Funny description of us - the hadith rejectors! :)
-
Pure logic brother Aymen! makes perfect sense.
Thank you
PeacePeace brother and thank you for your understanding. The great reading is pure logic and makes perfect sense when we let go of the cloud of sectarian nonsense and preconceptions.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
aymen
On the second point, I don't know how can an educated person propose nonsense such that a proper name cannot be plural. Have you ever heard of the proper name Pakistanis ? Does it apply to one and only one?
We are talking about the Arabic word "http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00002.%20Allah/3.gif here and it absolutely applies to one and only!
On the first point, the word "ilah" means "god" and not "the god". So the entire argument is based on a misunderstanding.
even if we substitute "the god" with "god" the results would be the same as I mentioned above. However if we use "Allah" meaning the only and one "God" the picture becomes very clear.
-
On the first point, the word "ilah" means "god" and not "the god". So the entire argument is based on a misunderstanding.
On the second point, I don't know how can an educated person propose nonsense such that a proper name cannot be plural. Have you ever heard of the proper name Pakistanis ? Does it apply to one and only one?? How do you expect me to take you seriously when you are copying and pasting such nonsense? Think. It is all very simple but you are making it too complicated for yourself and getting lost in the process.
Stupidity prevails when one makes up his mind of having superior knowledge. Those who know basic Arabic can understand the stupidity in calling as "plural" Proper Name, by a linguist in making.
A proper name can never be pluralized while retaining it as a Proper Name. Pseudo intellectuals never remember the basic principles of anything, and keep talking their nonsense.
-
aymen
How do you expect me to take you seriously when you are copying and pasting such nonsense? Think.
No one can make a dual and plural out of it since it is a Proper Name. And a proper name is always attributable to only and only one. Mazhar
now if you think that Mazhar is talking Non Sense and I am copying it then you must have already refuted the following or you think that this is non sense too.
A proper name is in its nature descriptive of only one object and therefore essentially singular. as soon as it becomes susceptible of plurality, as when we speak of twelve Caesars, or seven Jams es it ceases to be a proper noun.
Spain is the proper name of the country and Spaniard has been by some grammarians called the proper name of people; but later is a generic word characterizing any one of great number of persons by their connection with SpainThe Academician
edited by Albert Picket, John W. Picket -
Dear Mazhar and Raaajah,
So which one you think is the proper name of the creator?
1- Allah
2- Ar-rahamaan
3- (please note that there is no plural for this word in the quran)
4- (please note that there is no plural for this word in the quran)
Or does he have 4 proper (personal) names?
-
Peace Raaajah,
now if you think that Mazhar is talking Non Sense and I am copying it then you must have already refuted the following or you think that this is non sense too.
A proper name is in its nature descriptive of only one object and therefore essentially singular. as soon as it becomes susceptible of plurality, as when we speak of twelve Caesars, or seven Jams es it ceases to be a proper noun.
Spain is the proper name of the country and Spaniard has been by some grammarians called the proper name of people; but later is a generic word characterizing any one of great number of persons by their connection with Spain
The Academician
edited by Albert Picket, John W. PicketOf course this John Picket is saying nonsense too. All proper names can take plural. For example, when I say that I have three Mazhars in my classroom, do those people cease to have this proper name and are suddenly real "mazhars" common nouns, which in Arabic mean "appearences"?! People routinely use dual and plural proper names. Haven't you heard about the two Koreas? Again, proper names can be anything singular, dual or plural. Haven't you heard about Bahrain (dual) and Aljaza'ir (plural)?!
Again, proper names can be anything singular, dual, plural. Anyone can give anything any proper name. There is nothing preventing anyone from making some stone idols and naming them Allah and then say to people look at those Allahs or he can name them Allahat in Arabic plural. There are many people who are labeled Muslims by virtue of what is noted on their ID card or birth certificate. This doesn't mean that they are peacemakers. The difference is that proper names are just meaningless labels that don't describe truth and this is why they are not translated. So an idol given by some idolater the proper name Allah is not really the god/allah/al-ilah. The common noun describes truth and is not just a label that anyone can slap on anything.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Of course this John Picket is saying nonsense too. All proper names can take plural. For example, when I say that I have three Mazhars in my classroom, do those people cease to have this proper name and are suddenly real "mazhars" common nouns, which in Arabic mean "appearences"?! People routinely use dual and plural proper names. Haven't you heard about the two Koreas? Again, proper names can be anything singular, dual or plural. Haven't you heard about Bahrain (dual) and Aljaza'ir (plural)?!
Stupidity confounded. Also exposed that Aymen is not yet aware of what are the various types of nouns in Arabic and other languages. Mention of "three Mazhars" by a teacher in a class room will instantly expose that his degree in language is fake.
-
Someone,
Dear open up any book about language, and first study therein the basic perception denoted to a Proper name, adjective and participles. The point will become clear.
Thanks for the advice, but if it were that simple we wouldn't have all this mixing.
Now would you please take some of your precious time and give your answer with some explanation, so that I can follow your line of reasoning, if there is any.
-
aymen
Of course this John Picket is saying nonsense too.
Haven't you heard about the two Koreas? Again, proper names can be anything singular, dual or plural. Haven't you heard about Bahrain (dual) and Aljaza'ir (plural)?!
Seriously? I didn't expected this from a person of your caliber.
-
Thanks for the advice, but if it were that simple we wouldn't have all this mixing.
Now would you please take some of your precious time and give your answer with some explanation, so that I can follow your line of reasoning, if there is any.
Dear I gave you the most simple tool to understand. I didnt' ask you to go through various theories about Proper Name. I will give you explanation and you will bring another attributive name, as people call 99 names.
There is another thread about Proper Name of Allah.
Ar'Reh'maan Personal Name of Allah
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602143.0 -
Dear I gave you the most simple tool to understand. I didnt' ask you to go through various theories about Proper Name. I will give you explanation and you will bring another attributive name, as people call 99 names.
There is another thread about Proper Name of Allah.
Ar'Reh'maan Personal Name of Allah
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602143.0Yaa Mazhar,
I gave a second look to your above mentionned post about "Ar'Reh'maan Personal Name of Allah", but I have to say that you seem to have a lot of time to spend on writing such highly educated nonsense, and I still don't know for what reason or hidden agenda.
You give no solid reason as to why you have singled out "arrahmaan" to be the personal name of the creator of everything, meaning that even a chinese guy would have to call his (our)creator by this specific name, if not.... what happens?? this is another question for you that will certainely remain without answer.
Take these 2 attributes VS
Now would you care, or should I say, would you dare to give in a short list your reasons on taking one of them as a personal name of our creator and not the other?
I don't know who you are trying to deceive by your linguistic acrobatics? well besides Rajaaah, who seems to be one of your most unconditionnal and blind-following cheerleader, to the point where he is parroting your most incredible and nonsensible sayings without the least doubt, and better defending them... hail So congratulation for your first follower.
-
Someone,
Your simple problem is that you wish to perceive the ultimate nicities of a subject and concept without trying to see the basic abc of that subject. You have not yet given a thought to differentiate between personal name and specific descriptive/adjectival name.
Note the difference
The name is the code, which gives the basic cognition of existence and presence of a thing and person. Hence, name is the introduction for apparent/initial recognition of a thing and person. Cognition of the code/name of a thing or person is the elementary/first step in gaining knowledge about the thing or person. Name of a thing or person gives it or him a vivid distinction from all other things and persons and makes it or him distinguished/identified/definite/isolated and grants ability to others to identify and describe/ remember/recall and/or mention-refer it or him to others. The name/code serves as a basis/foundation for others to enquire and study about it to gain further knowledge.
Attributive names/adjectival descriptions give further information, insight and knowledge about the thing or person introduced by a Personal Name. These are complimentary in nature and help to acquaint others about the inner-self of the named object or person/being. Every person and thing/object that exists has two aspects, the one evidently apparent notwithstanding whether or not it is in the range of focus of someone, and the other is the inner-self, hidden, infolded, not apparent but invisibly embedded therein .
The evidently apparent is the reflection of the fact of existence, and its cognition and reference is by the Name. The pursuit-journey of knowledge is from cognition of existence/Name towards knowing and perceiving the inner-self of that which exists and its relationships and equations with all that exists. We cannot have the absolute knowledge of anything and person/being unless we know its/his inner-self , after its cognition, i.e. introductory knowledge of its Name."Agenda" is to make the following point understood
Once we know the inner-self, all that is secreted, hidden and its relationships with everything else, we know that thing and Person in near absolute sense. Thereupon, it or He becomes more visible and apparent than the shining sun in a bright and clear day, even without being physically in visual sight, the aspect of Him. Therefore, we know Him/him with such conviction, which is the absolute-exalted end of the knowledge. This type of knowledge, with reference to personalities, can be attained only about two, Ar'Reh'maan, the Exalted and Muhammad Sal'lallaa'hoalaih'wa'salam-The Mercy Personified, since the of both is quite extensively visible to us all around and through the courtesy of Grand Qur'aan.
-
Someone
I don't know who you are trying to deceive by your linguistic acrobatics? well besides Rajaaah, who seems to be one of your most unconditionnal and blind-following cheerleader, to the point where he is parroting your most incredible and nonsensible sayings without the least doubt, and better defending them... hail So congratulation for your first follower.
I can smell some thing burning. elektro
That is the only comment for your rant, I can give at the moment; as I am busy watching Pakistan Vs Sri Lanka spectacular.
-
What is "this" exactly? My caliber is that I answered you while you can't answer anything I say.
Peace,
AymanAyman, I do not agree with lot of stuff you say, but still respect you, the reason being your research and Knowledge, very few have researched based knowledge, Wakas, Layth, and Mazhar Sahib are few exceptions, but that does not mean they start calling others Non sense and copy posters. The reason I copied from Mazhar is because what he says is very near to what I may want to say, but my English not allows me too. Whenever you copy some thing or quote it in your favor this actually means you agree with it.
Well what you answered is just one point of view and I have presented mine, and I am not alone in my point of view.
Your basic assertion is that Allah is abbreviation of word al-ilah.The word "allah" is in fact an abbreviation of the word "al-ilah", which means "the god". Aymen
You said it is a fact. Is it fact? Who used this abbreviation at first in Quran? and why?
There are many who disagree with your theory copied by westerners, they think that Allah is not a contraction. They think that misunderstanding is due to spellings used in English of arabic word Allah.
Due to its English customary spelling it is often viewed by western writers that the English transliterated letters ?a,l,l,a,h? are a contraction of two Arabic words based on a linguistical prestige (in English not Arabic). Thus being ignorant of the fact, and the language it self, that the second ?L? in Arabic script called ?laam? is a double consonant letter. The first two letters ?al? is perceived as the definite article (the), and the three following letters ?laah? ( sometimes rendered in English as ?lah? ) is the contracted Arabic word ?ilaah (deity)? where the weak radical ?a?, in Arabic called ?alif? - pronounced as an ?i? in ?ilaah?, is dropped for a contraction.
Example- al ilah (the deity)
- al lah
- al-lah
- Allah
The double consonant ?L?(laam) in the original Arabic has been edited in English exegesis of the word as a single consonant giving it a linguistical prestige in English as an ?al ilah? contraction. This reason because, the double consonant ?L?, which would be properly spelled with three L?s(Alllah) serves no purpose in English as it does in Arabic. If the customary English spelling of the name it self is transliterated back into Arabic it would spell ? alif, laam, laam, fatah, ha? reading ?allah(a)? (Note This word in Arabic has NO article) which would be a different word in Arabic meaning ?Deification? whereas the name in its original Arabic is spelled as ?alif, laam, laam, laam, alif maqsoorah, ha?a? reading ?alllaah?. On the other hand, a contraction of the words ?al-ilah? is not possible in the Arabic language because the grammar behind it does no permit it as will be shown in the reality of the words in their original language which have been manipulated in English. In The Arabic language when the second radical letter of a word is doubled, by stressing it, it either enhances the word or changes its meaning all together. When the Arabic word ?ilaah?(deity) is pronounced as ?illaah? by stressing its second radical consonant ?L? to double ?ll? it changes the meaning from ?deity? to ?except him? where the ?h? consonant is converted into a masculine suffix pronoun. With the contraction theory of ?al ilah? applied in Arabic, rather than in English, the second radical letter ?L? in the Arabic word ?ilaah? is doubled when the ?i?(alif kasrah) is dropped to take the word ?al? in order to contract ?al? and ?lah? in the Arabic language.
EXAMPLE
- al ilaah
- al-llaah
- alllaah
Such an etymological contraction is not possible in the Arabic language in which the word would be meaningless
Ayman
But you didn't address the example. In fact, you don't seem to want to address anything I said. You made a big deal about al in allah being not the definite article. When I proved that it was the definite article since with the addition of li it becomes lillah, you simply remained silent after your argument was 100% defeated. Are you too proud to correct? What is the use of this discussion? If you were in my place what would you do if I made a big deal about an argument and I suddenly shut up when it was defeated and didn't go back and admit my mistake and correct it?
if ?al? in Alllah was a definite article ?li? could only be prefixed to it as ?li-alllah? not as ?lillaah? which would lose the article. The possessive form of the name as ?lillaah? confirms that there is no ?ilaah ~ deity? word contracted in the name, because the doubling of the second radical ?L? consonant, as we said before ,of the contracted word ?ilaah? with the dropped ?i? for ?laah? (as alleged) with the possessive ?li? for ?li-(i)llaah? would change the meaning of ?ilaah ~ deity? to except he or it . Thus is meaningless and would be prohibited in Arabic because it would be absurd and making no sense whereas the possessive form ?lillaah? of the name Alllaah would not be possible if such an etymological contraction of ?al ilaah? existed.
The in the word "" is merely the definite article. Like all mundane definited article when attached to any Arabic word, the letter Alif is removed when you add "to"/"".
Wrong i gave you an example before here it is gain "In Arabic there are many words that begin with ?al? such as ?alyasa? where ?al? is not a definite article. ?alyasa? is the arabicized form of the Hebrew name ?Elisha?.
Abdul Mannan Omar's Lexical Dictionary of the Quran
Allah.....It is the proper noun applied to the Supreme Being, Who is the sole possessor of all perfect attributes, Who is free from all defects and Who exists necessarily by Himself. It is not a common noun. All Divine atributes mentioned in the Holy Quran are qualities of the proper name Allah. No other language has a distinctive name for the Divine being. the nsames found in other languages are either attributive or descriptive and can be used in the plural form, but the word Allah is never used for any other thing, being or deity. It is never used as a qualifying word.
Now one needs lots of guts to call "Abdul Mannan" a NON SENSE.
As I have already posted in one of my older posts that, If you come out of this noun, pronoun game you can be great help to Muslim Ummah, but instead you are trying to disunite them.
Sorry in advance if any thing seems rude or not ethical.
-
Whenever you copy some thing or quote it in your favor this actually means you agree with it.
And few have the honesty to disclose when they are quoting matter earlier written by someone else. Has Aymen anywhere said or quoted from where is he getting and posting debate about ?
-
When I proved that it was the definite article since with the addition of li it becomes lillah, you simply remained silent after your argument was 100% defeated. Aymen
What a discovery?
Here is it
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/00002.%20Allah/2.gif
Where is the so called added "li" in it?
Removed hamza wasl and added a kasra to already existing laam and this has given the above prepositional phrase.
-
rahenijaat1
they didn't have bukhari's collection of hadiths. now, they did have the koran. so, they became believers by following the koran.I told you to be careful before answering, but as usual you did not took care as many do not. This means, to get involved in a debate with a person who has no solid reasons to back up what he says is meaningless.
The Quran was revealed in 22 and half years approximately. The early Muslims were not due to Quran but due to the Messenger and his Moral. Allah choose a person who was unique/elevated/having best morals to spread his Message. Off course with few Ayats of Quran which could not even be understood without the explanation of the Messenger at initial stage no one was going to change in which he/they believed for centuries.
lolwut? i understand them preety well, and every Sunni is following Al-Bukhari not the messenger! Hadiths make our beautiful religion look awfull.
And the Qu'ran IS COMPLETE, are you defying the word of God? The best-knower? The Almighty?
Which Hadith other than GOD and His revelations do they believe? 456
The Quran is not fabricated Hadith; ...It details everything. 12111
Some people uphold vain Hadith to divert others from the path of God 316
The Only Sunna to follow shall be God's Sunna ]
The Quran informs us that some enemies of the Prophet, described as"human and jinn devils," will fabricate lies and attribute them to the Prophet (6112, 2531).This is precisely what happened after the prophet Muhammad's death; Hadith (oral) and Sunna (actions) were invented and attributed to the Prophet. Hadith and Sunna are satanic innovations because they
defy the divine assertions that the Quran is complete, perfect, fully detailed, and shall be the only source of religious guidance (619, 38, 114 & 456-7),
blaspheme against the Prophet and depict him as a vicious tyrant who did not
uphold the Quran, and
create false doctrines based on superstition, ignorance, and indefensible nonsensical traditions.
The prophet Muhammad was enjoined, in very strong words, from issuing any religious teachings besides the Quran (6938-4.Some Muslims compromise "If a Hadith agrees with the Quran we will accept it, and if it contradicts the Quran, we will reject it!" Such premise proves that these people do not believe God's assertions that the Quran is"complete, perfect and fully detailed."
The moment they seek guidance from anything besides the Quran, no matter how "right"
it seems, they fall into Satan's trap ( 631). For they have rejected God's word and set up another god besides God (1857). See Appendix 33. The Quran's mathematical miracle provides mathematical evidence that the Quran shall be our only source of religious teachings. Here are just 2 examples1."We did not leave anything out of this book," is in Verse 38 (19x2)
and consists of 19 Arabic letters (63.
2. "He sent down this book fully detailed," is in Verse 114 (19x6) and
consists of 19 Arabic letters (6114).Khalifa is Allah's messenger, the evidence matches, his mission was to tell us that Hadith and Sunnah are FABRICATIONS and Islam is CORRUPTED!