, but at the point of bigbang... we can see the glimpse of God... he is the initiator of every thing... if you look by that angle,,, it will take us towards unending loop of confusion,,, so what was dust before dust(13.7)years ago is nothing to be consider,,, we should start from 4.7 billions years ago,,, after that stages came ,,, matter changed a lot ,,, a planet size like mars hit the earth and last stage of earth was when dinosour vanished,,,65 million years ago these two big scientific facts of earth is also comaptible with quran,,, allah is sayin we sent down water and iron,,, from sky....so its better to stick with the capacity of our understanding if we try to chase God,,, nothing will come in hand apart from confusion theories,,, ultimate knowledge belong to our rabb,,, its quite interesting topic we can debate it on somewhere seperate post and can share other opinions as well..
peace...
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 29, 2016, 01:37:03 AM
Imran,
.
Angels are not physical. This is a mistaken assumption.
Be safe
Amenuel
i agree,,, they are niether physical nor chemical,,,lol,,,
but whatever they are we have really no source to understand... even i dnt think so we can make something that travel with the speed of light which is material base thingie,,,of this universe... angels are described to us as light as we know light is the fastest object of universe... but i think angels are far far faster than the speed of light,,,
sec thing is this ,,, sometimes i start thinking about angels and how god address them,,, in quran,, seems its a natural force of law that governs the systems of universe,,, like winds ,,, productions,,, growth of things,,, taking lifes and port our soule(immaterial) to somewhere unknown dimension ,,, causing rain ,,, lot of other things,,, even the motions of planets are due to angels,,, science cant talk anything about angels as it is invisible,,, but they sometimes give names like dark energy dark matter,,, all these i think related to angels beings,,, God knows better,,,,
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 28, 2016, 08:53:25 PM
peace my brother ,, i m not gona talk on this topic anymore i provide more than enough proofs and reasonings,,, as duty of sharing accurate knowledge,,,, believing on it is ur responsibilty,,, no body can force no body ,,,
Peace,
Thanks for clarifying it.
لِّي عَمَلِي وَلَكُمْ عَمَلُكُمْ ۖ أَنتُم بَرِيئُونَ مِمَّا أَعْمَلُ وَأَنَا بَرِيءٌ مِّمَّا تَعْمَلُونَFor me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do.
Peace,
mmKhan
In my understanding, Quran was made written between year 250 until 625. That is based on how old the latest found texts are written in the "Modern" Arabic script. Theorizing I would say it was made written between year 400-500 because that is when researchers predict the current script came into use and it got in the hands of the sectarian clerics who fabricated Islam in about year 600-700. Either an impostor called Muhammad roamed the lands or the real Muhammad was blackmailed. Since historical sources say an unrighteous Muhammad roamed the Middle-East at least someone abused his name, if he even existed around that time.
Quran is likely not written prior to what I suggested. There is no sign it would. Quran is a revelation related to what we get to know through it. It is a full manifestation about the realm of Rabb (God).
There were three milestones of revelation and those were Torah (Torateh), Injeel (Gospel) and Quran, and at each milestone Rabb made revealed more about the nature of Himself, our existence and situation. Jesus was not absolutely clear in his elaboration as that was saved for Quran but he added food for thought. Quran was prophesied several centuries before even the coming of Jesus and Quran is just what the name says; "A manifestation", it makes everything clear black on white. A problem is while Gospel (enlightenment) was explained by Jesus as he elaborated on the philosophical aspect of the Decree (the 'Ten Commandments'), he did not speak as to why it is so but left the tinkering to the listener. But with Quran Rabb is even so kind as to completely reveal every detail of why we are here, the contradiction and the two choices between World or Otherworld, including how the Rabb works in practice (the dynamics).
An example is that Moses was told "I am who am I" by Rabb and Jesus said "I am in the Father and the Father in me" about his relationship with Rabb. No one explained this in detail, but Quran has a multitude of lines explaining every aspect of those expressions.
I would say Quran has never been interpreted in its entirety to this day though. This is because of the fallacy of humans to easily trust what others say regarding knowledge and they do not investigate matters sufficiently. It took me 1-3 years to realize something was seriously wrong and Quran has been available for over a millennium. Same story, some people who are a religious authority make ignorant claims and are too eager to confirm their doctrine than to actually check whether what their interpretation is rock solid. Due to man's ease of trust towards scholars, that lousy language skill has lived on for all this time.
Probably why Quran was claimed to be revealed over time so that the clerics and scholars, potentially in conjunction with their impostor Muhammad, could cook something together with a text they could not fully comprehend. In fact it is self-explanatory now.
"Kill the Mushrikeen, kill them wherever you find them" <--- is this your Rabb? It is from the sectarian interpretation of Quran. If you find that your Rabb I am sorry for you.
Be safe
Amenuel
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 29, 2016, 02:56:07 PM
"Kill the Mushrikeen, kill them wherever you find them" <--- is this your Rabb?
yes alhamdullaih this is our rab,,, who is giving us courage,,,, i already told in my previous post in replied too somebody what is the reason of this ayat,,, if u want somebody rape robe murder ur daughter or sister will you keep watching or will you gona kill him ,,, answer is up to u,,, if u are a believer you will protect your sister and listen to rabb and killed him,,, and be happy as well that due to this command you saved ur daughter,,,, on the other hand if we didnt apply selfdefense in our life,,, thinking Allah dnt want you to kill somebody in selfdefence,,, then obviously i dnt beleive this revelation is from my rab,,, who want to see me somebody robing muddereing and rapping us,,,,and in return i cant do anything,,, tell me a single religion on the planet of earth who is agaisnt self defence,,, forget about the religion tell me a single law in all the countries of this planet who is agaisnt self deffence,,, even if you killed somebody in self defence army and police give u medal for saving somebody,,,,
alhamdulliah this is the truth from my lord and alhamdullaih this verse is fully
logical,,,,, dnt take it personal ,,,plz its just to make somebody understand,,,
now come to the proof,,, people dnt want me to give reference from history ,,, as a historian i have grip on how history works and verify ,,, but even its true verification i dnt want to use it,,, now see some of the verses... in response to your essay,,,
And you did not recite before it any scripture, nor did you write one with your right hand. Otherwise the falsifiers would have had [cause for] doubt. chap 29 verse 48...
And they say, "Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon." chap 25 verse 5.
in light if above verses... praised one write it down with his own hand....
And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know.Say, [O Muhammad], "The Pure Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth to make firm those who believe and as guidance and good tidings to the Muslims." chap 16 verses 101 102
gabriel is very strong messenger(spirit) ,,, devil or anybody dnt have a access to come in the way of him ,,, not in power not in wisdom not in strength,,, nowhere,,,,, so alhamdulliah convo between gabriel and muhammad was fully secured ....and saved...
another gift for you my brothers who still think quran is alterd or changed or missed or incomplete or illogical...
We do not duplicate a sign, or make it forgotten, unless We bring one which is like it or even greater. Did you not know that God is capable of all things? chap 2 verse 10685:21 No, it is a glorious Qur?an.
85:22 In a tablet, preserved.
i provide my proof and references with the most certified book of history and religion people call it quran,,,
and now if somebody want to prove all these things wrong,,, i m waiting for their proof....
allah somewhere saying,,, they are plotting a plot and we plotted a plot,,,, and see what happend with disbeleivers,,,
brothers and sisters never listen some unverfied theories or claims from any tiom dick harry plz,,,,i realise its some hidden agenda,,, going on...
the truth is already among us,,,
and another wonderful wondrful gift from my lord tio my city birmingham,,, physical evidence of my claim.
Comparison of a 21st-century Quran and the Birmingham Quran manuscript
Two leaves of an early Quranic manuscript in the Mingana Collection of Middle Eastern manuscripts of the University of Birmingham's Cadbury Research Library were discovered in 2015 as being dated between 568 and 645, making it among the oldest Quran manuscripts to date
The manuscript is written in ink on parchment, using a monumental Arabic Hijazi script and is still clearly legible. The leaves preserve parts of Surahs 18 to 20. The university has placed the manuscript on public display at the Bramall Music Building at the university during October 2015, and plans to display it at the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery in 2016...
i want to invite everybody who lives near to birmingham (uk) we will have a discussion in my house a tea party from me to all the believers inshallah,,, and we will go to the exibition ,,, by the way experts of archealogy already proved this is original alhamdullih,,,
soon we will show our signs to them in the horizon and within themselves untill it will become clear to disbelievers ,,, that this quran is the truth from their lord,,,, alquran ...
for more deatils see this link i dnt know how to inser image here....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Quran_manuscript
check mate to the agenda,,, who are trying to taking the piss from last 1400 years,,, and every time the movement of God is ahead ,,,,, when somebody started this post ,,, this copy was no discoverd...and interestingly all are christinas who are protecting this copy and they are well reputable in their work,,,The Mingana Collection, comprising over 3,000 documents, was compiled by Alphonse Mingana, in the 1920s, and was funded by Edward Cadbury, a philanthropist and businessman of the Birmingham-based chocolate-making Cadbury family
Okay. Then I feel sorry for you. You are to kill Mushrikeen because they are disbelievers and do not perform your salat. You are to kill them until they perform salat in what is said by those who interpreted it.
and i feel sorry for ALL THE COWARDS OF WORLD who caanot self defense themselfes and their familes,,,
lier and hypocrate always tell half story,,,, specially this verse
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
if your are not one of them tell us full storey from starting to ending of this chapter,,,,, sura 9....
i already explained,,, by the way i started thinnking about you,,, i hope you are not one of those who pretend to b beleiver but from innerside they are what sura toba explain,,, i think you are much afraid of this sura,,,, due to what,,, i dnt know ,,, but the clear afraid what i can see is this,,, u want us to beleive the numbering theory that this sura is alter ,,,,, itts just my analysis,,, it may be wrong,,, but any intelligent person get to this conclusion...
moreover this was an historic event due to which this was the instruction for muslims to chase people who are trouble makers and try to make a hole in religion,,, but sorry to say people still never get what is the motif of quran and how it should be understand...
and before claiming anything i want to all of u guys to give me evidences,,, like i did,,,, its a professional and certified way... so that somebody gona listen,,, safe for now.. i hope by reading all the stuff nobody and any hidden agenda will affect a true believer,,,,
Quote from: Man of Faith on January 29, 2016, 02:56:07 PM
"Kill the Mushrikeen, kill them wherever you find them" <--- is this your Rabb?
Yes in context entire book ?
2:190 وقاتلوا and fight ye of فى in سبىل way الله the god الذىن the ones ىقاتلونكم fighting you ولا and not تعتدوا aggress ye of ان surely الله the god لا not ىحب loves المعتدىن the aggressors 2:191 واقتلوهم and slays ye them حىث anyplace ثقفتموهم find ye them واخرجوهم and evicts ye them من from حىث anyplace اخرجوكم evicts they you والفتنه and the oppression اشد stronger من from القتل the slay ولا and not تقاتلوهم thou fight ye them عند near المسجد al-masjidi الحرام the prohibited حتى until ىقاتلوكم fights they you فىه in it فان so if قاتلوكم fight they you فاقتلوهم so slays ye them كذلك like such جزاء recompense الكافرىن the skeptics 2:192 فان so if انتهوا that cease they of فان so surely الله the god غفور forgiver رحىم merciful 2:193 وقاتلوهم and fight ye them حتى until لا not تكون being فتنه oppression وىكون and being الدىن the creed لله to god فان so if انتهوا that cease they of فلا so not عدوان aggression الا except على upon الظالمىن the wrongdoers
4:89 ودوا wish they لو in case تكفرون thou disregarding كما as what كفروا disregard they of فتكونون so thou being سواء alike فلا so not تتخذوا take ye of منهم from them اولىاء allies حتى until ىهاجروا emigrated they of فى in سبىل way الله the god فان so if تولوا turn they of فخذوهم so take ye them واقتلوهم and slays ye them حىث anyplace وجدتموهم find them you ولا and not تتخذوا take ye of منهم from them ولىا supporter of ولا and not نصىرا helper 4:90 الا except الذىن the ones ىصلون arriving الى to قوم folk بىنكم between you وبىنهم and between them مىثاق agreement او or جاءوكم they come to you حصرت restrained صدورهم breasts theirs ان that ىقاتلوكم fights they you او or ىقاتلوا fights they of قومهم folk theirs ولو and in case شاء wills الله the god لسلطهم surely given power them علىكم over you فلقاتلوكم so surely fight they you فان so if اعتزلوكم withdrew they (from) you فلم so not ىقاتلوكم fights they you والقوا and offer they of الىكم toward you السلم the peace فما so not جعل made الله the god لكم for you علىهم on them سبىلا way of 4:91 ستجدون shall finding اخرىن others ىرىدون desiring ان that ىامنوكم secure they you وىامنوا and secure they of قومهم folk theirs كل each ما what ردوا return they of الى to الفتنه the temptation اركسوا plunged they of فىها therein فان so if لم not ىعتزلوكم withdraw they (from) you وىلقوا and offer they of الىكم toward you السلم the peace وىكفوا and restrain they of اىدىهم hands (i.e. actions) theirs فخذوهم so take ye them واقتلوهم and slays ye them حىث anyplace ثقفتموهم find ye them واولىكم and those جعلنا made we لكم for you علىهم over them سلطانا authority of مبىنا pronounced
8:65 ىا O اىها you النبى the prophet حرض urge المومنىن the believers على upon القتال the war/combat ان if ىكن that be منكم from among you عشرون twentieth صابرون steadfast being ىغلبوا overpowered ye of ماىتىن two hundred وان and if ىكن that be منكم from among you ماىه hundred ىغلبوا overpowered ye of الفا thousand of من from الذىن the ones كفروا disregard they of بانهم since they قوم folk لا not ىفقهون understanding
9:1 براءه innocence من from الله the god ورسوله and messenger his الى to الذىن the ones عاهدتم made covenant you من from المشركىن the idolaters 9:2 فسىحوا so move about فى in الارض the earth اربعه quartet اشهر ashr/cycles واعلموا and know ye of انكم that you غىر other than معجزى escape الله the god وان and that الله the god مخزى shames الكافرىن the skeptics 9:3 واذان and announcement من from الله the god ورسوله and messenger his الى to الناس the humankind ىوم day الحج the hajj الاكبر the greater ان that الله the god برىء free من from المشركىن the idolaters ورسوله and messenger his فان so if تبتم repent you فهو so it خىر good لكم for you وان and if تولىتم turned you فاعلموا so of knowledge ye of انكم that you غىر other than معجزى escape الله the god وبشر and give news الذىن the ones كفروا disregard they of بعذاب in punishment الىم dire 9:4 الا except الذىن the ones عاهدتم made covenant you من from المشركىن the idolaters ثم furthermore لم not ىنقصوكم have failed they you شىىا whatsoever ولم and not ىظاهروا supported they of علىكم over you احدا anyone of فاتموا so complete ye of الىهم toward them عهدهم covenant theirs الى to مدتهم term theirs ان surely الله the god ىحب loves المتقىن the righteous 9:5 فاذا so when انسلخ withdrew الاشهر al-ashr/the cycles الحرم the prohibited فاقتلوا so slays ye of المشركىن the idolaters حىث anyplace وجدتموهم find ye them وخذوهم and take them واحصروهم and restrain ye them واقعدوا and sit ye of لهم for them كل each مرصد place of ambush فان so if تابوا repented they of واقاموا and guard they of الصلاه the contact prayer واتوا and give they of الزكاه the recompense its فخلوا so leave ye of سبى their way لهم for them ان surely الله the god غفور forgiver رحىم merciful
Ok. If that stands for your Rabb, that is you.
It still says "slay them until they perform salat".
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 30, 2016, 01:09:37 PM
and i feel sorry for ALL THE COWARDS OF WORLD who caanot self defense themselfes and their familes,,,
lier and hypocrate always tell half story,,,, specially this verse
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
if your are not one of them tell us full storey from starting to ending of this chapter,,,,, sura 9....
i already explained,,, by the way i started thinnking about you,,, i hope you are not one of those who pretend to b beleiver but from innerside they are what sura toba explain,,, i think you are much afraid of this sura,,,, due to what,,, i dnt know ,,, but the clear afraid what i can see is this,,, u want us to beleive the numbering theory that this sura is alter ,,,,, itts just my analysis,,, it may be wrong,,, but any intelligent person get to this conclusion...
moreover this was an historic event due to which this was the instruction for muslims to chase people who are trouble makers and try to make a hole in religion,,, but sorry to say people still never get what is the motif of quran and how it should be understand...
Hi,
9:5
فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الْأَشْهُرُ الْحُرُمُ فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ وَخُذُوهُمْ وَاحْصُرُوهُمْ وَاقْعُدُوا لَهُمْ كُلَّ مَرْصَدٍ ۚ فَإِن تَابُوا وَأَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّكَاةَ فَخَلُّوا سَبِيلَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ You have to do all 4 things with them, because WA = AND.
Do you think that it's logical to kill them AND capture them AND besiege them AND wait for them for ambush?
Second part of the verse says "if they repent", how is it possible for a dead person to repent?
Ok somehow they rise, and then what? they have to establish prayer and give zakaat??? How are you going to check that? How are you going to check if I am establishing salat (what ever that means to you)?
Salaam,
Bender
guys you have a short term memory loss or what,,,,i already provide you answers in my previous posts ,,, and its third time you guys are bringing this qatal issue here,,, if you you want to talk just about qatal issue and this ayat issue come start a new tread,,, here we are talking about the originality of quran...
you guys just have nothing to prove infront of my solid evidences so you are playing hook nd crook,,, lets play then,,, but first provide some evidence to support this thread...
@bender my brother read my reply 507 and regarding the claim,, if u have something to say on it i will be waiting ,,, as far i see everybody else is answerless
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 28, 2016, 09:08:54 PM
actually for making ourself understand,,, allah is saying jinns are the creation of energy,,,, early scholars translated is as fire ,,, as we know at that time the source of energy availaible was fire,,, but early scholars use fire word as the materia,,, as we know we cant see jinn,,, but we can see fire,,,
Do you have any proof that Jinns are "invisible to humans"? Not something from the books of Bukhari & Co but Quran? Something like "We have made Jinns invisible to the children of Adam"?
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 30, 2016, 05:20:46 PM
Do you have any proof that Jinns are "invisible to humans"? Not something from the books of Bukhari & Co but Quran? Something like "We have made Jinns invisible to the children of Adam"?
did you read the full post,,, we are talking about the creation material and stuff... and in all of ur posts i see one thing you always ask,,, do you have a proof from quran,,,
do you have a proof from quran,,, human can see jin,,, ?
i think i should clear ur confusion,,, ok listen my brother,, we are dust let say,,, dust cannot be vanish,,,, true,,,
jinns are smokless fire,,, energy,,, plasma(whatever material) its qualites are they can be visible if they want...like you can swith off and on the light... by pressing switch button... in the same way these energy beings react,,,
like some stories tell us ,,, a man or animal suddenly disapper,,, if you look it closely it is disappeared what our limited eyes see... he transformed to another space and making himself off like a light bulb,, so that human cannot chase...i think in this way kids can unerstand easily what jinns are.....and when there is is something related with religion then i will give u ref from quran,,, beleiving on material and ideas of beings are not a part of religion its a scietific discussion,,, so ref not applid... and next time plz mr invalid try to find some valid things ,,, so that i will not get offend by childish questions...
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 30, 2016, 05:18:59 PM
@bender my brother read my reply 507 and regarding the claim,, if u have something to say on it i will be waiting ,,, as far i see everybody else is answerless
Hi,
Reply 507 is about some old quran, not sure why I had to read that.
I already did say something.
Quote from: Bender on January 30, 2016, 05:35:25 PM
Reply 507 is about some old quran, not sure why I had to read that.
so you are trying to say it is false...or false copy
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 30, 2016, 05:33:25 PM
did you read the full post,,, we are talking about the creation material and stuff... and in all of ur posts i see one thing you always ask,,, do you have a proof from quran,,,
do you have a proof from quran,,, human can see jin,,, ?
I asked a simple question to bring forth some Quranic evidence that Jinns are "invisible to humans". I am still waiting for the evidence brother.
If you cannot provide Quranic evidence, then you should re-evaluate what exactly Jinns are. The silly claim that Jinns are invisible to humans can be found in guess where? The books of Bukhari & Co.
Quotei think i should clear ur confusion,,, ok listen my brother,, we are dust let say,,, dust cannot be vanish,,,, true,,,
jinns are smokless fire,,, energy,,, plasma(whatever material) its qualites are they can be visible if they want...like you can swith off and on the light... by pressing switch button... in the same way these energy beings react,,,
No confusion on my side brother. I asked for some Quranic evidence, not some mental gymnastics. According to you, Jinns are made of "smokless fire,,, energy,,, plasma(whatever material)", therefore they must be invisible to humans. I fail to fathom how you can make that conclusion brother. Is there any Quranic evidence to support the claim that Jinns are "invisible" to the children of Adam?
Quotelike some stories tell us ,,, a man or animal suddenly disapper,,, if you look it closely it is disappeared what our limited eyes see... he transformed to another space and making himself off like a light bulb,, so that human cannot chase...i think in this way kids can unerstand easily what jinns are.....and when there is is something related with religion then i will give u ref from quran,,, beleiving on material and ideas of beings are not a part of religion its a scietific discussion,,, so ref not applid... and next time plz mr invalid try to find some valid things ,,, so that i will not get offend by childish questions...
Did I offend you just by asking you to provide some Quranic evidence? OR maybe it's you who feel that your belief system is under threat.
I'll ask one last time Imran. Please provide Quranic evidence that Jinns are "invisble to humans". Something like "We have made Jinns invisible to the children of Adam" or "you cannot see them".
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 30, 2016, 05:39:11 PM
so you are trying to say it is false...or false copy
Hi,
How did you come to this conclusion? Did I say that?
I still do not see any link with what I wrote and some old manuscript.
Quote from: Invalid777 on January 30, 2016, 05:51:21 PM
I asked a simple question to bring forth some Quranic evidence that Jinns are "invisible to humans". I am still waiting for the evidence brother.
If you cannot provide Quranic evidence, then you should re-evaluate what exactly Jinns are. The silly claim that Jinns are invisible to humans can be found in guess where? The books of Bukhari & Co.
No confusion on my side brother. I asked for some Quranic evidence, not some mental gymnastics. According to you, Jinns are made of "smokless fire,,, energy,,, plasma(whatever material)", therefore they must be invisible to humans. I fail to fathom how you can make that conclusion brother. Is there any Quranic evidence to support the claim that Jinns are "invisible" to the children of Adam?
Did I offend you just by asking you to provide some Quranic evidence? OR maybe it's you who feel that your belief system is under threat.
I'll ask one last time Imran. Please provide Quranic evidence that Jinns are "invisble to humans". Something like "We have made Jinns invisible to the children of Adam" or "you cannot see them".
in all here what i see is deafeat,,,, brother,,, invalid..
if you read it properly what i said,,, u will get ur answers,,, now what you are asking me is similar if a student of science is asking from me formula of water is h20 is it mention in quran,,,, how can we beleive in the formula ,,, god mention water why god didnt tell us water got 2 atoms of hydrogen and one oxygen,,, god is unaware about formula,,,or if its true give us a reference from quran,,,
my brother it will never change a fact,,, that the formula is h2o whether its mention or not mention,,,
come to the jinns ,,, did you realy read my post properly,,, i told you accoring to the observations of experts the material is invisible but this universe mysteries only can understand and explore by wisdom rsearch and experinments with earthly material,,, so scientist can tell the properties of water....
about jinns common understanding is they are invisible,,, and on top of that i told you like a bulb switcing it on and off so yeh u can see them but you need some next level tecnology,,, like solomon had,,,
it was not the subject of religious faith to discuss who they are what they are how they formed,,, quran gives you facts about jinnn,,, and quran let human to explore the things... interesting things... about us,,, so go and check whenever you encounter a jinn ask from him u r invisible or visible,,, are u made up of energy or fire,,, i think jinn will give you very nice answers,, and if he tell you i m invisible then ask from him,,, give me reference from quran...that you ar invisible...
and i know you will never get a tecnology to see the jinn,,, btw did you ever encounter jinn... or did you see anybody who see jinn with their own eyes....
and i have a gift for you as well,,,, in the shape of quranic verse....
"O Children of Adam, do not let the devil afflict you as he evicted your parents from the paradise; he removes from them their garments to show them their lusts. He and his tribe see you from where you do not see them. We have made the devils as allies for those who do not believe." (7:27)
Why are you all attacking imran?
Why are you questioning about the your Lord's Words?
You are all so vehemently opposed to his views but none of you have provided evidence for yours.
Is this, how you all intend to establish an ummah subservient to Allah?
When half of you cannot even comprehend the simplest of commands form your Lord!
Establish prayer give zakah!
Yet you debate about nonsense with passion and pretend to be in doubt about these simple commandments.
You argue about Jinns??
Invalid there is plenty of evidence in the Quran that would lead one to understand such as imran has understood. Be patient and read over once again.
You argue about verses from your Lord, the authenticity of the Messenger who delivered the message to you.
Evil is what your faith bids you to if you are believers.
Invalid777,
I would suggest to lay low. Satan is in total control of your discussion-partners right now and it is a primitive rage now so the beast has taken over. They are in total defense of their territory. They would not reflect upon anything you write in that berserk mode. You are their enemy.
Relax.
Be safe
Amenuel
Quote from: imrankhawaja on January 30, 2016, 01:15:31 PM
and before claiming anything i want to all of u guys to give me evidences,,, like i did,,,, its a professional and certified way... so that somebody gona listen,,, safe for now.. i hope by reading all the stuff nobody and any hidden agenda will affect a true believer,,,,
:o :o :o
Salam...
Muhammad is not the name of the Last Prophet. It is actually a honourable title ALLAH gives to the Last Prophet which means Paraclete in Greco-Roman.
Followers of Mani' (founder of the so called ?Manichaeism?) believe that these titles (the Seal of the Prophets and the Last Prophet) are attributed to Prophet Mani who came before Muhammad ibn Abdullah, the so called Arab Prophet of the 7th Century CE! The title Seal of the Prophets and The Last Prophet have no copyright, yet if the so called Sectarians are assuming, Muhammad ibn Abdullah could be charged with plagiarism as Prophet Mani used these titles for himself 300 years prior to 7the Century CE.
Historically, Mani and Muhammad have much in common. Both claimed:
1. that messengers had been sent to every nation,
2. a belief that someone was crucified by the Israelite and Jews in the place of Esaias,
3. to be the Comforter promised by Esaias,
4. and last but not least, the title of Last Prophet.
The above shows clearly that Prophet Mani was the Muhammad of the Quran!
Arthur Jeffery, in his book 'The Qur'an as Scripture', states the following: "Explicitly, however, Mani had claimed that he was the last in the succession of Prophets from God, so that in the Arabic sources it is recorded that his followers called him "the Seal of the Prophets". As such Mani had issued his own Scriptures and had set forth a "new law" for his community. This is what Muhammad does." (Jeffery, The Qur'an as Scripture, p. 79).
So who is the prohet to whom the Qur'an was revealed?
It is the revelator in the Qur'an the one who says that the receiver is not the last prophet but the seal of prophts. I do not know why people keep changing the seal of prophets into the last prophet. They are not the same thing. The Qur'an is quite able to say last prophet if that was what was wanted to say.
From where do you get that the prophetto whom the Qur'an was revealed "believed that that someone was crucified by the Israelite and Jews in the place of Esaias"?
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on February 29, 2016, 02:11:53 AM
So who is the prohet to whom the Qur'an was revealed?
Prophet Mani aka Muhammad
Quote from: huruf on February 29, 2016, 02:11:53 AM
It is the revelator in the Qur'an the one who says that the receiver is not the last prophet but the seal of prophts. I do not know why people keep changing the seal of prophets into the last prophet. They are not the same thing. The Qur'an is quite able to say last prophet if that was what was wanted to say.
The word KHATAM means Last and Sealed.
Quote from: huruf on February 29, 2016, 02:11:53 AM
From where do you get that the prophetto whom the Qur'an was revealed "believed that that someone was crucified by the Israelite and Jews in the place of Esaias"?
And [their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Esa, the son of Maryam, the messenger of ALLAH." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but A LIKENESS to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.My apology, i should be more precise. Those criminals were made to believe what they did. Its plausible that they were in a different dimension, when they were about to carry out the killings. Those who came in the future differ about the event. They have no knowledge and conjectured. But for sure no one killed Esa but he was one of those considered martyr...Quran 06:85
And Zechariah and Yahya and Esaias and Elias - and all were of the righteous.All the prophets above are in the category of Martyr although Esaias was not practically murdered but because of the attempted murder on him, ALLAH caused him to die and raised up.
Quran 3:55: Lo! ALLAH said: "O Esaias! Verily, I shall cause you to die, and shall exalt you unto Me, and cleanse you of [the presence of] those who are bent on denying the truth; and I shall place those who follow you [far] above those who are bent on denying the truth, unto the Day of Resurrection. Than, unto ME you all must return, and I shall judge between you all with regard to all on which you all differ"Salaam
No. Khatam does not mean last and sealed.
Quote from: Man of Faith on February 29, 2016, 05:53:42 AM
No. Khatam does not mean last and sealed.
Salam bro
In Arabic yes it means that...The Prophet was the Last Prophet in the Family of Abraham and the Sealed of the Prophets - meaning there will not be any prophets that will be coming from both families of the Prophet, that is, the family of Abraham and Amran [Israel] - Quran;03:33
Salam
Salam to all
Who is the one Rasool who is not a forefather to any men, who does not speak of his desire, who is send for the alameen/all times/all worlds? The one who was sent to all the prophets back in time to verify from the book and give them the prophecy of the days to come? The one who is sent to the believers in their souls/selves to teach them the book and purify them(minds/ideology)?
Who is this ONE Rasool he was also sent to Marry?
Who is this ONE Rasool of whom we are given very little knowledge about?
Quote from: Furqan on October 01, 2016, 02:53:27 PM
Salam to all
Who is the one Rasool who is not a forefather to any men, who does not speak of his desire, who is send for the alameen/all times/all worlds? The one who was sent to all the prophets back in time to verify from the book and give them the prophecy of the days to come? The one who is sent to the believers in their souls/selves to teach them the book and purify them(minds/ideology)?
Who is this ONE Rasool he was also sent to Marry?
Who is this ONE Rasool of whom we are given very little knowledge about?
Jibrail A.S.