:: Was Muhammed name of a Prophet? ::

[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 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
mmKhan

[diamantinehoneybunch]

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.

[Man of Faith]

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

[Bender]

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 كَثِيرًا
27:6  وَإِنَّكَ لَتُلَقَّى الْقُرْآنَ مِن لَّدُنْ حَكِيمٍ عَلِيمٍ
10:37 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

[wasi]

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 

[wasi]

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

[wasi]

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]

[diamantinehoneybunch]

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?

[Noon waalqalami]

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

[huruf]

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