To Obey the Prophet(PBUH) is obligatory to every Muslim
-
Salaam Z,
How can someone be a messenger when as you say they rejected the role of being a messenger?
I also see you mention he left his job, fact is, he never left his job beause he never accepted the job.
He was according to 37139-145 and then he fled it. So, he accepted it and then left it. Secondly, when God chooses one to be a messenger, this is not voluntary to take or leave, it becomes obligatory. Therefore leaving it is a sin.
Moroever, how do you equate rejecting the job of being a messenger with sinning-being unjust/oppressive?
Rejecting the role that God gave to them as messengers is a huge sin. The Qur'an is full of Ayat warning the prophet not to leave the message.
Then I'd like for you to show me where in the quran every sin is an act of injustice and oppression...
3133 And vie with one another to attain to your Sustainer's forgiveness and to a paradise as vast as the heavens and the earth, which has been readied for the God-conscious
3134 who spend in time of plenty and in time of hardship, and hold in check their anger, and pardon their fellow-men because God loves the doers of good;3135 and who, when they have committed a shameful deed or have sinned against themselves, remember God and pray that their sins be forgiven - for who but God could forgive sins? - and do not knowingly persist in doing whatever they may have done.
3136 These it is who shall have as their reward forgiveness from their Sustainer, and gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide and how excellent a reward for those who labour!
In this passage it tells you that the God conscious can Thalamoo anfusahum= trasngress against themselves, yet they were always believers. This tells you that all sin is a transgression and act of injustice. Transgression is not limited to rejection of God.
But more importantly, I would like for you to explain how you equate a messenger attributing something falsely to the god as being the same as someone rejecting the role of messenger, especially in light of the fact, that when Jonah did become a messenger, his message was effective, so effective his people were spared.( to my knowledge that is the only example of a whole people accepting/obeying the message).
A messenger who tampers with the message may distort part of the message but it will still be there. A messenger who leaves the message makes the message not arrive to it's intended audience. The second crime is bigger because it is total while the first one is partial.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
-
Peace hlatif,
He was according to 37139-145 and then he fled it. So, he accepted it and then left it.
You deduce all that from an introduction?
Wainna ilyasa lamina almursaleena
37123 SO ALSO was Elias among those sent (by Us).Wainna lootan lamina almursaleena
37133 SO ALSO was Lut among those sent (by Us).Wainna yoonusa lamina almursaleena
37139 SO ALSO was Jonah among those sent (by Us).When does one exactly become a messenger; isn't there something about a covenant?
Secondly, when God chooses one to be a messenger, this is not voluntary to take or leave, it becomes obligatory. Therefore leaving it is a sin.
Rejecting the role that God gave to them as messengers is a huge sin.Are you sure; how do know all this God stuff?
A messenger who tampers with the message may distort part of the message but it will still be there. A messenger who leaves the message makes the message not arrive to it's intended audience. The second crime is bigger because it is total while the first one is partial.
How do you know what is a greater sin? What else do know about how God works?
Are you sure about may distort part of the message? Which part? How much distortion?
5678 In Book well-GUARDED,
159 We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from CORRUPTION).
37 He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
The above verses are also for all the 9128-129 rejectors and believers in slight distortions.
You have a great day too.
-
Salaam Nun,
You deduce all that from an introduction?
Wainna ilyasa lamina almursaleena
37123 SO ALSO was Elias among those sent (by Us).Wainna lootan lamina almursaleena
37133 SO ALSO was Lut among those sent (by Us).Wainna yoonusa lamina almursaleena
37139 SO ALSO was Jonah among those sent (by Us).When does one exactly become a messenger; isn't there something about a covenant?
You just beat yourself. It does not matter when they become messengers. Why? because in ALL of them, the recitation deals with them after having become messengers and not before. None of them has a story before his messengership and therefore, Jonah is no exception.
Hussein
Secondly, when God chooses one to be a messenger, this is not voluntary to take or leave, it becomes obligatory. Therefore leaving it is a sin.
Rejecting the role that God gave to them as messengers is a huge sin.Nun
Are you sure; how do know all this God stuff?Contemplate on this
Picktal
7175 Recite unto them the tale of him to whom We gave Our revelations, but he sloughed them off, so Satan overtook him and he became of those who lead astray.7176 And had We willed We could have raised him by their means, but he clung to the earth and followed his own lust. Therefore his likeness is as the likeness of a dog; if thou attackest him he panteth with his tongue out, and if thou leavest him he panteth with his tongue out. Such is the likeness of the people who deny Our revelations. Narrate unto them the history (of the men of old), that haply they may take thought.
The man received the revelation and sloughed off to follow his own desires. It tells you that when a person receives revelation, they have to abide by it as in delivering the message and be honest with it.As for the last part. God protects his message through means of protection and makes sure that it arrives to the audience. Those means include messengers and other people. A messenger who does not deliver the message has a bigger failure than the one who delivers the message with changes in it, because he did not bring it to where it was intended.
Take care,
Hussein
-
Contemplate on this
Picktal
7175 Recite unto them the tale of him to whom We gave Our revelations, but he sloughed them off, so Satan overtook him and he became of those who lead astray.7176 And had We willed We could have raised him by their means, but he clung to the earth and followed his own lust. Therefore his likeness is as the likeness of a dog; if thou attackest him he panteth with his tongue out, and if thou leavest him he panteth with his tongue out. Such is the likeness of the people who deny Our revelations. Narrate unto them the history (of the men of old), that haply they may take thought.
The man received the revelation and sloughed off to follow his own desires. It tells you that when a person receives revelation, they have to abide by it as in delivering the message and be honest with it.As for the last part. God protects his message through means of protection and makes sure that it arrives to the audience. Those means include messengers and other people. A messenger who does not deliver the message has a bigger failure than the one who delivers the message with changes in it, because he did not bring it to where it was intended.
Poor translation. I would have made some ridiculous generalisation about hadeethists here, but I know better. It does not mention divine inspiration/wahi but signs/ayat. Everybody has access to ayat, as the preceding verses and the rest of the Quran shows, but few recieve wahi. Messengers and prophets are made distinct by the revelation/wahi, not by signs/ayat.
That story can be applied to anyone who rejects the signs of God and makes his desire his god. Moreover, 7178 reaffirms the point. Can it be said rasool/nabi are the most guided people on Earth? God does not misguide a person he has chosen to guide. Also in 7181, it makes it even clearer that it cannot be a messenger in error in 7175-176 but a common man. Unless of course, we say God failed to guide
-
Peace hlatif,
You just beat yourself. It does not matter when they become messengers. Why? because in ALL of them, the recitation deals with them after having become messengers and not before. None of them has a story before his messengership and therefore, Jonah is no exception.
What; da-ra-ba myself? lol
Sure it matters for Zun-nun could not be a messenger while confessing being wrong!
2187 And remember Zun-nun, when he departed in wrath He imagined that We had no power over him! But he cried through the deptHs of darkness, "There is no god but thou glory to thee I was indeed wrong!"
Also 7175-176 talks about those overtaken and never repenting; not the case here.
As for the last part. God protects his message through means of protection and makes sure that it arrives to the audience. Those means include messengers and other people.
Then you recant your last statement ?may distort part of the message??
A messenger who does not deliver the message has a bigger failure than the one who delivers the message with changes in it, because he did not bring it to where it was intended.
What changes in it? This contradicts your first statement above.
The message was successfully delivered after repenting/accepting to be a messenger?
1098 Why was there not a single township (among those We warned), which believed,- so its faith should have profited it,- except the people of JONAH? When they believed, We removed from them the penalty of ignominy in the life of the present, and permitted them to enjoy (their life) for a while.
Take your time responding without contradicting yourself in the same paragraph to justify events according to hearsay such as this?
http//ahlusunnah.org.au/articles/document.jsp?id=77
The inhabitants of the town of Nineveh were idolators who lived a shameless life. Prophet Jonah was sent to teach them the worship of Allah. The people disliked his interference in their way of worship, so they argued "We and our forefathers have worshipped these gods for many years and no harm has come to us."
Try as he might to convince them of the foolishness of idolatry and of the goodness of Allah's laws, they ignored him. He warned them that if they kept on with their foolishness, Allah's punishment would soon follow. Instead of fearing Allah, they told Jonah that they were not afraid of his threats. "Let it happen," they told him. Jonah was disheartened. "In that case I will leave you to your misery!" So saying, he left Nineveh, fearing that Allah's anger would soon follow.Where do they get the above quotes from; is this hadith or are they making stuff up?
More inline with Qur?an?
http//www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jonah%201-4;&version=31;
Take care.
-
Peace "genteel",
Hmmm, I see, JK. So then the "We" refering to God and His messenger (according to you) becomes a better explanation when they both band together from hastening to move the tongues of all others and that they both (God and messenger) will EXPLAIN them later what it is all about. But then this very God also warns the messenger from explaining anything and only to DELIVER, as per some believers though most disagree. Perhaps, in your better explanation, this God seems even weaker than I originally thought.
Peace!
JK- This is what id call "argument from ignorance". GOD has a systematic approach and of what we know this includes evolutionary processes everywhere around us. Thus certain Quranic verses can only be understood wehen a certain time comes and with the aid of an appropriate proven messenger of GOD. GOD Bless!
-
Salaam Warner,
You have a big hole in your argument. You based it on taking Zachariah's use of the lip language to make Kalam mean not necessarily voiced speech. However, you forgot that the Qur'an indicated clearly that lip movement is the exception in KLM and not the rule. Now you want to switch over and make the exception into the rule without any Aya indicating that it is an exception. Linguistically, you have no support.
As for NTQ, it can mean speech but is reserved to entities that do not usually speak.
As for Aya 4251, it indicates big exception at the beginning ILLA. It also does not negate speech as in spoken words. for example, it gives one of the ways God speaks to people is "min warai hijab= From behind a screan". This means that He can speak to people without being seen by them. This is what happened to Moses. He spoke to God but could not be seen by Him. If Moses did not speak to God directly, then there is nothing to make him any different from any other prophet/messenger. However, the Qur'an clearly gives him the distinction of speaking to God and of God speaking to him.
Yes, the Qur'an is a great literary work. Unforunately, many of you guys want to make that literary miracle less so by playing with the language according to your biases.
I do not mind Lisan Al Arab being corrupted. I have a better alternative to understand the Qur'an. As for you, the moment you make dictionaries corrupted, then your whole Qur'an alone argument fails miserably. You will end up depending on your pure bias in understanding the Qur'an. There are many examples of that here.
Take care and have a great day.
Hussein
Salaam Hussein
I am not surprised that you started seeing non existent holes when your theories and argument gets shattered when we test them with the Quran.
I never said Zakariya ?spoke? silently by moving his lips to inspire the message to his people. You said this. For me moving the lips without any speech to communicate a message is a sign language and not spoken language. Silently moving lips to communicate without speech is your explanation of ramza_ in 341 which is part of Kalam. You insisted in 341 it had to be ?spoken words without sound?. I quote you below.
Warner, La tukallima annasa illa ramza does not have to mean sign language only. It can also mean speaking with your lips but not making sounds. It is still spoken words but without sound and the spoken words are then seen but not heard. This same phrase means that spoken words are supposed to be heard unless indicated as in this Aya
SPOKEN WORDS WITHOUT SOUND. Does that make any sense to you? Zakariya could have inspired to his people using any kind of sign language including hands and finger signs like the modern sign language used by the deaf. But you will not agree with that since ramza to be part of kalam you insist lips have to move without sound otherwise your kalam = spoken words argument will fail. Are sure the only thing a man needs to speak are his lips.
How God spoke and all the other specifics is not provided in the Qur'an and therefore one should not speculate. What one should accept is what the Qur'an said GOD KALLAMA MOSES= He spoke words to Moses and Qur'an is Kalam Allah= The spoken word of Allah.
I am not speculating how God ?spoke? it is you and your great imams. I am only saying God communicated or conversed with Moses. That is what the Quran tells us as well. Moses heard a voice but that does not mean God spoke like a human. It is you adamantly and falsely claim God ?spoke words? to Moses. Why add this WORDS (SPOKE WORDS)? To make it look important or different? ?SPOKE WORDS?? What nonsense.
When speech comes from humans as Zachariah, it always comes from their lips. So, the lip movement can be considered an acceptable exception to voiced speech for humans when and only when indicated by the context as happened clearly with Zachariah.
341 says sign language and not lip movements that makes sign language part of kalam which effectively negates your argument that kalam can only be spoken words. You still have not answered whether ramza is ?silent lip movements? or all kinds of sign language including hand movements and gestures. Can you kindly consult the Lisan .
All your arguments on spoken words of Allah clearly crashes since Kalam incorporates sign language and for that matter any mode of communication including email, fax and electronic wireless data transfer. In 341 God allows sign language for Zakariya as an exception since sign language is part of Kalam.
KLM as a concept means voiced words by speaker and comprehended by the listener. When speech comes from humans as Zachariah, it always comes from their lips. So, the lip movement can be considered an acceptable exception to voiced speech for humans when and only when indicated by the context as happened clearly with Zachariah.
I bet you have never seen a ventriloquist.
As for NTQ, it can mean speech but is reserved to entities that do not usually speak.
You have made the Messenger among ?the entities that do not usually speak?. This is what the Quran says.
533 Nor does he speak of (his own) desire.
Wa ma_ yantiqu anil hawa_In fact according to you all of us belong to ?the entities that do not usually speak?. But the Quran says otherwise.
5123
Pickthall And by the Lord of the heavens and the earth, it is the truth, even as (it is true) that ye speak.
Transliteration Fawarab bis sama_ I wal ardi in nahu_ lahaq qum mitsla ma_ an nakum tantiqu_n
How and why and where that voiced word comes from depends on the nature of the entity. So, when speech is generated electronically by a computer (for weather emergencies and so on), it is KLM but not coming from a mouth and lung. When God KLM then we know that he voiced words that were comprehended by His listeners, (Moses and so on).
We do not know how God speaks. So please accept it without giving him lips and mouth and ?spoken words?. The Quran says we conversed/communicated/kalam with Moses and not ?sent spoken words to Moses?. Moses had a conversation with God and this kind of communication is explained in 4251 as from behind a hijab and Moses heard the voice as well. You can see in these encounters either God asks Moses questions and Moses replies or Moses asks questions and God replies. But the Quran does not say or imply that Allah sent His spoken words to Moses. I can not recall God having this kind of direct conversation from behind a veil with other than Moses out of the humans on earth. But the Quran does not say Moses is different.
Yes, the Qur'an is a great literary work. Unforunately, many of you guys want to make that literary miracle less so by playing with the language according to your biases.
I do not mind Lisan Al Arab being corrupted. I have a better alternative to understand the Qur'an. As for you, the moment you make dictionaries corrupted, then your whole Qur'an alone argument fails miserably. You will end up depending on your pure bias in understanding the Qur'an. There are many examples of that here.
When I commented on the amazing word use in the Quran I meant the accuracy and the logic in the use of words without contradictions although I do not doubt that it is a great literary work.
In the Quran a word is used in different verses to bring out its exact meaning or its various meanings clearly. Majority of the time the logical perfection of use of words will fail if the wrong meaning is applied to bring out a forced meaning. I never play with the words for my bias whenever a meaning of a word is not clear to me I check with every use of that word in the Quran in all other verses. Some words such as ?samad? are used once but some words are used hundreds of times. If a meaning in the dictionary does not agree with the meaning the Quran is projecting of a word from its numerous uses in the verses then I will question the meaning given in the dictionary. But a lexicon such as Lanes gives many meanings to a word. These meanings may include the correct meaning plus the corrupted.
The other one is 96 because Kalam which is the word in the Aya, can only be a spoken word according to Lisan Al Arab volume 13 page 39.
When speech comes from humans as Zachariah, it always comes from their lips. So, the lip movement can be considered an acceptable exception to voiced speech for humans when and only when indicated by the context as happened clearly with Zachariah.
So, when speech is generated electronically by a computer (for weather emergencies and so on), it is KLM but not coming from a mouth and lung.
You contradict and make up as you go along. You say it is ONLY spoken words then silent lip movements are also allowed and then any communication can be called depending on the entity.
I do not mind Lisan Al Arab being corrupted
As for you, the moment you make dictionaries corrupted?.
You say the Lisan is corrupted and then you are saying that I/we make dictionaries corrupted. Dictionaries like Hadeeths, tafsirs is not the ultimate truth but I have not seen anyone here saying that all Arabic dictionaries are totally corrupted.
Also you sound highly uncharacteristic above. When you failed with your argument to prove the eternal Quran and God sending His spoken words you have started attacking me/us for making a Quran a less literary miracle (which I never did) and attacking the Lisan and the dictionaries and attacking of following the Quran.
Kindly tell me what is your better alternative to understand the Quran ?
-
Salam and Peace on Isa and everyone!
Allah sent His Messenger(SAW) with "The Message".
And Allah ordered us to obey the Messenger.
---"O you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger." (Al-Nisaa-59)---
---"He who obeys the Messenger, has indeed obeyed Allah." (Al-Nisa-80)---What is "Obedience to Allah"?-----What is "Obedience to the Messenger"?
Are these two different things?---Or---Are they one thing?The Question is
Can anyone obey the Messenger without following "The Message"?Today, the Ummah answers
Yes, it is possible to obey the Messenger without following "The Message".---How???They say "Obedience to the Messenger" is the ahadith (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Al-Muslim, etc.).
So, if you follow the ahadith, you obey the Messenger.
(Ironically) And if you have obeyed the Messenger by following the ahadith, you have obeyed Allah.---"He who obeys the Messenger, has indeed obeyed Allah." (Al-Nisa-80)---
(Ironically) So, today the Ummah is obeying the Messenger by following the ahadith, which is equal to obeying Allah.
(In real) The Ummah have finally got rid of "The Message" that the Messenger brought.---So sad!