Praise Be to Muhammad rasool Allah
-
justamuslim
Rajah, what does praising Muhammad mean to you? and how do you suppose we obey and praise Muhammad?
rajaah,
ok, the prophet is not dead and is in this Barzakh till the final day. So, how do you suppose we obey the prophet now that his soul is in Barzakh?We praise him day and night who ever recites Quran with understanding praises him day and night, Quran is full of that, here are few verses, it is not me, you Layth or Asana it is Allah acknowledging his moral character, raising his status, calling him best example for others.
Al-Quran
And indeed, you are of a great moral character.There has certainly come to you a Messenger from among yourselves. Grievous to him is what you suffer; concerned over you and to the believers is kind and merciful.
?Soon your Lord will raise you to Mukam e Mehmood?
One who obeys the Messenger has certainly obeyed God. You have not been sent to watch over those who turn away from you.
The Messenger of God is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in God and in the Day of Judgment and who remember God very often.
Al-Quran (translation From Haqeeqat.org of Mazhar sahib)
And when Allah obtained a pledge/oath of the Chosen/Elevated/Selected Persons,
"For reason what I have given you from the Book and Wisdom/knowledge of invisible/secreted/in-folded things,
thereafter lapse of time there comes the Messenger as the one who certifies/sanctifies/affirms what is with you people,
it will be binding for you to believe and help him".
Allah asked them, "Do you consent/pledge/agree to stay by it and you undertake upon yourselves My this assignment".
They responded, "We solemnly undertake".
Allah said, "for this you people record/testify/witness and I am with you from amongst witnesses ".How we obey him? through his message, through his life, through his moral and exemplary character!
Allah Ho Akbar!
-
Soon your Lord will raise you to Mukam e Mehmood?
Permit me a little correction. The above gives an impression as if he will be hereafter elevated. On the contrary the verb means to revive to his orginal place
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/017.%20Al%20Israa/17.79a.gif
May be it is near that your Sustainer Lord may revive/return you to the original Place/Abode of Glory and Praise.http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/028.%20Al%20Qasas/28.85.gif
Certainly the One Who has time-bound assigned you the Qur'aan, shall surely return you, the Messenger honorably to the original AbodeIn Urdu you may like to read about it here
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/book%20tafseer/055/TAFSEER%20001/slides/38.html
-
justamuslim
We praise him day and night who ever recites Quran with understanding praises him day and night, Quran is full of that, here are few verses, it is not me, you Layth or Asana it is Allah acknowledging his moral character, raising his status, calling him best example for others.Al-Quran
And indeed, you are of a great moral character.There has certainly come to you a Messenger from among yourselves. Grievous to him is what you suffer; concerned over you and to the believers is kind and merciful.
?Soon your Lord will raise you to Mukam e Mehmood?
One who obeys the Messenger has certainly obeyed God. You have not been sent to watch over those who turn away from you.
The Messenger of God is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in God and in the Day of Judgment and who remember God very often.
Al-Quran (translation From Haqeeqat.org of Mazhar sahib)
And when Allah obtained a pledge/oath of the Chosen/Elevated/Selected Persons,
"For reason what I have given you from the Book and Wisdom/knowledge of invisible/secreted/in-folded things,
thereafter lapse of time there comes the Messenger as the one who certifies/sanctifies/affirms what is with you people,
it will be binding for you to believe and help him".
Allah asked them, "Do you consent/pledge/agree to stay by it and you undertake upon yourselves My this assignment".
They responded, "We solemnly undertake".
Allah said, "for this you people record/testify/witness and I am with you from amongst witnesses ".How we obey him? through his message, through his life, through his moral and exemplary character!
Allah Ho Akbar!
Brother
Assalamu Alaikum. Nice reply.
bravo bravo bravo
-
rajaah, do you obey the messenger? do you follow the messenger?
you claim you do but are you really? sure doesn't seem like it to me from reading your posts.
-
@ Raaajah
Salaam;
Remember it was clearer at the time (amongst the people) for the Qur?an to say ?Obey Allah and His Messenger? than to simply say ?Obey Allah? or ?Obey what Muhammad follows?.
- If we are not supposed to follow the practice of Muhammad (sm) in obeying Allah's command, then please allow me to disagree that ?Obey Allah and His Messenger? is clearer than ?Obey Allah? or "obey the message".
Any command to "Obey messenger", "follow messenger", or association of this command with the guidance and love for/of Allah in any form makes the main idea vague.
"Follow messenger", in simple thinking, refers to "Follow" whatever the messenger does, whichever ways the messenger chooses, etc. If any meaning of these is not applicable, you have to prove that from Quran Only.
If we are really not supposed to follow the practice of Muhammad (sm) in obeying Allah's command, then Allah must have revealed some ayats that clearly indicates where this "simple thinking" will not be applicable.
Does Quran have any ayat that directly states that do not follow the messenger in this & this cases...???
The first is confusing without needing to explain why, and the second is silly because Muhammad (SAW) was divulging the Qur?an and thus he might be following himself! It would be redundant to say ?Obey what the Messenger follows? because the Message was being delivered by a person, and therefore we have to obey that person anyway (again he might be following himself). The Qur?an might have said ?Obey the Message? but then luckily Muhammad (SAW) is instructed to do only that in 543-50 and many other places (e.g. 7203, 1015). It is after all necessary to know exactly where that Message is coming from (saying ?Messenger? instead of ?Message? clarifies this). Ayat such as 758 explain that the Qur?an repeats ayat to help us understand it.
I simply failed to understand why the first will be confusing. If someone acknowledges the Quran as a message from Allah, then "Obey Allah" is a very clear message! Why is it confusing?
I could no how agree with your argument regarding "Obey what the messenger follows", or "Obey the message". Look, before you accept the command "Obey Messenger", you have to decide whether you acknowledge the message as one really sent by Allah. If you acknowledge that to be from Allah, then you will just obey it. Why even bother for thinking about the messenger??? Let alone "obey him". If you do not acknowledge the message to be from Allah, you are simply ignoring the command.
In both cases, the command is simply meaningless.
Again, you may say that before you acknowledge the message, you may be acknowledging the messenger...
However, if that is the case, then as soon as you acknowledging him to be the messenger, you are actually acknowledging the message. And as soon as you acknowledge the message why do you need to obey this messenger anymore? You said that
///It would be redundant to say ?Obey what the Messenger follows? because the Message was being delivered by a person, and therefore we have to obey that person anyway (again he might be following himself).///
Please notice that whether you automatically obeying the messenger or not is not main point here. If you are automatically obeying the messenger, then, again, why the command? If Our main point was to obey Allah by obeying the message, then this "Obey messenger" command has make this main point very cloudy, I must say.
?O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end.?
59
If Allah (SWT) is represented by the Qur?an and the Messenger by his interpretation of the Qur?an (ahadith), is Islam a religion authored by at least three different sources? However, after consulting those in authority we are instructed to refer disagreements to Allah and His Messenger. Thus, ?Obey Allah and obey the Messenger? must necessarily reference one source. For further information on ayat 59-65, see the notes for 2124. See also 4238 for an ayah involving community consultation. Also remember it was necessary for Allah (SWT) to specify ?obey the Messenger? so that people would know how to obey Allah (SWT) (see 480 and notes). There were at the time more ayat to come, and thus people were instructed (to be ready) to obey them (confirmed by 161). See also the notes for 331-32.
Brother, I don't have any problem with the "One Source". This is something you will notice no disagreement with, among any muslims. No other source other than ALLAH is acceptable to us.
However, I have noticed one assumption of yours that seemed to me very wrong. Please allow me to talk about that.
Probably you think that Allah has revealed only QURAN, and nothing else, to Muhammad (sm). Am I right?Please read this comment http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601994.msg271665#msg271665
(Regarding this topic, Start reading from point 2-b)
In this comment I have proved from Quran itself has proof that Quran is not the only WAHY that was sent down to Muhammad (sm). A part was in the Quran. While obeying Allah's command, Muhammad (sm) was allowed to do nothing without the guidance of our One and ONLY source ALLAH.So, when Quran commands us to follow the messenger, it actually indicates both Quran, and the part of the WAHY not included in the Quran but embedded in the practice of Muhammd (sm).
My conclusive equation was like this (now somewhat moderated)
Following Muhammad (sm)
= Following WAHY
= Following (QURAN+the Part of the WAHY not included in the QURAN but embedded in the practice of Muhammd (sm))
= Following QURAN+ Following Part of the WAHY not included in the Quran but embedded in the practice of Muhammd (sm)If Allah says that you must obey the messenger to get Allah's love (in return of your love for Allah) and Guidance, HE actually says that you must follow Muhammad (sm) in full, comprising of What he gave to us as a book, and what he did and said (as guided by Allah, see 7203), not included in the QURAN but embedded in his practice.
Now, brother, you will get an explanation for the following Ayat
1644(We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought. -
antibhondo
Prophet Mohammad was commanded to follow what was revealed to him?..What was revealed to him was only Quran619.
331-O you prophet, you shall reverence GOD and do not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites. GOD is Omniscient, Most Wise.
332-Follow what is revealed to you from your Lord. GOD is fully Cognizant of everything you all do.
,So, when Quran commands us to follow the messenger, it actually indicates both Quran, and the part of the WAHY not included in the Quran but embedded in the practice of Muhammd (sm).
Your statement in above is the statement of idol worshiper according to the below verse where Prophet takes God as witness that only Quran was revealed to him full stop.
619-Say, "Whose testimony is the greatest?" Say, "GOD's. He is the witness between me and you that this Quran has been inspired to me, to preach it to you and whomever it reaches. Indeed, you bear witness that there are other gods* beside GOD." Say, "I do not testify as you do; there is only one god, and I disown your idolatry."
,If Allah says that you must obey the messenger to get Allah's love (in return of your love for Allah) and Guidance, HE actually says that you must follow Muhammad (sm) in full, comprising of What he gave to us as a book, and what he did and said (as guided by Allah, see 7203), not included in the QURAN but embedded in his practice.
What does 7203 say that is not included in the Quran?!
God makes clear distinction between Mohammad and the messenger whose job was just delivering the message. No where in the Quran says ?obey prophet/Mohammad?.
God repeatedly emphasize that his sole duty was to deliver what was revealed to him and Almighty has made it clear to us what He revealed it to him was ONLY QURAN Alone.
What you say is contradiction and accusation to God which is pure blasphemy.
,1644(We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought.
You like other traditional Muslims keep interpreting ?litubayyina? as explanation things out of Quran which never authorized by God??.How on earth Prophet could say things that could not be found in the Quran when God threaten him in below verses;
Had he uttered any other teachings.
We would have punished him.
We would have stopped the revelations to him.
None of you could have helped him.Your focus instead on God is on Prophet that's the root of all your misinterprations.
Asana
PS;Sorry MesMorial for answering some lines from the post addressed to you.
-
Salam Rajaaah
Sorry for answering you late.,Your logic is that in these verses Allah is sending Salaam on prophets and we should not; that is what I understood from your posts. Correct me if I am wrong,
Yes, that?s what I meant.
,Who are "they"? off course not Allah, Allah sends blessings and Salaam on prophets AND so do the Angels following Allah and so do we dear Asana. I can't just understand a bit of your logic for not allowing to say us Salaam to prophets.
Well maybe you should first answer me about this verse where the word of ?we? is there by telling me if we?re allowed to pray to Angels too then Insha-Allah you get the answer;
We responded to him and granted him John; we fixed his wife for him. That is because they used to hasten to work righteousness, and implored us in situations of joy, as well as fear. To us, they were reverent.
,Peace upon Ilyaas We perpetuated his praise in the later generations, this is how we repay for the good deeds.from Surah 37
What?s your point there? Salam is from God which means contentment/peacefulness etc in paradise and where about is written 'perpetuated his praise'?God is reading there history of those messengers by reminding us .
,read 1915
and then read Al-Muminoon 99-101, after that we may discuss are the prophets and martyrs alive or not? and is it us who cannot perceive or something else.I don?t get your point. I've already told you about God?s Salam on Messengers and 1915 is one of them again.
And 2399-100 are talking about the souls of disbelievers where will be kept till the Day of Judgment??What these verses got to do with my question regarding 1933 ?
Let's see your explanation.,You may scroll back a page to see my reply to this absurd claim. An ordinary person cannot deliver the message of Allah, he has to be extra ordinary.
Whatever prophet was irrelevant to what we make out of him as God clearly is asking us not to make distinction among His Messengers?.And whatever Prophet was irrelevant to what we make idol out of him by praising him when God never asked us praising him.
Religion is all about God minus any prophets/messengers or saints plus companions and disciples.Asana
-
Mazhar
Permit me a little correction. The above gives an impression as if he will be hereafter elevated. On the contrary the verb means to revive to his orginal place
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/017.%20Al%20Israa/17.79a.gif
May be it is near that your Sustainer Lord may revive/return you to the original Place/Abode of Glory and Praise.dear Asana only if you could read and understand the above verse and for a moment come out of the hypnotism of Rashad Khalifa, it will disclose a new world to you.
-
Salam and Peace!
First we would like to consider what is the meaning of word "Muhammad" it is
"the praised one" in Arabic.
Please read and comment!
Even the proper noun ?muhammad? is not in the Quran
By Saim BakarEven the proper noun ?muhammad? is not in the Quran
Yes it is true. The proper noun ?muhammad? is not found written in the Quran. This means the Quran does not recognise ?muhammad? as the name of the Prophet of Islam. This is a very big claim but as usual it is easy to prove this point from the Quran.
First here is a simple lesson in arabic. In arabic all proper nouns are prefixed with ?al?. So in arabic it should be al-muhammad. But there is no ?al muhammad? in the Quran. In arabic a proper noun is called an isme ma?rifah. When it is NOT a proper noun, without any prefix ?al? then it becomes a simple noun. In arabic a simple noun is known as a nakirah.
But here is the catch there is no mention of a simple noun ?muhammad? in the Quran either. What is found written in the Quran are the adjectives ?muhammadoon?, ?muhammadeen? and ?ahmadoo?. These are all adjectives in the arabic language and are definitely not proper nouns (isme ma?rifah) nor simple nouns (nakirah).
?Muhammadoon? and ?muhammaddeen? are adjectives meaning a ?praiseworthy person?. Similarly ?ahmadoo? is an adjective meaning someone ?who shall be praised?. We will relook all these five verses shortly to see how these adjectives fit perfectly into the context and meaning of these five verses.
How did I stumble upon this? The four verses in the Quran where the scholars misinterpret and mistranslate the adjectives ?muhammadoon? and ?muhammadeen? to become the proper noun ?muhammad? are 3144, 33;40, 4829 and 472. The scholars are being dishonest.
The fifth verse which the scholars misinterpret and mistranslate is 616 where the adjective ?ahmadoo? is twisted around to become the noun ?ahmad?. Then they twist the meaning once more by saying that this imaginary noun ?ahmad? also refers to ?muhammad?. So first they magically invent the nouns ?ahmad? and ?muhammad? from thin air and then say that these created nouns are interchangeable. This is just more dishonesty. The verse 616 only mentions the adjective ?ahmadoo.?
After undertaking such linguistic gymnastics the scholars say that the Quran has five references to the Prophet?s name. There is no such thing. There are only five different mentions of the adjectives ?muhammadoon?, ?muhammadeen? and ?ahmadoo?.
When I studied the Quran, minus any preconceived notions or prejudices, I realised there was something not right with the traditional understanding of the following verse in the Quran.
3340 Ma kana muhammadoon abaa?a ahadin min rijaali-kum wa laakin rasoolul laahi wa khaatama al nabiy-yeena wa kaanallaahu bi kulli shay-in aaleeman
Here is the traditional translation by A Yusuf Ali
3340 Muhammad is not the father of any of your men (sons), but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
The first question that popped into my head was why would God NOT make the Prophet the father of any sons? Why deny the Prophet the joy of being the father of sons?
Then the scholars say that the Prophet did have one son ? Ibrahim ? who died as an infant. Even if this story was true, it simply means that this verse in the Quran has been disproven ? it becomes a historically false statement because at a point in time in history, the Prophet did have a son.
If the scholars retort that the verse was revealed after the baby Ibrahim had died, it raises even more doubt. Surely God knew he would be revealing this verse at some point in history. So was God condemning the baby Ibrahim to an early death just so that this verse would stand? Asides from trying to potray God as very cruel, it is also illogical.
Then I realised that there was no proper noun ?muhammad? in this verse at all. ?Muhammadoon? is an adjective which means ?praiseworthy?. Only then the true meaning of the verse fell into place
3340 It is not praiseworthy to be the father of sons from among you, but it is so to be the Messenger of God, and to be the last of the Prophets and God has full knowledge of all things.
Obviously this verse addresses a culture which prefers sons over daughters. Not only Arab but Chinese, Indian and other cultures have a distinct preference for sons over daughters. This verse seeks to correct this misconception. It is not praiseworthy to have sons over daughters. The meaning of this verse then fully tallied with other verses in the Quran which chastises the wicked custom of burying female infants alive. Here are the verses
818 And when the female (infant) buried alive shall be questioned.
81 9 For what sin she was killed?So it is not praiseworthy to prefer sons over daughters.
Once I realised this simple truth, the three other verses that mention ?muhammadoon? and ?muhammadeen? fell into place too.
3144 Wa maa muhammadoon illa rasoolun qad khaa-lat min qablihi al rasoolu afaa-in maata au qutila in qalabtum ala iqaa bikum waman yan qalib ala aqi bayhi fa lan yadurra Allaaha shay-an wa sayaj-zee Allahu al shakireena.
Here is the traditional translation by A Yusuf Ali
3144 Muhammad is no more than a messenger Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; but god (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.
Here is the more accurate translation
3144 There is no (bigger) praiseworthiness than to be a messenger Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; and God will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.
And here is 4829
4829 Muhammadun rasoolullaahi wallatheena ma?ahu ashaddoo ala alkuffari ruhmaai baynahum tarahum rukka?an sujjadan yabtaghoona fadlan minallaahi wa ridwaanan seemahum fee wujoohihim min athaari as sujoodi thaalika mathaaluhum fee al tawraati wamathaaluhum fee al-injeeli kazara akhraja shataa-hu faazarahu faistaghlatha faistawa ala sooqihi yu aajibi al zura?a li yagheetha bihim al kuffaara wa?adallaahu allatheena aamanoo wa?amiloos saalihaati minhum maghfiratan wa ajran atheeman
Again here is Yusuf Ali?s translation
4829 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward
Rephrasing just the beginning of this verse, it sounds like this
4829 It is praiseworthy indeed to be the messenger of God...
This tallies exactly with verse 3144 above. Here is the last one which mentions ?muhammadeen?
472 Wal-lathee na amanoo wa?aamiloos saalihaati wa amanoo bimaa nuzzila ala muhammadeen wahuwa al haqqu min rabbihim kaffara anhum sayyi-aa tihim waslaha balaahum
Yusuf Ali translates it as
472 But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition.
The more acccurate translation is And those who believe and work righteousness and believe in what was sent down upon praiseworthiness ? and it is the truth from their Lord ? He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition.
Finally lets look at the adjective ?ahmadu? which is mentioned in 616 and which meaning has been twisted to become a noun ?ahmad?.
616 Wa-ith qaala eesa ibnu maryama ya banee isra-eela innee rasoolul laahi ilaykum musaddiqan lima bayna yadayya min al tawraati wamubashiran bi rasoolin ya?tee min ba?dee ismuhu ahmadu falamma jaa ahum bil bayyinaati qaloo haatha sihrun mubeenun
Here is A Yusuf Ali?s translation
616 And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!
Here first I would like to show you two other translations of this verse by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall and Rashad Khalifa.
Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall And when Jesus son of Mary said O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One. Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say This is mere magic.
Rashad Khalifa Recall that Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O Children of Israel, I am GOD's messenger to you, confirming the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be even more praised." Then, when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, "This is profound magic."
Please note that both Pickthall and Khalifa do not use any noun form ?ahmad? ? because they both acknowledge that it is not a noun. They stick to the adjective ?ahmadu?.
Then in 2009 Professor Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a native German born Muslim and a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Munster in Germany made a statement that was quite startling to many people. Professor Kalisch said that there was no evidence to support the existence of a historical ?Prophet Muhammad?. I did smile when I first read this. Here is an English translation of an extract from Professor Kalisch?s paper.
Up to some time ago I was convinced that Muhammad was a historical figure. Although I always based my thinking on the assumption that the Islamic historical narrative regarding Muhammad was very unreliable, I had no doubts that at least the basic lines of his biography were historically correct.
I have now moved away from this position and will soon publish a book in which I will, among other things, comment on this question and explain my arguments in more detail. This essay is only a short summary of my most important arguments. It also deals with the question of what implications historical-critical research has for the Islamic theory and how I deal with my research results as a theologian.
With regard to the historical existence of Muhammad ... I consider my position simply as a continuation of the most recent research results. It appears so spectacular only because it has been said by a Muslim ... Most Western scientists turn down such an hypotheses out of respect for Islam or because they are afraid of the reactions of their Muslim friends or because they think it is speculative nonsense.
The word "respect" sounds wonderful but it is completely inappropriate here because one really refers to the opposite. Whoever thinks that Muslims can't deal with facts puts Muslims on the same level as small children who can't think and decide for themselves and whose illusions of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny one doesn't want to destroy.
Whoever really bases his thoughts on the equality of all human beings must expect the same intellectual performance. Really treating Muslims with respect would imply that they are strong enough to deal with their religion on the basis of our modern level of knowledge. "Islamophobes" think we Muslims are barbarians, the "kind-hearted" take us for "noble savages"... The result is the same Muslims are seen as different from the rest of the world -- they either belong in a "petting zoo" or in cages for wild animals, but by all means they belong in a zoo.
The final argument is even more awful because it can only be described as cowardly. Religious fundamentalists are spreading out (not only Islamic fundamentalist) and freedom of thought must be defended no matter what. There must not be any compromise on this otherwise we set the track for a retreat into the Middle Ages and this can happen much faster than many people think.
My position with regard to the historical existence of Muhammad is that I believe neither his existence nor his non-existence can be proven. I, however, lean towards the non-existence but I don't think it can be proven. It is my impression that, unless there are some sensational archeological discoveries -- an Islamic "Qumran" or "Nag Hammadi" -- the question of Muhammad's existence will probably never be finally clarified.
Some people have said that by denying the name ?Muhammad? I am denying the very existence itself of a Prophet of Islam. I beg to differ. There was a Messenger or Rasool sent to us who was also a Prophet or Nabi. He was no doubt an Arab because he delivered to us the Quran which is in Arabic. We therefore cannot deny that God did send a Messenger. But his name was not Muhammad ? at least not in the Quran.
Is the identity of the Messenger important? Lets listen to the Quran (4163-166)
4163 We have inspired you, as we inspired Noah and the prophets after him. And we inspired Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, the Patriarchs, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon. And we gave David the Psalms.
4164 Messengers we have told you about, and messengers we never told you about. And GOD spoke to Moses directly.
4165 Messengers to deliver good news, as well as warnings. Thus, the people will have no excuse when they face GOD, after all these messengers have come to them. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.
4166 But GOD bears witness concerning what He has revealed to you; He has revealed it with His knowledge. And the angels bear witness as well, but GOD suffices as witness
God lists many Messengers or Rasools who were despatched to mankind. Noah, Abraham, Ismail, Jacob, Jesus were just some of them. But in 4164 above, God says that there were also other messengers ?we have told you about, and messengers we never told you about.?
So the exact history and identities of all the Messengers is not important. What is really important is the content of the message which the Messengers brought. This is made clear in 4165 and 4166 above. ?Thus, the people will have no excuse when they face GOD, after all these messengers have come to them. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise?.
Whether we know the Messenger?s identity or not, the message has been delivered. We, the people have no more excuse. And all the Messengers from Abraham, Moses right down to the last Messenger have delieverd the same message. Here is the Quran
8718 Surely this was also recorded in the earlier books.
8719 The books of Abraham and Moses.
So the teachings of the Quran are exactly the same as what was revealed to Abraham and Moses. This is simple logic ? the same God cannot be teaching different things to different people. The Message is certainly more important than the messenger.
===========================================================
Posted by Saim Bakar at Tuesday, November 10, 2009
http//biblical-islam.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-proper-noun-muhammad-is-not-in.html
-
3144 Muhammad is no more than a messenger Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; but god (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.
Here is the more accurate translation
3144 There is no (bigger) praiseworthiness than to be a messenger Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; and God will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.
Yes, sure.. if "praisworthy" died or were slain... Many messengers passed away before "praiseworthy"...
-
to, truth behind it
Please read and comment!
Even the proper noun ?muhammad? is not in the Quran
By Saim BakarIt would have been better if you had read it in detail before asking my comment on it; it however took me so long to comment as I did not visited the site.
in the same post the author quotes an Ayat
4163 We have inspired you, as we inspired Noah and the prophets after him. And we inspired Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, the Patriarchs, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon. And we gave David the Psalms.
Are these proper nouns or what? What noun is Musa? I would like to know please before go on to your main question...and who is "YOU" in this ayat? who has been inspired.
Is the identity of the Messenger important?