- Welcome to Free Minds.
Free Your Mind!
Recent posts
#1
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: Surah Al-Kahar
Last post by Fusion - Today at 09:25:07 AMInteresting question! I had a similar understanding that Khidr did the first act alone based on the knowledge given to him by Almighty, and the second act used the "Royal We" to signify importance. However, I found the following explanation aligns more with my thoughts:
Imam Alusi cites these and other explanations in his tafsir, yet concludes his discussion with another explanation which he feels is strongest, namely, that each ascription corresponds in strength to the objections of Musa (peace and blessings upon him).
Musa's objection to the first incident is, "Did you pierce it [the boat] so as to drown its inhabitants? You have indeed committed something severe (imra)!" (18:71)
This was a criticism directed at Khidr himself (peace be upon him), coupled with a questioning of his intention, i.e., "So as to drown..." Hence, Khidr's response is personal, "I desired to damage it."
The second objection of Musa (peace and blessings upon him) is, "Did you kill a pure soul, without it having killed another soul? You have indeed committed a thing most atrocious (nukra)!" (18:74)
This criticism is also directed at Khidr (peace be upon him) yet is regarding a harsher crime from Musa's perspective (killing vs damaging property). It is therefore more severe in wording, as the Arabic "nukra" is much stronger than "imra". Hence, Khidr's response remains personal yet makes use of the more majestic "we" instead of "I", saying, "So we desired that their Lord would give them in exchange..." The utmost of criticism called for a most emphatic response, to highlight the gravity of the matter and the seriousness of what was feared, namely, the child's ruining the faith of his parents.
It is worth noting that this explanation, as opposed to the classical one, takes into account the "we" used in the previous statement of Khidr, "And we feared that he would overwhelm them," since the fear of the child overwhelming his parents is not an act of both good and bad, which serves as the basis of the classical explanation.
The third objection of Musa (peace and blessings upon him), however, is not a criticism but rather a suggestive inquiry. "Had you wanted, you could have taken renumeration for it [fixing the wall]" (18:77). This question is very mild in tone, and pertains not to the actual act which Khidr did but instead to his not having taken a wage for the work. So it was most appropriate for Khidr's response to be gentler than the first two, and for him not to ascribe the act to himself whatsoever, neither to him alone (I desired) nor as a participant (we desired).
In any case, Khidr (peace be upon him) concludes the entire discourse with a statement that serves as the basis of all of his acts, affirming the reality of Whose will he was carrying out, "And I did nothing of my own accord" (18:82).
Ref:https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/the-pronoun-usage-in-khidrs-explanation-to-musa-peace-and-blessings-upon-them-both-regarding-his-actions/
As to the first part of your question, I understand you might be referring to the following Hadiths:?
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever recites Surah Al-Kahf on the night of Jumu'ah (Friday), will have a light that will stretch between him and the Ancient House (the Ka'bah)." (Sahih Al-Jaami)
Another narration mentions: "Whoever recites Surah Al-Kahf on the day of Jumu'ah (Friday), will have a light that will shine from him from one Friday to the next." (Al-Bayhaqi)
and then there is another hadith:
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever memorizes ten verses from the beginning of Surah Al-Kahf will be protected from the Dajjal." (Sahih Muslim)
In my personal opinion, the Quran is meant to provide guidance from Allah and help us live a just and righteous life. While there are many hadiths highlighting its importance as a shield, including the one you mentioned, you might often hear the common explanation that reading Surah Al-Kahf will protect its reciter from one Friday(if Jumma indeed translates to Friday) to the next. However, the true emphasis from Allah is to take the holistic approach and not differentiate and take Quran in such a selective manner:
39:23
Allah has sent down the best statement: a consistent Book wherein is reiteration. The skins shiver therefrom of those who fear their Lord; then their skins and their hearts relax at the remembrance of Allah. That is the guidance of Allah by which He guides whom He wills. And one whom Allah leaves astray - for him there is no guide."
Imam Alusi cites these and other explanations in his tafsir, yet concludes his discussion with another explanation which he feels is strongest, namely, that each ascription corresponds in strength to the objections of Musa (peace and blessings upon him).
Musa's objection to the first incident is, "Did you pierce it [the boat] so as to drown its inhabitants? You have indeed committed something severe (imra)!" (18:71)
This was a criticism directed at Khidr himself (peace be upon him), coupled with a questioning of his intention, i.e., "So as to drown..." Hence, Khidr's response is personal, "I desired to damage it."
The second objection of Musa (peace and blessings upon him) is, "Did you kill a pure soul, without it having killed another soul? You have indeed committed a thing most atrocious (nukra)!" (18:74)
This criticism is also directed at Khidr (peace be upon him) yet is regarding a harsher crime from Musa's perspective (killing vs damaging property). It is therefore more severe in wording, as the Arabic "nukra" is much stronger than "imra". Hence, Khidr's response remains personal yet makes use of the more majestic "we" instead of "I", saying, "So we desired that their Lord would give them in exchange..." The utmost of criticism called for a most emphatic response, to highlight the gravity of the matter and the seriousness of what was feared, namely, the child's ruining the faith of his parents.
It is worth noting that this explanation, as opposed to the classical one, takes into account the "we" used in the previous statement of Khidr, "And we feared that he would overwhelm them," since the fear of the child overwhelming his parents is not an act of both good and bad, which serves as the basis of the classical explanation.
The third objection of Musa (peace and blessings upon him), however, is not a criticism but rather a suggestive inquiry. "Had you wanted, you could have taken renumeration for it [fixing the wall]" (18:77). This question is very mild in tone, and pertains not to the actual act which Khidr did but instead to his not having taken a wage for the work. So it was most appropriate for Khidr's response to be gentler than the first two, and for him not to ascribe the act to himself whatsoever, neither to him alone (I desired) nor as a participant (we desired).
In any case, Khidr (peace be upon him) concludes the entire discourse with a statement that serves as the basis of all of his acts, affirming the reality of Whose will he was carrying out, "And I did nothing of my own accord" (18:82).
Ref:https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/the-pronoun-usage-in-khidrs-explanation-to-musa-peace-and-blessings-upon-them-both-regarding-his-actions/
As to the first part of your question, I understand you might be referring to the following Hadiths:?
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever recites Surah Al-Kahf on the night of Jumu'ah (Friday), will have a light that will stretch between him and the Ancient House (the Ka'bah)." (Sahih Al-Jaami)
Another narration mentions: "Whoever recites Surah Al-Kahf on the day of Jumu'ah (Friday), will have a light that will shine from him from one Friday to the next." (Al-Bayhaqi)
and then there is another hadith:
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever memorizes ten verses from the beginning of Surah Al-Kahf will be protected from the Dajjal." (Sahih Muslim)
In my personal opinion, the Quran is meant to provide guidance from Allah and help us live a just and righteous life. While there are many hadiths highlighting its importance as a shield, including the one you mentioned, you might often hear the common explanation that reading Surah Al-Kahf will protect its reciter from one Friday(if Jumma indeed translates to Friday) to the next. However, the true emphasis from Allah is to take the holistic approach and not differentiate and take Quran in such a selective manner:
39:23
Allah has sent down the best statement: a consistent Book wherein is reiteration. The skins shiver therefrom of those who fear their Lord; then their skins and their hearts relax at the remembrance of Allah. That is the guidance of Allah by which He guides whom He wills. And one whom Allah leaves astray - for him there is no guide."
#2
What is the nature of God? / Re: Exalted Assembly?
Last post by perrywest29 - Today at 04:38:25 AMWhat I am about to say might seem controversial but it's only a thought and my own opinion so judge with your own intellect.
I think what you said about God being one as many makes sense. God's names refer to perticular attributes but it also resembles the good old paganism. In fact if you take the whole quran and than it seems like there are 99(even more than that) attributes are like individual gods. That's what the old pagans got it wrong. The entire quran emohasises on A being that is named "Allah" as one but than we see he has 99 other names. Now lets say a person only calls god by al rahman. Another guy calls him al rahim. Without context it seems they are calling two different gods. But its two aspects of the same ineffable being put into words. But what actually means to be "One"? Does god has a body that is sepreate from all of existance hence he is "one"? Lets say I cut up my arm and ship it to antertica. But i still have control over that arm and i can do exactly what i want to do with that arm despite being seprate. My question is is the arm a seperate entity? Am i two because my arm is seperated by space? If i give my arm the ability to think and it doesnt know where it came from it might question do i have a free will or what is it's purpose. But since i am the one pulling the strings than the arm is never seperated. All of my limbs and organs make up who i am and i am one. Now lets say you who is reading. What if i download your consciousness into my head. Than are two or one? We have two different opinions. But this is a real life example where people have multiple identity disorder. They have different opinions within the same body. So is that "one". My conclusion is What we call the very ground of being "god"(i tend to avoid this word because it pops up like a person having a body sitting on a throne which is unfitting for this wonderfull presence") has different aspects all at the same time. In human understanding it would be like al rahman and al gaffar are two seperate gods. Al rahman the god of love because that's the very source of love and al gaffar the god of mercy. But they are infact just two qualities of the same being. Hence the line no god but "allah". The confusion arises from the meaning of the name. What is the eaxct meaning of "allah" it can't be al-ilah. Because the sentence doesn't add any meaning. No doudt "allah" has a different meaning that i wonder even muhammad knew. If he did he probaly interpreted as al-ilah or kept secret because normal sober mind cannot comprehend comlicated things. But like i said it can be something simple like Al-La-Hu. The word Al automatically comes to our mind as "the" but it has a secret meaning in wikitionary written differently there is another Al that means "family" or related to "return". Than the word could stand for "Al-La-Hu"= Return to "Hu". "Hu" is all over the quran where we are told " Hu is al rahman", "hu is al rahim" etc. So Hu coukd refer to just a indicator of an indescribable being who has these qualities and there really is no God but a Home where we will return.And in that Home are all of them "99 and more names" are "One". Even i am not qualified enough to say what this means. Maybe it means unity of all of those different aspects. Than whole of creation is "One" there for it gives the meaning "Allahu" is all-encompassing(containing everything) a whole different meaning. Also that could be a fitting reason that there are terms like "high assembly" and using the pronoun "we" and even the word "Allahumma" that is used to conventionally mean O Allah. But i don't get how -umma is translated to "O" it litterally is a plural signifier "Allahumma" literally means they allah. But they allah is "One" somehow. And there's no such thing as royal we. If the quran is directly gods word than it should be only "I" used. But thinking differently makes sense. "We" is "One". That's all i can come up with. But at the end of the day trying to understand what god is or isn't will not get us anywhere. It's like trying to describe colours to a blind person. We should just focus on living a good life instead. And The infinitely loving God is definitely not a toddler that "He/she" will punish you for the wrong idea of him/her. The conventional islam uses fear tactics to keep you in line to he controlled by corrupt muslim leaders for conquest. And "Islam" really isn't a religion it's a way of living peacefully.
I think what you said about God being one as many makes sense. God's names refer to perticular attributes but it also resembles the good old paganism. In fact if you take the whole quran and than it seems like there are 99(even more than that) attributes are like individual gods. That's what the old pagans got it wrong. The entire quran emohasises on A being that is named "Allah" as one but than we see he has 99 other names. Now lets say a person only calls god by al rahman. Another guy calls him al rahim. Without context it seems they are calling two different gods. But its two aspects of the same ineffable being put into words. But what actually means to be "One"? Does god has a body that is sepreate from all of existance hence he is "one"? Lets say I cut up my arm and ship it to antertica. But i still have control over that arm and i can do exactly what i want to do with that arm despite being seprate. My question is is the arm a seperate entity? Am i two because my arm is seperated by space? If i give my arm the ability to think and it doesnt know where it came from it might question do i have a free will or what is it's purpose. But since i am the one pulling the strings than the arm is never seperated. All of my limbs and organs make up who i am and i am one. Now lets say you who is reading. What if i download your consciousness into my head. Than are two or one? We have two different opinions. But this is a real life example where people have multiple identity disorder. They have different opinions within the same body. So is that "one". My conclusion is What we call the very ground of being "god"(i tend to avoid this word because it pops up like a person having a body sitting on a throne which is unfitting for this wonderfull presence") has different aspects all at the same time. In human understanding it would be like al rahman and al gaffar are two seperate gods. Al rahman the god of love because that's the very source of love and al gaffar the god of mercy. But they are infact just two qualities of the same being. Hence the line no god but "allah". The confusion arises from the meaning of the name. What is the eaxct meaning of "allah" it can't be al-ilah. Because the sentence doesn't add any meaning. No doudt "allah" has a different meaning that i wonder even muhammad knew. If he did he probaly interpreted as al-ilah or kept secret because normal sober mind cannot comprehend comlicated things. But like i said it can be something simple like Al-La-Hu. The word Al automatically comes to our mind as "the" but it has a secret meaning in wikitionary written differently there is another Al that means "family" or related to "return". Than the word could stand for "Al-La-Hu"= Return to "Hu". "Hu" is all over the quran where we are told " Hu is al rahman", "hu is al rahim" etc. So Hu coukd refer to just a indicator of an indescribable being who has these qualities and there really is no God but a Home where we will return.And in that Home are all of them "99 and more names" are "One". Even i am not qualified enough to say what this means. Maybe it means unity of all of those different aspects. Than whole of creation is "One" there for it gives the meaning "Allahu" is all-encompassing(containing everything) a whole different meaning. Also that could be a fitting reason that there are terms like "high assembly" and using the pronoun "we" and even the word "Allahumma" that is used to conventionally mean O Allah. But i don't get how -umma is translated to "O" it litterally is a plural signifier "Allahumma" literally means they allah. But they allah is "One" somehow. And there's no such thing as royal we. If the quran is directly gods word than it should be only "I" used. But thinking differently makes sense. "We" is "One". That's all i can come up with. But at the end of the day trying to understand what god is or isn't will not get us anywhere. It's like trying to describe colours to a blind person. We should just focus on living a good life instead. And The infinitely loving God is definitely not a toddler that "He/she" will punish you for the wrong idea of him/her. The conventional islam uses fear tactics to keep you in line to he controlled by corrupt muslim leaders for conquest. And "Islam" really isn't a religion it's a way of living peacefully.
#3
General Issues / Questions / Re: What is Zikr?
Last post by jkhan - Today at 02:48:10 AMQuote from: jkhan on Yesterday at 01:15:45 AMPeace...
Zikr is normally translated as MENTION / REMIND / REMEMBER / MESSAGE etc..
I am not here to invalidate them.. But for example word REMEMBER has many a meaning to cover.. So, I feel CONSIDERATION would suit ie 'to give a careful thought to something / Thoughtfulness' would befit...
Anyway, I am not in full agreement to the translation of MESSAGE... Rather I would go with CONSIDERATION..
For example..
5:4 "..... .... So eat of what they catch for you, and consider attribution of Allah on it, and be concious of Allah...... ..."
Peace...
Some are concerned and they ask as under :
Do you mean to say we don't need to MENTION the name of Allah before eating as per verse 6:118...
Well! Verse 6:118 goes like this..
"So eat of that on it the attribution of Allah / The Deity has been considered, if you are believers in His verses."
Even 6:121
"And do not eat of that on it the attribution of Allah / The Deity has not been considered, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. ...."
To grasp it precisely without any deviation of the meaning, pls refer the exact meaning of ATTRIBUTION..
so.. Accordingly.. There is no need of MENTIONING the name of Allah before eating..
I have no idea what the name the Deity itself.. Allah is the Deity and He is the Rabb / Lord of all Races.. And He has many an attributions which are unique..
Thanks..
#4
Prophets and Messengers / Re: Prophethood
Last post by sublimistri - Yesterday at 11:14:51 AMKill them where you find them would be on the antichrist and followers.
All prophets warned of criminals. The main criminal getting away with forced suicide/murder (deceiver) has revelation opposing him and his crimes; he then goes kufr to conceal this crime; which leads to being shirk trying to create false signs of god and have other people create fake signs of god in the way that they seen the prophet displaying a tawheed curse on this antichrist and his followers(followers include the satan). They want the fake signs of god created to deceive that islam and the crime isnt real(deception) as if murder wasnt the persons intent and the victim now a prophet wont be harmed until he gets victory by faith. The antichrists should all fool government(deceived them while criminal) which leaves the prophet with no hope for government on the original murder. He can then fool people on revelation as if he is the good person in comparison to islam; even if it were to take a million muslim lives they would continue to conceal this truth of revelation while claiming the good guys due to fooling government.
So the antichrist deceives government to murder someone as if he were the victim of murder; then revelation comes to behead that government as corrupt; and they show they are transgressive and wont behead the antichrist and followers and would rather kufr salvation of the muslim world (which turns into salvation of their own country and the entire planet). If they can easily lie their way out playing the usa gov vs terror card they play it any chance they get while they are murder and need beheading.
This is the type of deceiver the prophets were opposing and it is that antichrist and his followers including the satan that lead astray; they try to get people to present a fake version of what was displayed as signs (associate yourself with god for a fake curse claiming yourself as god for that prophet to be cursed instead of blessed these people that do real shirk of prophethood are in contact with antichrist to help harm the prophet and god forbid harming that prophet). The prophet displayed tawheed (which someone who studied this religion can confuse as if the prophet were associating when he is just showing tawheed saying its done by god without trying to create fake signs to associate with god; he was inspired by god to start pointing out tawheed when he got revelation by a christ killed by tawheed to answer his prayer) where the person had signs of god that cursed antichrist and the antichrist while harming/monitoring the prophet tries to make a fake version of it where they need fake signs of god for a fake curse; this is where shirk is that exact association the creation of the fake sign of god needs a god to do it so they act like they are god while doing it that way they can confuse on the revelation and who is cursed and act like its not real.
The prophet is to prove gods existence while these criminals denied his existence in their own country then gets humiliated with his arrival on the second coming answering a prayer proving them wrong on all topics they were harming the prophet for while making things up to be smarter transgressing in disbelief. They then fool the rest of the world while the prophet preaches the second coming; in transgression going as far as to wanting to steal the revelation to get people to support harming him in any way they can. If the prophet proves gods existence this leads to beheadings because they understand why he got revelation and its a severely transgressive government that they already want to behead (usa criminals in my case). Or they have to go to war because they find out the lies of that government is to mastermind them to kill themselves in tribal wars with islam spiralling the middle east into all kinds of wars leading islam astray instead of governing that antichrist being transgressive instead of government; this is where god knows of future events and overrides that prophets countries government with sharia the prophet calls out to other countries to govern his corrupt government. This is where the muslims raise the banners for caliphate for that caliph with revelation who is a prophet to correct islam and guide it onto gods new targets/antichrist and followers; if muslims do not get beheadings they get persecuted by the rest of the planet for islam; sometimes in genocidal fashions.
50/19 is used for avoiding crime and revelation the whole group and anyone that enjoins them ends up liein about religion to prevent being beheaded as a criminal follower that also got cursed; kufr and shirk on true religion face 50/19 by beheading/war and/or gods punishment to force the final hour to force the antichrist to death since he wasnt beheaded/killed where found. If the country of that antichrist doesnt back down to beheadings then they commonly oppose islam while the government tries to oppose gods solution for islam they have to create their own solutions so when they see terror they are the good guys to go kill 10k people that were supposed to already be civilians with islam fixed by governing an antichrist for a prophet.
The solution to radicalism :
Think of how islam started it was revealed to a prophet.
Why was it revealed to this prophet? To kill a specific set of criminals.
Muhammad in hadith said he is the master of all prophets; properly interpreted after he said that : and any prophet after him will use the quran fighting for its true interpretation meaning they are trying to accomplish sharia by revelation of god answering a prayer (lesser hour) using revelation + quran proving gods existence with his revelation to get beheadings on those criminals.
The quran is to be used by a prophet and it says it at the end of the quran as well; this is the word of god carried by a messenger. This is to be used agianst those criminals that god judges as an antichrist and followers. You won't be able to have true peace with this group of criminals and it ends up getting proven for beheadings.
All prophets warned of criminals. The main criminal getting away with forced suicide/murder (deceiver) has revelation opposing him and his crimes; he then goes kufr to conceal this crime; which leads to being shirk trying to create false signs of god and have other people create fake signs of god in the way that they seen the prophet displaying a tawheed curse on this antichrist and his followers(followers include the satan). They want the fake signs of god created to deceive that islam and the crime isnt real(deception) as if murder wasnt the persons intent and the victim now a prophet wont be harmed until he gets victory by faith. The antichrists should all fool government(deceived them while criminal) which leaves the prophet with no hope for government on the original murder. He can then fool people on revelation as if he is the good person in comparison to islam; even if it were to take a million muslim lives they would continue to conceal this truth of revelation while claiming the good guys due to fooling government.
So the antichrist deceives government to murder someone as if he were the victim of murder; then revelation comes to behead that government as corrupt; and they show they are transgressive and wont behead the antichrist and followers and would rather kufr salvation of the muslim world (which turns into salvation of their own country and the entire planet). If they can easily lie their way out playing the usa gov vs terror card they play it any chance they get while they are murder and need beheading.
This is the type of deceiver the prophets were opposing and it is that antichrist and his followers including the satan that lead astray; they try to get people to present a fake version of what was displayed as signs (associate yourself with god for a fake curse claiming yourself as god for that prophet to be cursed instead of blessed these people that do real shirk of prophethood are in contact with antichrist to help harm the prophet and god forbid harming that prophet). The prophet displayed tawheed (which someone who studied this religion can confuse as if the prophet were associating when he is just showing tawheed saying its done by god without trying to create fake signs to associate with god; he was inspired by god to start pointing out tawheed when he got revelation by a christ killed by tawheed to answer his prayer) where the person had signs of god that cursed antichrist and the antichrist while harming/monitoring the prophet tries to make a fake version of it where they need fake signs of god for a fake curse; this is where shirk is that exact association the creation of the fake sign of god needs a god to do it so they act like they are god while doing it that way they can confuse on the revelation and who is cursed and act like its not real.
The prophet is to prove gods existence while these criminals denied his existence in their own country then gets humiliated with his arrival on the second coming answering a prayer proving them wrong on all topics they were harming the prophet for while making things up to be smarter transgressing in disbelief. They then fool the rest of the world while the prophet preaches the second coming; in transgression going as far as to wanting to steal the revelation to get people to support harming him in any way they can. If the prophet proves gods existence this leads to beheadings because they understand why he got revelation and its a severely transgressive government that they already want to behead (usa criminals in my case). Or they have to go to war because they find out the lies of that government is to mastermind them to kill themselves in tribal wars with islam spiralling the middle east into all kinds of wars leading islam astray instead of governing that antichrist being transgressive instead of government; this is where god knows of future events and overrides that prophets countries government with sharia the prophet calls out to other countries to govern his corrupt government. This is where the muslims raise the banners for caliphate for that caliph with revelation who is a prophet to correct islam and guide it onto gods new targets/antichrist and followers; if muslims do not get beheadings they get persecuted by the rest of the planet for islam; sometimes in genocidal fashions.
50/19 is used for avoiding crime and revelation the whole group and anyone that enjoins them ends up liein about religion to prevent being beheaded as a criminal follower that also got cursed; kufr and shirk on true religion face 50/19 by beheading/war and/or gods punishment to force the final hour to force the antichrist to death since he wasnt beheaded/killed where found. If the country of that antichrist doesnt back down to beheadings then they commonly oppose islam while the government tries to oppose gods solution for islam they have to create their own solutions so when they see terror they are the good guys to go kill 10k people that were supposed to already be civilians with islam fixed by governing an antichrist for a prophet.
The solution to radicalism :
Think of how islam started it was revealed to a prophet.
Why was it revealed to this prophet? To kill a specific set of criminals.
Muhammad in hadith said he is the master of all prophets; properly interpreted after he said that : and any prophet after him will use the quran fighting for its true interpretation meaning they are trying to accomplish sharia by revelation of god answering a prayer (lesser hour) using revelation + quran proving gods existence with his revelation to get beheadings on those criminals.
The quran is to be used by a prophet and it says it at the end of the quran as well; this is the word of god carried by a messenger. This is to be used agianst those criminals that god judges as an antichrist and followers. You won't be able to have true peace with this group of criminals and it ends up getting proven for beheadings.
#5
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Surah Al-Kahar
Last post by hakeema - Yesterday at 09:22:57 AMSalam everyone, I have a few questions regarding Surah Al-Kahaf:
1. Why did the propher PBUH teach us to read this particular Surah every Friday? What I mean is, out of all the surah's of the Qur'an, why did he mention this one in particular? Is there a particular important message that the prophet PBUH wanted us to remember weekly? I love this Surah, especially the story of the youth seeking refuge in a cave... but the Surah is very complex if you look at it from a structural point of view, and each portion has its own message. It starts with ahlul-kahaf and then switches to the example of the man with two gardens then switches to Musa and Khidr (PBUT) and finally to the mysterious Zul-qarnayn. What was the prophet (and actually, Allah, because our prophet would not teach us something if he didn't have an order from Allah) trying to tell us with this act of weekly reading? Again, I just want to repeat I love reading this Surah and if I ask all of this is just from genuine curiosity.
2. This is more of a grammatical question but it really puzzles me. At the end of Musa and Khidr's journey, Khidr finally explains why he did what he did but if you read closely, while explaining the first act he uses the first singular pronoun "I", while for the second act he uses the first plural pronoun!
أَمَّا ٱلسَّفِينَةُ فَكَانَتْ لِمَسَـٰكِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ فَأَرَدتُّ أَنْ أَعِيبَهَا وَكَانَ وَرَآءَهُم مَّلِكٌۭ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًۭا ٧٩
وَأَمَّا ٱلْغُلَـٰمُ فَكَانَ أَبَوَاهُ مُؤْمِنَيْنِ فَخَشِينَآ أَن يُرْهِقَهُمَا طُغْيَـٰنًۭا وَكُفْرًۭا ٨٠
I don't understand this. I know that at the end he says وما فعلته عن امري, with which I believe he was pointing out that Allah was guiding him, but why use the plural pronoun? Was it for giving him importance? If so, why using the singular pronoun in the first act?
Jazakum Allah and have a blessed Friday!
1. Why did the propher PBUH teach us to read this particular Surah every Friday? What I mean is, out of all the surah's of the Qur'an, why did he mention this one in particular? Is there a particular important message that the prophet PBUH wanted us to remember weekly? I love this Surah, especially the story of the youth seeking refuge in a cave... but the Surah is very complex if you look at it from a structural point of view, and each portion has its own message. It starts with ahlul-kahaf and then switches to the example of the man with two gardens then switches to Musa and Khidr (PBUT) and finally to the mysterious Zul-qarnayn. What was the prophet (and actually, Allah, because our prophet would not teach us something if he didn't have an order from Allah) trying to tell us with this act of weekly reading? Again, I just want to repeat I love reading this Surah and if I ask all of this is just from genuine curiosity.
2. This is more of a grammatical question but it really puzzles me. At the end of Musa and Khidr's journey, Khidr finally explains why he did what he did but if you read closely, while explaining the first act he uses the first singular pronoun "I", while for the second act he uses the first plural pronoun!
أَمَّا ٱلسَّفِينَةُ فَكَانَتْ لِمَسَـٰكِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ فَأَرَدتُّ أَنْ أَعِيبَهَا وَكَانَ وَرَآءَهُم مَّلِكٌۭ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًۭا ٧٩
وَأَمَّا ٱلْغُلَـٰمُ فَكَانَ أَبَوَاهُ مُؤْمِنَيْنِ فَخَشِينَآ أَن يُرْهِقَهُمَا طُغْيَـٰنًۭا وَكُفْرًۭا ٨٠
I don't understand this. I know that at the end he says وما فعلته عن امري, with which I believe he was pointing out that Allah was guiding him, but why use the plural pronoun? Was it for giving him importance? If so, why using the singular pronoun in the first act?
Jazakum Allah and have a blessed Friday!
#6
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: How do you grammatically u...
Last post by abuhanzala - Yesterday at 04:26:49 AMI appreciate your thoughtful approach to interpreting the Quran. It's important to distinguish between general principles that are universally applicable and specific instructions meant for particular individuals or situations.
Your perspective that some verses, like those about Salah timings (11:114, 17:78), are specific rather than general is intriguing. Recognizing verses directed at the Prophet or his contemporaries (e.g., 8:64, 9:45) clarifies that these were context-specific.
This nuanced interpretation helps bridge historical context with contemporary application, ensuring the Quran's teachings remain relevant today. Thank you for sharing this insightful view.
Your perspective that some verses, like those about Salah timings (11:114, 17:78), are specific rather than general is intriguing. Recognizing verses directed at the Prophet or his contemporaries (e.g., 8:64, 9:45) clarifies that these were context-specific.
This nuanced interpretation helps bridge historical context with contemporary application, ensuring the Quran's teachings remain relevant today. Thank you for sharing this insightful view.
#7
General Issues / Questions / Re: What is Zikr?
Last post by jkhan - Yesterday at 01:15:45 AMPeace...
Zikr is normally translated as MENTION / REMIND / REMEMBER / MESSAGE etc..
I am not here to invalidate them.. But for example word REMEMBER has many a meaning to cover.. So, I feel CONSIDERATION would suit ie 'to give a careful thought to something / Thoughtfulness' would befit...
Anyway, I am not in full agreement to the translation of MESSAGE... Rather I would go with CONSIDERATION..
For example..
5:4 "..... .... So eat of what they catch for you, and consider attribution of Allah on it, and be concious of Allah...... ..."
Zikr is normally translated as MENTION / REMIND / REMEMBER / MESSAGE etc..
I am not here to invalidate them.. But for example word REMEMBER has many a meaning to cover.. So, I feel CONSIDERATION would suit ie 'to give a careful thought to something / Thoughtfulness' would befit...
Anyway, I am not in full agreement to the translation of MESSAGE... Rather I would go with CONSIDERATION..
For example..
5:4 "..... .... So eat of what they catch for you, and consider attribution of Allah on it, and be concious of Allah...... ..."
#8
Hadith Discussions / Aisha Marital Age Hadith is a ...
Last post by Bajram Hoxhaj - May 16, 2024, 09:43:49 PMWhy the Aisha Marital Age Hadith is a FORGERY:
An EXCLUSIVE Lecture by Dr. Joshua Little
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr6mBlEPxW8
Scroll to 1:30:00 minute for summary.
4:6
and test ye of the orphans until when of
reach they of the marriage (age; over puberty)
so if perceives you of them rational (maturity) of
so deliver ye of to them wealth (inheritance) theirs
An EXCLUSIVE Lecture by Dr. Joshua Little
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr6mBlEPxW8
Scroll to 1:30:00 minute for summary.
4:6
and test ye of the orphans until when of
reach they of the marriage (age; over puberty)
so if perceives you of them rational (maturity) of
so deliver ye of to them wealth (inheritance) theirs
#9
Hadith Discussions / 21 REASONS Why Historians are ...
Last post by Bajram Hoxhaj - May 16, 2024, 09:25:26 PMOxford Scholar Dr. Joshua Little Gives 21 REASONS Why Historians are SKEPTICAL of Hadith
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz4vMUUxhag
Summary notes weakest to strongest:
1. Common Practice: People have a long history of making up stories.
2. Delayed Origins: Many hadiths collected after the 8th century are based on reports from 100 to 250 years earlier.
3. Internal Inconsistencies: Hadiths often contradict each other, for example, some provide unclear details about specific events (e.g., 5:3, when and where did this happen?).
4. Propaganda Potential: Hadiths can be biased, promoting or opposing certain groups. Who, for instance, is considered the first male convert according to differing hadiths?
5. Anachronisms: Some hadiths reference historical events that occurred later, suggesting the stories were created after the fact.
6. Unlikely Events: The supernatural elements present in some hadiths make their historical accuracy doubtful.
7. Widespread Fabrication: There are reports that a large portion (or most) of hadiths are fabricated.
Further Considerations:
8. Late Isnads: The chains of transmission (isnads) for many hadiths were established much later than the events they describe, often during the 2nd Fitna (Islamic civil war), raising questions about their accuracy.
9. Early "Sunnah": The concept of "Sunnah" originally referred to good customs and practices. Hadiths, as a specific genre, didn't exist before the 8th century.
10. Rapid Growth: The number of hadiths reported grew rapidly during a specific period in Islamic history.
11. Absence in Early Islam: Early Islamic sources don't rely heavily on hadiths.
12. Retrojection: Hadiths may have been created later and attributed to earlier figures, with a progression from followers to companions to the Prophet himself. Prophetical hadiths likely emerged later in this process.
13. Contradictions with History and Archaeology: Some hadiths contradict established historical and archaeological evidence. For instance, the claim that Mecca was entirely pagan before Islam contradicts the Quran itself, which suggests some form of monotheism existed there.
Oral Tradition and Reliability:
14. Oral Transmission Issues: Hadiths were primarily transmitted orally for over a century during a period of significant conflict. This raises concerns about their accuracy due to the potential for distortion and embellishment over time.
15. Variations and Inconsistencies: Extreme variations exist in the content of hadiths, even those supposedly describing the same event, highlighting the unreliability of oral transmission.
Literary Features:
16. Formulaic Storytelling: Many hadiths share similar narrative structures, tropes, and themes, suggesting a formulaic approach to storytelling rather than accurate historical accounts.
17. Entertainment Value: Some hadiths seem more concerned with entertainment than historical accuracy. Stories about the Prophet striking a rock with a staff and water emerged like story of Moses seems embellished for dramatic effect.
Exegesis and Interpretation:
18. Explaining the Quran: Some hadiths attempt to explain the Quran through stories, often lacking historical basis. For instance, hadiths about the meaning of specific Quranic verses often vary depending on the scholar interpreting them.
19. Infering from the Qur'an (74:49-51 asses from lion, hunters, archers) why variation? to explain an argument e.g., word meanings.
20. External Influences: Early Islamic interpretations of the Quran (exegesis) may have been influenced by external sources like Jewish and Christian traditions.
Classifying Hadiths:
21. Subjectivity of Authenticity: Is there a truly reliable method for classifying hadiths as weak, strong, or authentic? After all, people can be dishonest at any time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz4vMUUxhag
Summary notes weakest to strongest:
1. Common Practice: People have a long history of making up stories.
2. Delayed Origins: Many hadiths collected after the 8th century are based on reports from 100 to 250 years earlier.
3. Internal Inconsistencies: Hadiths often contradict each other, for example, some provide unclear details about specific events (e.g., 5:3, when and where did this happen?).
4. Propaganda Potential: Hadiths can be biased, promoting or opposing certain groups. Who, for instance, is considered the first male convert according to differing hadiths?
5. Anachronisms: Some hadiths reference historical events that occurred later, suggesting the stories were created after the fact.
6. Unlikely Events: The supernatural elements present in some hadiths make their historical accuracy doubtful.
7. Widespread Fabrication: There are reports that a large portion (or most) of hadiths are fabricated.
Further Considerations:
8. Late Isnads: The chains of transmission (isnads) for many hadiths were established much later than the events they describe, often during the 2nd Fitna (Islamic civil war), raising questions about their accuracy.
9. Early "Sunnah": The concept of "Sunnah" originally referred to good customs and practices. Hadiths, as a specific genre, didn't exist before the 8th century.
10. Rapid Growth: The number of hadiths reported grew rapidly during a specific period in Islamic history.
11. Absence in Early Islam: Early Islamic sources don't rely heavily on hadiths.
12. Retrojection: Hadiths may have been created later and attributed to earlier figures, with a progression from followers to companions to the Prophet himself. Prophetical hadiths likely emerged later in this process.
13. Contradictions with History and Archaeology: Some hadiths contradict established historical and archaeological evidence. For instance, the claim that Mecca was entirely pagan before Islam contradicts the Quran itself, which suggests some form of monotheism existed there.
Oral Tradition and Reliability:
14. Oral Transmission Issues: Hadiths were primarily transmitted orally for over a century during a period of significant conflict. This raises concerns about their accuracy due to the potential for distortion and embellishment over time.
15. Variations and Inconsistencies: Extreme variations exist in the content of hadiths, even those supposedly describing the same event, highlighting the unreliability of oral transmission.
Literary Features:
16. Formulaic Storytelling: Many hadiths share similar narrative structures, tropes, and themes, suggesting a formulaic approach to storytelling rather than accurate historical accounts.
17. Entertainment Value: Some hadiths seem more concerned with entertainment than historical accuracy. Stories about the Prophet striking a rock with a staff and water emerged like story of Moses seems embellished for dramatic effect.
Exegesis and Interpretation:
18. Explaining the Quran: Some hadiths attempt to explain the Quran through stories, often lacking historical basis. For instance, hadiths about the meaning of specific Quranic verses often vary depending on the scholar interpreting them.
19. Infering from the Qur'an (74:49-51 asses from lion, hunters, archers) why variation? to explain an argument e.g., word meanings.
20. External Influences: Early Islamic interpretations of the Quran (exegesis) may have been influenced by external sources like Jewish and Christian traditions.
Classifying Hadiths:
21. Subjectivity of Authenticity: Is there a truly reliable method for classifying hadiths as weak, strong, or authentic? After all, people can be dishonest at any time.
#10
Prophets and Messengers / Re: Jesus was not a Prophet of...
Last post by sublimistri - May 16, 2024, 01:10:55 PMJesus was a prophet.
There is a christ for second comings that is a sign for the hour for a prophet; salvation/atonement/islam as mercy with christ for that prophets revelations with quran both against crime to kill corruption and criminals so it makes islam into the good law but easily lied about as terrorism to show the level of transgression and crime in that prophets country if they refuse to kill murderous criminals and would rather watch 1 million muslims die to wars (since 2014) lieing about true islam covering revelation as not true to not fix islam and eradicate all radicalism into peace they kill them as radicals instead. They kill the muslims by ideology just not fixing islam has killed 1 million muslims since 2014.
There is a prophetic christ (second comings/god brings his word through this sign) and a historical christ (prophet in quran).
There is a christ for second comings that is a sign for the hour for a prophet; salvation/atonement/islam as mercy with christ for that prophets revelations with quran both against crime to kill corruption and criminals so it makes islam into the good law but easily lied about as terrorism to show the level of transgression and crime in that prophets country if they refuse to kill murderous criminals and would rather watch 1 million muslims die to wars (since 2014) lieing about true islam covering revelation as not true to not fix islam and eradicate all radicalism into peace they kill them as radicals instead. They kill the muslims by ideology just not fixing islam has killed 1 million muslims since 2014.
There is a prophetic christ (second comings/god brings his word through this sign) and a historical christ (prophet in quran).