ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[hlatif]

Salaam all,

Wakas, thanks for your response.

One can only be a messenger if one has a message.

Sure, but there is more to the messenger than just a message.  Ignoring that will be unwise.

what does "al hikmata" refer to has been discussed many times: see http://members.tripod.com/lebou/authorityof.htm

I read it and am familiar with it and I even used it.  It goes back to the original redundancy of making Hikma and kitab being the same, therefore making the sentence redundant.  Insisting on it undermines the literary strength of the Qur'an.  Is Hikma included in the Qur'an? yes, but one has to extract it with help.  Is Alkitab limited to the Qur'an? not necessarily.

I really liked the way you explained the issue of Iaataziloo.

As for the end of your note.  It is fair enough.  May God guide us all to his wisdom.

Tanveer, salaam again,

Your reply "I trust and have safety in God's words" would have been an appropriate reply to the question "In which hadeeth do you trust ?", but that was not what The God asked ! You conveniently ignored the "other than The God's words" part of the question. Be sincere to yourself, because you end up deceiving only yourself.

I answered the way I did because to me, Iman, includes the feeling in the heart, the words of the mouth and the actions.

It is obvious you actually don't have trust in The God's words because of your reply "I trust and have safety in God's words" (which still does not eliminate the possibility of you trusting OTHER than The God's words too) to the question asked: "in which hadeeth OTHER THAN The God's words will you trust in ?".

Had you really trusted The God's words, your answer would have been "none" or "I trust and have safety ONLY in God's words/hadeeth".

Thank you for diagnosing me.  I will not return it to you.  I will say peace.  I did go over those Ayat related to "In what hadeeth other than Allah's they trust".  It is talking about the people who rejected the message.  As for those who accepted it, it does not tell them not to trust in other words approved by God as the words of the messenger whether they are God's words or otherwise.

The Qur'aan is fully detailed and complete, contains every example, and has a clear explanation of everything relevant to our guidance, is enough for our guidance, and THE PROPHET FOLLOWED ONLY THE QUR'AAN. You have admitted you trust in God's words. Hence you have to admit that ALL THE HADEETH of the messenger which can be trusted are already in The God's words. When you are asked to obey the messenger, you obey by following the hadeeth in the Qur'aan,

No hadeeth follower will claim otherwise.  Let me ask you something.  How do you get to understand the Qur'an?  You read it and it enters your heart and you understand it?  Or you depend on "hadeeths" of fellow human beings, unauthenticated and called dictionaries?  In what hadeeth other than God's do you trust?

1. The Qur'aan came through the messenger, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.

Correct and there is nothing in the Qur'an to limit "obeying the messenger" to that.

2. The God Himself says that it is the speech/saying/utterance of the messenger, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.

Sure, but obeying the messenger goes further.

3. The Qur'aan contains ALL AUTHENTIC HADEETH of the messenger relevant to our guidance (please see above), so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.

Fine and the hadeeth of the prophet helps you understand it.  Instead you prefer the hadeeth of the dictionary.  Nothing wrong in that.  However, if you use one method of understanding the Qur'an, then you cannot condemn another.

4. The messenger followed only the Qur'aan for guidance purposes, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.

Then I am interested to know how he did, but you are not.

It is very clear that had The God not used the words "and obey the messenger" in addition to "obey God", then people could have denied the Qur'aan being the word of The God because it came through the messenger, and could have refused to follow the message of The God when the messenger uttered what was commanded to him to say to them from the Qur'aan (thus becoming his hadeeth), and could have justified following ANY BOOK THEY THOUGHT WAS THE WORD OF GOD.

Not convincing.  By adding the messenger and insisting that it is the only thing there, you give people more reason to claim that it did not come from God.  I have a different explanation.  If it said obey God alone, then people will vary whether it meant the Qur'an alone or all what the messenger told them.  If it said obey the messenger alone then people will differ on whether to obey the messenger alone or obey the messenger and the Qur'an.  By putting the two together, it makes it combine obeying the Qur'an and the messenger within and outside the Qur'an, no matter how one understands obey God to mean or obey the messenger to mean.  Therefore it combines the widest meaning and that is the true miracle of the Qur'anic language.

The true hadeeth is found inside the Qur'aan. In which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

True and you guys have obviously a hard time understanding it, just because you refuse to use some tools that help you in that understanding.

How does one know whether the material related to us from the messenger outside the Qur'aan was actually related by the messenger ? If it is consistent with the Qur'aan, then it is redundant anyway, because the Qur'aan is saying the same thing. In which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

This reveals a narrow understanding of the Qur'an.  The Qur'an is much deeper and more complex meanings in it than one thinks.  Hadeeth does not appear redundant.  It makes you pay attention to some aspects of the Qur'an that you may have missed.  Imam Ahmad bin hanbal said:  Each true hadeeth relates to the Qur'an.

Indeed the DNA of living beings, the atomic and molecular structure of material objects, the forces that govern the particles and the universe, the galaxies etc. are all God's words, but the UNVERIFIABLE HEARSAYS ATTRIBUTED TO THE PROPHET are definitely not The God's words. In which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

So, my and your DNA are God's words.  Interesting.  Let me take it further.  Does that mean that we are God's words?  If we are God's words, then even the inauthentic hadeeth is a product of God's words.  Of course this is not the case.  We may have been created by God's word : Be, but that is not the only word of God.

6:112 And as such, We have permitted the enemies of every prophet, human and Jinn devils, to inspire in each other with fancy words in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.

31:6 And from the people, there are those who accept BASELESS HADEETH to mislead from the path of God without knowledge, and they take it as entertainment. These will have a humiliating retribution.

Just because you posted those Aya does not make them not apply to you as well as they may apply to me.  It is something for you to contemplate as you sling God's words on others.

It is interesting that hlatif goes to great lengths to find the meaning of "fussilat" but then conveniently ignores the signs in which we hear of ALL THINGS (kulla shay'in) being detailed, and that is the reason for "fully" detailed:

12:111 In their stories is a lesson for the people of intelligence. It was not a HADEETH that was invented, but an authentication of what was already revealed and a detailing of all things (tafseela kulli shay'in), and a guidance and mercy to a people who believe.

17:12 And We made the night and the day as two signs, so We erased the sign of night and We made the sign of day to see-in, that you may seek bounty from your Lord, and that you may know the number of the years and the count. And everything (kulla shay'in) We have detailed completely.

How do you understand detailing everything in this passage? I understand it as delineation and differentiation.  If it truly means detail of everything, then your tools of finding those details are not going to get you anywhere.  The tool of hadeeth may be better suited at finding those details.

If The God had said "obey The God and obey the message", then people could have denied the Qur'aan as the message of The God and could have followed ANY MESSAGE THEY THOUGHT WAS GOD'S MESSAGE. It was necessary to say "obey The God and obey the messenger" to make it crystal clear to follow the message of The God brought through the messenger.

not convincing.  There is a much easier way to make it understood as you like it.  He would say:  "Obey God and this message".  He mentioned the messenger because he counts.

Sarah,

Hussien you see if I was to accept things and to reject things due to the pieces not fitting in, if they shouldn?t be there it questions the other hadiths. And then I could be like these people that you mention later:


Quote
4:150 VERILY, those who deny God and His messengers by endeavouring to make a distinction between [belief in] God and [belief in] His messengers, and who say, "We believe in the some but we deny some," [162] and want to pursue a path in-between -
4:151 it is they, they who are truly denying the truth: and for those who deny the truth We have readied shameful suffering.

Anyway the point is none of us deny God nor the messenger. It?s what is claimed to be of the messenger that has us thinking. Well me.

There is a big difference between accepting the authority of the messenger and refusing a particular hadeeth because one does not believe the messenger said it and the refusing the authority of the messenger outside of the Qur'an as many people here assert.  The second group are in the category that is considered in the Aya blameworthy.

Tanveer,

The Qur'aan contains the hikma, and "the book and the wisdom" both refer to the Qur'aan. "Hikma" is one of the attributes of the Qur'aan (36:1-2, 3:58, 10:1, 31:2), and "wa" in Classical Arabic is also sometimes used to separate attributes of the same thing.

When one practices under supervision of how others practice medicine, one is still following the book because the others practice it according to the book ! In fact, the others will have to practice by the book otherwise they put themselves at risk of being sued.

And you can look at hadeeth the same way.  There is no redundancy in learning the book from an instructor.  Same in hadeeth.

Good example of a logical fallacy !

"The Qur'aan being fully detailed" and "you guys having variance in issues" are not mutually exclusive and can both be true. "Guys having variance in issues" could be due to "guys" not understanding the message properly and not because the Qur'aan is not fully detailed. In other words, the Qur'aan can be fully detailed but "guys" can still have variance in issues because they are not understanding its message properly. Capisce ?

When The God says that the Qur'aan details ALL things, it does, relevant to our guidance.

This is what is called an excuse that is worse than the crime.  So, God sent a book that is fully detailed, but not understandable, even in the most basic things as Zakat, Salat, Hajj.  It points to the fact that your methodology of understanding the Qur'an is faulty.  You have to look somewhere else for understanding.  Surat al fatiha talks about the ones who are lost.  They are two kinds:

1- Ones who are lost but have no means of finding the way.  Those, God may have mercy on them, because it is an issue of ignorance they could not help.
2- Ones who are lost and can see an alternative root, but refuse to take it.  Those are the ones who are ignorant by choice.

May God have mercy on us, all.


Hussein

[tanveermd]

Peace hlatif,

I read it and am familiar with it and I even used it.  It goes back to the original redundancy of making Hikma and kitab being the same, therefore making the sentence redundant.  Insisting on it undermines the literary strength of the Qur'an.  Is Hikma included in the Qur'an? yes, but one has to extract it with help.  Is Alkitab limited to the Qur'an? not necessarily.

Is The God being redundant when He uses different adjectives to describe His attributes ? "Hikma" and "kitaab" are both attributes of the same Qur'aan describing different aspects of it and are not redundant. You are the one who insists on this being "redundant" when they describe the different aspects of the same thing; maybe it is your logic that is poor ?

The way you "extract" the hikma is by understanding a particular message according to its Qur'aanic context and cross referencing all signs that detail the same message to get an overall picture, a process in which the Qur'aan is used to explain itself, and then implementing that message in your life to see the "hikma"/wisdom behind it.

I did go over those Ayat related to "In what hadeeth other than Allah's they trust".  It is talking about the people who rejected the message.  As for those who accepted it, it does not tell them not to trust in other words approved by God as the words of the messenger whether they are God's words or otherwise.

The message of the relevant signs advising us not to trust any signs other than The God's words is for all times and for all people and refers to all hadeeth. I see you have still not answered the question asked by the God the way someone with actual trust in The God would have answered. That is EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE of indefensibility of your fallacious position and refutes it. Here it is for you again:

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

No hadeeth follower will claim otherwise.  Let me ask you something.  How do you get to understand the Qur'an?  You read it and it enters your heart and you understand it?  Or you depend on "hadeeths" of fellow human beings, unauthenticated and called dictionaries?  In what hadeeth other than God's do you trust?

Dictionaries are used to learn a language by finding out the meanings of different words, and not the message of the sentences in that language. By using The God given tools of mind and reason, the appropriate meaning of a particular word out of the possible meanings given by a dictionary, is determined by its context of usage in the Qur'aan and cross referencing other occurrences and thus finding out how the Qur'aan defines it and even modifying the dictionary meaning sometimes depending on how exactly the word is defined by the Qur'aan; this way the Qur'aan explains itself and is its own dictionary.

The God has made it incumbent upon Himself to explain the Qur'aan, but it appears you don't really have trust in The God by the way you answered the God's question. Just saying you have trust is not enough, you have to BELIEVE it in your heart too.

75:13 Man will be told on that Day what he has put forward, and what he has done.
75:14 Indeed, man will testify against himself.
75:15 Even though he puts forth his excuses.
75:16 Do not move your tongue with it to make haste.
75:17 It is for Us to gather it into a compilation.
75:18 So when We compile it, you shall follow its compilation.
75:19 Then it is for Us to explain it.

This process can take time and The God asks us to be patient and not be hasty with its understanding and to follow the best meaning:

20:114 Then High above all is God, the King, the True. And do not be hasty with the Qur'an before its inspiration is completed to you, and say: "My Lord, increase my knowledge."

39:18 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.

Stop putting forth your excuses and start really trusting The God.

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

Classical Arabic dictionaries are essential for learning the language. An English speaking person will never be able to learn Classical Arabic and understand The God's message without those dictionaries, and understanding the Qur'aan would be limited only to the Classical Arabic speaking people.

Fine and the hadeeth of the prophet helps you understand it.  Instead you prefer the hadeeth of the dictionary.  Nothing wrong in that.  However, if you use one method of understanding the Qur'an, then you cannot condemn another.

The dictionary and the so called "hadeeth" are not the same as explained above. We understand the language through the dictionaries and grammar books. Then, once we understand the language then and only then can we understand the book. Even the dictionary meanings should not be blindly followed to determine the exact meaning of a word as used in the Qur'aan. The dictionary meaning is modified in some instances depending on the context of usage of the word in the Qur'aan, and cross referencing other occurrences, and thus using the Qur'aan as its own dictionary.

You can use the search feature and look up brother Anwar's detailed posts on this issue in the past, which you are probably already aware of. For example:

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9427.msg37922#msg37922

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9435.msg50908#msg50908

Then I am interested to know how he did, but you are not.

Keep diagnosing me too. You are contradicting yourself when you earlier said you won't:

Thank you for diagnosing me.  I will not return it to you.

Saying something and doing something else is called you know what. Trusting hadeeth OTHER THAN God's words, despite The God's advice to trust ONLY His words, is not really trusting The God even if one says that one trusts The God.

The messenger followed the Qur'aan by following the message contained in it, and not using "outside sources":

10:15 And when Our clear revelations are recited to them, those who do not wish to meet Us said: "Bring a Qur'an other than this, or change it!" Say: "It is not for me to change it of my own accord, I merely follow what is inspired to me. I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the retribution of a great day!"

Here CLEARLY "what is inspired to me" = this Qur'aan.

Not convincing.  By adding the messenger and insisting that it is the only thing there, you give people more reason to claim that it did not come from God.

I never insisted that it is the only thing there. This is another occasion that you are ascribing something to me that I never said. It is "obey The God and obey the messenger", and not just "obey the messenger".

I have a different explanation.  If it said obey God alone, then people will vary whether it meant the Qur'an alone or all what the messenger told them.  If it said obey the messenger alone then people will differ on whether to obey the messenger alone or obey the messenger and the Qur'an.  By putting the two together, it makes it combine obeying the Qur'an and the messenger within and outside the Qur'an, no matter how one understands obey God to mean or obey the messenger to mean.  Therefore it combines the widest meaning and that is the true miracle of the Qur'anic language.

Your explanation does not make any sense. If it had said "obey God alone", then not only the people could have denied the Qur'aan being from The God and followed any book they thought was from The God, but they could also have rejected the messenger too.

By putting the two together, it can only mean following the Qur'aan alone, because of the reasons I gave earlier:

1. The Qur'aan came through the messenger, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.
2. The God Himself says that it is the speech/saying/utterance of the messenger, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.
3. The Qur'aan contains ALL AUTHENTIC HADEETH of the messenger relevant to our guidance, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.
4. The messenger followed only the Qur'aan for guidance purposes, so following the Qur'aan is obeying the messenger.

True and you guys have obviously a hard time understanding it, just because you refuse to use some tools that help you in that understanding.

Using "your tools" of understanding i.e. the unverifiable hearsays attributed to the prophet that are called "hadeeth", billions have divided themselves into countless sects, and have adopted pagan practices contradicting the Qur'aan, and an image of the prophet contradictory to his exemplary character as portrayed in the Qur'aan.

It takes time to understand The God's message:

20:114 Then High above all is God, the King, the True. And do not be hasty with the Qur'an before its inspiration is completed to you, and say: "My Lord, increase my knowledge."

This reveals a narrow understanding of the Qur'an.  The Qur'an is much deeper and more complex meanings in it than one thinks.  Hadeeth does not appear redundant.  It makes you pay attention to some aspects of the Qur'an that you may have missed.  Imam Ahmad bin hanbal said:  Each true hadeeth relates to the Qur'an.

What about other aspects of the Qur'aan that the so called "hadeeth" missed ? It is a fact that the so called "hadeeth" purports to explaining only a portion of the Qur'aan and not all of it, and doesn't even explain ALL aspects of the same sign in many instances.

If a so called "hadeeth" is consistent with the Qur'aan, then it is redundant anyway and not needed, because the Qur'aan is saying the same thing about that aspect.

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

I am still hoping you might answer this question the way someone who REALLY trusts The God's words alone would.

So, my and your DNA are God's words.  Interesting.  Let me take it further.  Does that mean that we are God's words?  If we are God's words, then even the inauthentic hadeeth is a product of God's words. Of course this is not the case. We may have been created by God's word : Be, but that is not the only word of God.

The God calls His words "signs". All the signs within us and on the horizons are His signs.

41:53 We will show them Our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things?

The UNVERIFIABLE HEARSAYS ATTRIBUTED TO THE PROPHET are definitely not His words.

Just because you posted those Aya does not make them not apply to you as well as they may apply to me.  It is something for you to contemplate as you sling God's words on others.

It does not change the possibility that they could apply to you.

How do you understand detailing everything in this passage? I understand it as delineation and differentiation.  If it truly means detail of everything, then your tools of finding those details are not going to get you anywhere. The tool of hadeeth may be better suited at finding those details.

I understand detailing everything in those signs as DELINEATING, DIFFERENTIATING AND DETAILING EVERYTHING RELEVANT TO OUR GUIDANCE TO THE STRAIGHT PATH. Capisce ?

Using "your tool" of understanding, billions have divided themselves into countless sects, and have adopted pagan practices contradicting the Qur'aan. Don't worry about me getting anywhere, for everyone will be accountable for their own deeds, and only The God guides. By using the appropriate God given tools, I have gotten much farther just in 2 years than I got anywhere in decades.

not convincing. There is a much easier way to make it understood as you like it.  He would say:  "Obey God and this message". He mentioned the messenger because he counts.

If He had said "obey The God and this message", people still could have followed any book that claimed itself to be the message of The God.

There is a big difference between accepting the authority of the messenger and refusing a particular hadeeth because one does not believe the messenger said it and the refusing the authority of the messenger outside of the Qur'an as many people here assert. The second group are in the category that is considered in the Aya blameworthy.

We accept the authority of the messenger by following the Qur'aan, because it came through him, and trusting that he followed ONLY the Qur'aan, as he himself claimed. This is apparent by the fact that The God denounced him whenever he did not follow the Qur'aan and made a mistake.

And you can look at hadeeth the same way. There is no redundancy in learning the book from an instructor. Same in hadeeth.

The instructor teaches only the book and does not add to it, and thus the instructor's message is the SAME as the message of the original book. If the instructor's teachings/hadeeth following only the book are written down, they would be saying the same thing as the original book, thereby those written instructor's teachings/hadeeth will be redundant and not really necessary, if one possesses the original unadulterated book.

Suppose the instructor's teachings/hadeeth based only on the original book are written down from memory many years after the instructor dies, and one also possesses the original unadulterated book, which would be more authentic to be followed, and which could be trusted ?

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

This is what is called an excuse that is worse than the crime. So, God sent a book that is fully detailed, but not understandable, even in the most basic things as Zakat, Salat, Hajj.  It points to the fact that your methodology of understanding the Qur'an is faulty.

Again good example of a logical fallacy which is called "STRAWMAN".

When did I say it is not understandable ?

Some people not understanding it properly or fully in their initial attempt to understand it, and thus having temporary variance, DOES NOT MEAN THE BOOK IS NOT UNDERSTANDABLE. It can take time for one to understand something properly, and different people will have different rates of proper understanding, thus causing some temporary variance in some people. Also some variance in understanding about a certain issue, as long as it is within the limits and guidelines defined by The God in the Qur'aan, is acceptable.

Many exact details about certain things have been purposely omitted by The God because those exact details were not important relevant to our guidance; instead He gave broad guidelines and limits for those issues, and has left the exactly how to do something up to us, which would naturally result in some insignificant and unimportant variance. For example, cleaning ourselves is important, and actually what soap, brush, shampoo, etc. to use is left up to our common sense, so there will be some variance which is unimportant and at the same time the message is fully detailed and complete (relevant to our guidance) by mentioning the important details.

You have to look somewhere else for understanding.

I will quote the relevant signs again:

75:13 Man will be told on that Day what he has put forward, and what he has done.
75:14 Indeed, man will testify against himself.
75:15 Even though he puts forth his excuses.
75:16 Do not move your tongue with it to make haste.
75:17 It is for Us to gather it into a compilation.
75:18 So when We compile it, you shall follow its compilation.
75:19 Then it is for Us to explain it.

The God has made it incumbent upon Himself to explain His words, provided we make a sincere attempt to understand by using all The God given faculties of mind, reason and the various senses, and asking Him for guidance.

Surat al fatiha talks about the ones who are lost.  They are two kinds:

1- Ones who are lost but have no means of finding the way.  Those, God may have mercy on them, because it is an issue of ignorance they could not help.
2- Ones who are lost and can see an alternative root, but refuse to take it.  Those are the ones who are ignorant by choice.

The alternative route is to follow the Qur'aan and accept it as fully detailed, complete, containing every example and clear explanation of everything relevant to our guidance to the straight path, and accept that it is enough for our guidance and that the messenger followed only the Qur'aan, and to trust ONLY The God's hadeeth. Those who refuse to do so, are ignorant by choice.

When The God commands me to obey Him and obey the messenger, the only way I can follow this command is by following the whole Qur'aan because the Qur'aan is both The God's word and the messengers "qawl"/speech/saying and by following the hadeeth of the messenger relevant to my guidance that I can trust 100 %, and all those trustworthy ahadeeth are in the Qur'aan only.

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust ?

May the God guide us all to the straight path.

[tanveermd]

Peace all,

Which hadeeth other than The God's words will you trust in ?

Following is a collection of the true hadeeth of the messenger:

http://www.quranicteachings.co.uk/sayings-of%20the-prophet-all.htm

[hlatif]

Salaam Tanveer,

Is The God being redundant when He uses different adjectives to describe His attributes ? "Hikma" and "kitaab" are both attributes of the same Qur'aan describing different aspects of it and are not redundant. You are the one who insists on this being "redundant" when they describe the different aspects of the same thing; maybe it is your logic that is poor ?

The way you "extract" the hikma is by understanding a particular message according to its Qur'aanic context and cross referencing all signs that detail the same message to get an overall picture, a process in which the Qur'aan is used to explain itself, and then implementing that message in your life to see the "hikma"/wisdom behind it.

Fair enough and then you go and say this:

The instructor teaches only the book and does not add to it, and thus the instructor's message is the SAME as the message of the original book. If the instructor's teachings/hadeeth following only the book are written down, they would be saying the same thing as the original book, thereby those written instructor's teachings/hadeeth will be redundant and not really necessary, if one possesses the original unadulterated book.

Yet the instructor exposes the student to issues in the book that the student missed.  Also, the instructor may talk about something that may not exactly appear in the book while it is contained in it.  This is also the role of hadeeth.

The dictionary and the so called "hadeeth" are not the same as explained above. We understand the language through the dictionaries and grammar books. Then, once we understand the language then and only then can we understand the book. Even the dictionary meanings should not be blindly followed to determine the exact meaning of a word as used in the Qur'aan. The dictionary meaning is modified in some instances depending on the context of usage of the word in the Qur'aan, and cross referencing other occurrences, and thus using the Qur'aan as its own dictionary.

Show me one instance in the Qur'an where God asks people to learn Arabic.  So, God either will explain it to us by himself without Dictionaries, or through the messenger.  Here we go back to how God decided to teach us the Qur'an:
1- WayuAAllimukum Alkitab waljikmata= and he makes you know the book and the wisdom.  So, the messenger's job is not only delivery of a message, but explanations of the meaning of the words, not only through words, but through actions which do not need Dictionaries.

2- Ya Ayyuha annabiyyu, inna baaathnaka shahidan wa mubashshiran wa natheera, wa Daaaiyan il Allahi bithnihi wa Sirajan muneera =  O prophet WE have sent you as a witness, a bearer of good news and warning.  And a caller to Allah, by his permit and a light producing beacon.
This is very significant.  It mentions the prophet not the messenger.  It makes him a source of light, like the sun which was described as Siraj, and not like the moon, which reflects light.  If he only carried the message, then he would not be a source of light, he will be the moon.

You can use the search feature and look up brother Anwar's detailed posts on this issue in the past, which you are probably already aware of. For example:

http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9427.msg37922#msg37922

I am aware of this discussion and Anwar had the weaker argument.  There is no way to authenticate dictionaries.  They were written after hadeeth was written.  The people that wrote them are few and therefore have a much easier time making meanings that do not exist.  Despite all the words and the meanings used in them, one will still need to know, how the messenger understood it.  It was after all, his language.

I want to touch base one last time about "In which hadeeth they believe"  It is clear that it was talking about people who refuse the Qur'an.  It does not apply to the people who accept the Qur'an.  When one refuses the Qur'an then they are trusting something else.  If one trusts the Qur'an, then one does what it tells them, including learning from the teacher of book and Hikam.

Do not throw at me the differences in the 1.5 billion muslims.  They have much agreement than the followers of your group.  Do I need to remind you?  There is not much difference if you put your hands on your sides or fold them, if you combine prayers or separate them when they all accept five prayers per day with the same number of Rakaat.  Compare that to the difference between No Salat to 2 to 3 to five.  Do I need to mention crescent vs full moon in midsummer.  And what is midsummer for india vs Jordan vs the equator vs south of the equator.  Do I need to mention Hajj, Zakat?

It has been 1400 years since the message came.  You say that God promised to explain it, but according to this movement, no one in the last 1400 years understood it untill you guys came.  Did God lie about explaining His message?  You aks for time?  how much time?  Do you believe yourself?

This is called throwing empty slogans with no proofs.

As for this:

I understand detailing everything in those signs as DELINEATING, DIFFERENTIATING AND DETAILING EVERYTHING RELEVANT TO OUR GUIDANCE TO THE STRAIGHT PATH. Capisce ?

Everything= Kulli shayin became everything for guidance.  So, how come the always repeated Salat and Zakat and Sawm was never explained? that you guys are in shambles.  The 1.5 billion are much more united than you guys, despite all their misgivings.


May God guide us all.


Hussein

[Jack]

But the blessing isn?t calling onto anyone besides God, it's just saying blessings be upon him it?s not calling on to it's merely saying a supplication.

a) who are you praying to? God or the prophets?

b) whats the reason for this supplication? can the dead hear? do the prophets have a video monitor of whats going on here?

Also no prophet/messenger is alive so the verses would not be for our use? which wouldn't make sense.

what time period was the quran revealed in? was the messenger alive when it was revealed?

there are some verses that aren't specific for us, the verses that start with 'o you prophet' or 'o wives of the prophet' etc.....what about them?

[Wakas]

peace Hussein, all,

I'm not entirely sure what your understanding of "hikma" is but I personally regard this concept as one of my favourite aspects of al quran.

The way I see it, al kitab is to do with what is written, whilst al hikma refers to determining/judgement/wisdom - the stuff behind the scenes. They are most definitely both to be found in al quran. That is why al quran is not simply a long list of rules/regulations because if it were, there would be an endless list! I used to wonder why al quran had so much stuff not dedicated to rules/regulations, at first to me it seemed unecessary but I soon realised the genius of it. By providing lessons, insights/wisdom, a message within the stories/examples it relates, it provides us with a basic framework within which to base our judgement on. This is key. It is this that equips us to deal with ANY situation not explicitly mentioned in al quran.

This is used all the time in real life. For example the story about the boy who cried wolf. If one read it literally and never thought about the story, all they would get is the al kitab part, but if they reflect upon and learn the lessons within the story, they will grasp the al hikma part. Thus, as you can see a written text can have both.

[hlatif]

Salaam Wakas,

To me, the book is the information and the facts.  The Hikma is the connection of the dots, putting the pieces of information together in order to come with better judgement and implementation.  Both are present in the Qur'an.  While one can easily point the different points of information in the Qur'an, the connection of the dots is trickier, and may need mentorship and instruction. 

So, to bring the example of medicine again. Medical knowledge is in the book, but to connect the dots, one needs instruction from a professor.  One of my medical professors once said to us when we were medical students:  "I have a fraction of your knowledge, but I know how to use it."

So, to me, when one says that the Hikma is in the Qur'an, then he/she is correct.  However, to say that I learn it by just reading the Qur'an, then I will be skeptical.  The khawarej lacked Hikma not because they did not have the Qur'an nor lack of Arabic, but for lack of instruction in connecting the dots of the Qur'an.

I hope this answers your question.  Take care and have a great day.


Hussein

[siki]

peace Hussein, all,

I'm not entirely sure what your understanding of "hikma" is but I personally regard this concept as one of my favourite aspects of al quran.

The way I see it, al kitab is to do with what is written, whilst al hikma refers to determining/judgement/wisdom - the stuff behind the scenes. They are most definitely both to be found in al quran. That is why al quran is not simply a long list of rules/regulations because if it were, there would be an endless list! I used to wonder why al quran had so much stuff not dedicated to rules/regulations, at first to me it seemed unecessary but I soon realised the genius of it. By providing lessons, insights/wisdom, a message within the stories/examples it relates, it provides us with a basic framework within which to base our judgement on. This is key. It is this that equips us to deal with ANY situation not explicitly mentioned in al quran.

This is used all the time in real life. For example the story about the boy who cried wolf. If one read it literally and never thought about the story, all they would get is the al kitab part, but if they reflect upon and learn the lessons within the story, they will grasp the al hikma part. Thus, as you can see a written text can have both.

Salaam Wakas,

To me, the book is the information and the facts.  The Hikma is the connection of the dots, putting the pieces of information together in order to come with better judgement and implementation.  Both are present in the Qur'an.  While one can easily point the different points of information in the Qur'an, the connection of the dots is trickier, and may need mentorship and instruction. 

So, to bring the example of medicine again. Medical knowledge is in the book, but to connect the dots, one needs instruction from a professor.  One of my medical professors once said to us when we were medical students:  "I have a fraction of your knowledge, but I know how to use it."

So, to me, when one says that the Hikma is in the Qur'an, then he/she is correct.  However, to say that I learn it by just reading the Qur'an, then I will be skeptical.  The khawarej lacked Hikma not because they did not have the Qur'an nor lack of Arabic, but for lack of instruction in connecting the dots of the Qur'an.

I hope this answers your question.  Take care and have a great day.


Hussein

I think you both are talking the same thing, the only difference being, that wakas wants to use his own sense, and latif is recommending a mentor, or a guide to follow,

Here comes the subtle difference,

Wakas would listen to every one , but will use his own mind to extract hikma, where as Brother  Latif believes , " when you find/trust someone to be better in knowledge , then follow him , in every thing, or i could say that just follow him blindly from then on".     Or, Follow the human instructor.


Brother latif !  this is where the things go wrong.  No body is perfect /all knowing (and that includes Mohammad pbuh) . There are quite a few ayahs of Quran which were meant  for the future generations , Mohammad could not have been able to reflect upon them, that is why he was told ,


75-16,19 Do not move your tongue to hasten it. It is we who will collect it into Quran Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran Then it is we who will explain it.

We will not find the whole truth , as a package with any one,  except in  Quran, so, just how much one is able to benefit from ?   would depend on individual's intellect and hard work, but at least the source is pure and contains 100% truth.    where as, it is an impossibility, that one will be able to extract 100% from an adultrated source.

peace

siki

[Samia]

75-16,19 Do not move your tongue to hasten it. It is we who will collect it into Quran Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran Then it is we who will explain it.

We will not find the whole truth , as a package with any one,  except in  Quran, so, just how much one is able to benefit from ?   would depend on individual's intellect and hard work, but at least the source is pure and contains 100% truth.    where as, it is an impossibility, that one will be able to extract 100% from an adultrated source.

Well said siki, and I like how you understood this verse. That's what it means.

[hlatif]

Salaam Brother/sister Siki,

Nice try, but not not quite right at explaining my opinion:

Here comes the subtle difference,

Wakas would listen to every one , but will use his own mind to extract hikma, where as Brother  Latif believes , " when you find/trust someone to be better in knowledge  , then follow him , in every thing, or i could say that just follow him blindly from then on".     Or, Follow the human instructor.


Brother latif !  this is where the things go wrong.  No body is perfect /all knowing (and that includes Mohammad pbuh) . There are quite a few ayahs of Quran which were meant  for the future generations , Mohammad could not have been able to reflect upon them, that is why he was told ,

1- I follow the one or ones whom God asked me to have Iman=safety and trust in.  Those include the Qur'anically declared group that include Allah, his messenger and his book.

2- "Our mind" was not included in the group to have safety and trust in.  This means that trusting it is conditional and never absolute and that it comes after the first group.  It means that we should put it under scrutiny in order to make sure that it does not lead us astray through bias.  It was the mind of Satan that sent him to Hell, when he used it against God's order.

3- Trusting the messenger does not automatically mean that I have to take every hadeeth and accept it.  It means that I should not automatically discard it.  That I should study the degree of authenticity or lack of authenticity, the different ways of understanding it and how it fits within the whole message, mainly the Qur'an and the stronger hadeeths.  If there is no way for it to harmonize with the rest of the message, then it was not said by the messenger.

75-16,19 Do not move your tongue to hasten it. It is we who will collect it into Quran Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran Then it is we who will explain it.

We will not find the whole truth , as a package with any one,  except in  Quran, so, just how much one is able to benefit from ?   would depend on individual's intellect and hard work, but at least the source is pure and contains 100% truth.    where as, it is an impossibility, that one will be able to extract 100% from an adultrated source.

You contradict yourself.  If you believe that people vary in the extraction of Hikma from the Qur'an, then the ones with less ability should try to see how the ones with more ability understood.  Who was the one with the best ability?  Are you proposing that it should be your mind? or every othe mind but the messengers?

As for the fear of an adulterated source, it is overrated.  Why would one not read something, even if adulterated as long as you have the Qur'an as your criterion?  The messenger never contradicted the Qur'an.  All the hadeeth scholars agree that if a hadeeth contradicts the Qur'an then it was not said by the messenger.

The problem with you guys is that you deem many hadeeths as contradicting the Qur'an when they may not be, just as many missionaries deem many Ayat of the Qur'an as contradictory to each other.

Take care and have a great day.

Hussein