9:24 anyone else ever hear of this claim
-
Just a quick question about 924.
Say "If your fathers and your sons and your brothers and your spouses and your clan, and the worldly goods which you have acquired, and the commerce whereof you fear a decline, and the dwellings in which you take pleasure - are dearer to you than God and His Apostle and the struggle in His cause, then wait until God makes manifest His will; and God does not grace iniquitous folk with His guidance."
I was sent an email from a sister stating that it is in this Ayah, that Allah allows us to have the same love for Him as the Prophet. If Allah wanted to distinguish the love between them, he would have at that time. That our life, family and possessions are for Muhammad as well as Allah. Of course, I totally disagree and feel it is taken out of context. I read the Ayah above and below and I did not come to that conclusion. Just wondering if any of you had heard this statement before. I can't read arabic, but I don't see Muhammad's name in that ayah.
I sent her quotes of how all prophets are equal and there for if I say I can love Muhammad the same as Allah, then I can also love all the other Prophets as much as Allah. She said no. All prophets are equal and you can not SPEAK that one is better than the other, it is just common knowledge that Muhammad was the most important, hence why he is so respected. Hogwash! They speak it all the time. It is not that I don't love the Prophet, it is I feel so angry and sick at his raised level equal to Allah. It is not him, but what the people have done with him. I used to feel bad about how angry I got, until I realized it was what they were doing and not the person himself.
Thanks in advance for your opinions and comments!
You raised a good point when you said all prophets are equal. She said no they are not equal and Muhammad wa sthe most important but did not back up what she said from Quran. That is somethimng you need to note for the future. Its not what convinces them that matters its whats consistent with the Quran that matters. As you debate more you will be taking new looks at the Quranic verses and you will be making continous analysis and considering topics discussed in the Quran. This will benefit you a great deal. The more you debate the more you understand the Quran. There is no other way.
If I were you I would not feel sick about this obsession with Muhammad. Its the same in Christianity with Jesus and also with the Jews but their obsession is about the Jewish "chosen" people. Its what arguments we are bringing about from the Quran that is important. Its good u talked about the equality of the prophets. Muslims are usually taken back from that because while they claim to believe in that the reality as we know is very different.
I find this argument very effective. Its in my mind a more effective argument than simply trying to convey why excessive idolozing the prophets is wrong. Here the issue shifts to all the prophet are the same. This is a richer argument and makes people think more.
Rather than complain about Muhammad's name mentioned in the shahada or the call for prayers, a better argument is why only him and not the other prophets. Maybe every call for prayer should mentioned the other prophets. The shias even mention Ali's name. But no other prophet. This makes them defensive and makes them think and they have very little oxygen from the Quran to counter.
-
Salam Indelwyn
i read one good statement from a member the messenger is also the same as the message that it brings.
So we can read
Say "If your fathers and your sons and your brothers and your spouses and your clan, and the worldly goods which you have acquired, and the commerce whereof you fear a decline, and the dwellings in which you take pleasure - are dearer to you than God and His Apostle and the struggle in His cause, then wait until God makes manifest His will; and God does not grace iniquitous folk with His guidance." than God and His Message, i.e. Quran" This argument primarily because the Messenger is dead, that what we still hold in our hands is the Qur'an (and not Ahadith)peace
Bigmo i also like to read your posts! thank you
-
Is opposite of this not an obsession and sickness with many?
1 When is the last time you heard a sufi sheikh praising Lot or Noah or Saleh? Why is that?
2 Why is the Islamic calendar based on the supposed Muhamedan migration and not Moses and the exodus or Joseph leaving prison or Noah climbing the ship?
3 Why are David and Solomon's name not mentioned in the azan? What happenes if we do mention their names instead of Muhammed? Is there a problem with that?
4 What about the shahada? Can we make the shahada based on believing God and Jesus as the messiah? If not why not?
5 What about the 5 pillars of Islam like Haj and Ramadan? Did the other prophets perform them? Why did they have a different shariah law than what Muslims now have? If Shariah law can change like that can it change now? If not why not? Was there Shariah law not perfect?
6 If Abraham was the father of the prophets why should he not be the greatest of the prophets? Or Adam since he was the father of all mankind? Why Muhammad exactly?
7 Why does the Quran spend so much ink telling us about the lives and stories of the other prophets if they are not relevant to us anymore? Why not spend that ink telling us about Muhamed's Sunnah and his companions and household? Why is there very little information about them? Why are the companions not mentioned in the Quran except for Zayd? Even then there is no information about Zayd anyways? Why does the Quran only focus on the prophets?
8 If these prophets are still relevant to us than in what ways are they relevant? What exactly is their role in Shariah law? Why this discrepancy between the role the prophets play in the Quran and the role they now play in Shariah law.
9 Why do Shias commemorate the death of Hussein and not the death of the prophets killed by the Israelites? Why don't they commemorate the battle between David and Goliath? Why Karbala exactly?
These are just some of the issues that can come up when we look at the other prophets of the Quran. These are a lot of things to think about. That is why I find this a very effective argument.
Muslims have a hard time with us because they assume we are either ignoring Muhammad or downplaying him. Maybe they are the ones who are ignoring the other prophets. The best defense is a good offense. So they say.
-
The Prophet to whom the Qur'an was revealed God called Khatam an-nabiyin, although someone might say it is not the prophet of the Qur'an but "One who is praised", then still with more reason, Muhammad is used because it is the seal, and when you mention the seal, you mention everything and has the seal, and not only the prophets who are named in the Qur'an, in the seal are included ALL the prophets, even those who are not mentionned int he Qur'an who are the majority.
I find it more congruent to mention the seal of Prophets as a symbol of all prophets and profecy than mention any one of those who are mentionned in the Qur'an. ALL the prophets are ALL the prophets and not just those mentionned in the Qur'an.
There may be an obsession with Muhammad, but I think there is also, may as a compensation, an obssession with not seeing the that soemthings are logical and reasonable.
It depends what one has in mind when mentionning. True, one might mentionned any of those in the Qur'an, or any of those not in the Qur'an and who one believes to have been a prophet, or any other name which takes the same significance instead of Muhammad, but then may be that is why it is called Muhammad, the praised one. Finally the one message which is intact (that I know of) is the Qur'an, which is the one who gurantees for us the content of any other revelation, through conformity or non conformity to it, wo it makes sense that the the Prophet who transmitted successfully the Qur'an be an obvious name to emtnion as a symbol of all prophets mentionned and not mentionned in the Qur'an.
Salaam
-
Simple answer
The Authenticating Accomplisher of those who are declared Chosen, Dignified and Exalted Sincere Allegiants of Allah the Exalted.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604408.0
None before him was appointed for humanity collectively as a species. They all were appointed to convey message to their respective group of people/nation they were sent.
Universal Messenger confirmed and authenticated all of them and all that which was sent to various people in timeline. Mention of him enfold all those who were in the Exalted Group, whether names are known and not known, since he authenticated all of them. -
Universal Messenger confirmed and authenticated all of them and all that which was sent to various people in timeline. Mention of him enfold all those who were in the Exalted Group, whether names are known and not known, since he authenticated all of them.
ALLAH authenticated all of them as ALLAH gave the words for the man to speak, none of this was from any messenger himself but from Allah and some messenger had to be last....... ALL other prophets prior were also the voice medium for authenticating all those before them too. peace
-
ALLAH authenticated all of them as ALLAH gave the words for the man to speak, none of this was from any messenger himself but from Allah and some messenger had to be last....... ALL other prophets prior were also the voice medium for authenticating all those before them too. peace
Salamun alaiki,
Citation-reference needed--otherwise conjecture--a belief in vacuum!!!
-
Salam all
brother huruf saidIt depends what one has in mind when mentionning. True, one might mentionned any of those in the Qur'an, or any of those not in the Qur'an and who one believes to have been a prophet, or any other name which takes the same significance instead of Muhammad, but then may be that is why it is called Muhammad, the praised one. Finally the one message which is intact (that I know of) is the Qur'an, which is the one who gurantees for us the content of any other revelation, through conformity or non conformity to it, wo it makes sense that the the Prophet who transmitted successfully the Qur'an be an obvious name to emtnion as a symbol of all prophets mentionned and not mentionned in the Qur'an.
has not Edip written an article about the meaning of MUHAMMAD? That the praised one could also be he, who praises always/ much?
If Allah says the praised one, this is a serious statement which points to the last Prophet. If the term means however, the one who praises always, everything gets a different sense, in my opinion the better sense of the Quranic context.
Salam -
Salam all
brother huruf said
has not Edip written an article about the meaning of MUHAMMAD? That the praised one could also be he, who praises always/ much?
If Allah says the praised one, this is a serious statement which points to the last Prophet. If the term means however, the one who praises always, everything gets a different sense, in my opinion the better sense of the Quranic context.
SalamWill you please link the thread!
-
Salam mazhar
here it is the article- What was the name of the last prophet Muhammad or Muhammed?
All the derivatives of the root word H8M40D4 (read HaMaDa) occurs 68 times in the Quran
yuHaMmaDu (to be praised by others) occurs once in a NEGATIVE context in verse 3188
HaMD (praise, noun) occurs 38 times and all for GOD 12; 61; 645; 743; 1010; 1439; 1598; 1675; 17111; 181; 20130; 2328; 2715; 2759; 2793; 2870; 2963; 3018; 3125; 3215; 341; 341; 351; 3534; 37182; 3929; 3974; 3975; 3975; 407; 4055; 4065; 425; 4536; 5039; 5248; 641; 1103.
HaMDika (your praise) occurs once for GOD in verse 230
biHaMDihi (with His praise) occurs 4 times all for GOD 1313; 1744; 1752; 2558.
HaMiDun (those who praise) occurs once for praising GOD 9112.
HaMyD (the One who is praised) is used 17 times, and all for GOD 2267; 4131; 1173; 141; 148; 2224; 2264; 3112; 3126; 346; 3515; 4142; 4228; 5724; 606; 646; 858.
maHMuD (the praised position) occurs once as the description of the POSITION promised for the prophet 1779.
aHMaD (the one who praises more/most; it is not a proper name but an adjective made of a verb) occurs once in verse 616
muHaMMed (the one who praises frequently) occurs in 4 verses 3144; 3340; 472; 4829.
The picture must be clear now. As Satan distorted the monotheistic message of Jesus by turning unity to trinity, similarly Muslims fabricated many different idols by creating partners in religious sources, by adhering the sharia laws made by their clergymen (4221), and by glorifying the name of a human-messenger more than his Lord and Creator, by adding his name to the name of God in the Statement of Unity thereby transforming it to the Statement of Duality.The one who was prophecised by Jesus was described as ahmad, that is ?the one who praises more?, similar to the linguistic form a?lam (the one who knows more) or arham (the one who cares more).
616 When Jesus, son of Mary, said, ?O children of Israel, I am God?s messenger to you, authenticating what is present with me of the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose attribute will be ?the most praising.?? But when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, ?This is clearly magic.?
Ironically, though the prophesized description is pronounced as AHMAD, (the one who praises more or the most) it is commonly translated as YUHMAD or HAMYD or HUMIDA (the one who was praised more or the most).
Some Sunnis might attempt to abuse verse 1779, in order to maintain the Orthodox reading. ?If he was not praised which is denoted by his name Muhammad, how could his position be praised?? This objection initially appears to be a fair one, but with little scrutiny it falls apart. Here is the problem with this reasoning.
A person might be appointed and raised to a praised position by the frequently praised Lord and that person would still not be a ?frequently praised person.? The position is the one which is praised, not the person who might be blessed by God to reach such a position, which is returning to God, the Praise-worthy.
If I am given a miraculous sign, I do not become miraculous myself. If one is promised high heaven, he does not become high himself. If one is blessed with abundance, she does not become abundant herself.
In fact, God provides us with the best mathal, the best tafsyr in verse 2658 by using similar words. In verse 2658 we are informed that pharaoh and his followers lost their ?treasures and honorable positions (maqamun karym)? However we know that neither Pharaoh nor his close friends were honorable (karym), but they had honorable position (maqamun karym) in Egypt!
After the departure of the prophet Muhammad, like most heroes the hypocrites started carving an idol around his name, which later was extended to his family members, to his monotheist friends, and even to the hypocrite friends. Unlike what the sunni sources claim, the word sahaba is not a holy word in the Quran; to the contrary, it is mostly used to describe the hypocrites and mushriks around Muhammad. When the Umayyad and Abbasid tyrants betrayed the Quranic principle of democratic election, they distorted the meaning of the word jizya (war reparation) as an extra taxation on Christians and Jews (See Quran a Reformist Translation for detailed discussion on this and similar issues).
This anti-islamic imperialistic policy forced many Christians and Jews to convert to Sunni or Shiite sects. Those unhappy converts found it easy to replace their previous idols with new ones; this time with Muhammed and many others. Knowing the depth and breadth of alteration performed by the Sunni and Shiite clergymen, especially, considering their intolerance to and aggression against those who adhered to the monotheistic principles, gradually changing the pronunciation of the word Muhammed to Muhammad would not be a difficult task. (I highly recommend my colleagues Prof. Aisha Musa?s and Ahmad Kassim?s books on this subject Hadith as Scripture Discussions on the Authority of Prophetic Traditions in Islam; and Islamic Renaissance a New Era has Started, respectively.)
In summary, according to the teaching of the Quran, the name of the last prophet was most likely not MuhammAd, but was MuhammEd, similar to the linguistic form of Muallem (teacher) or Musawer (designer). HMD is true praise and implies magnifying, honoring and admiration. The person who engages in HMD, declares his or humility and submission. Thus, HaMD exclusively applies to Allah (the god), our Lord, the One, the Initiator, the Designer, the Compassionate, the Living, the Eternal, the Almighty, and the Omniscient God. Praise is to the Lord of the Universe.
Note for the administration it has thousands of empty names in the Memberlist- There is no spam filter?
Salam
-
See how erroneous and evasive is the conduct of Edip on his thread on this subject. He does not have any evidence in support of his vague presumptions. He knows only to calculate digits, not abc of Arabic of Qur'aan.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9603264.0
-
Salam Mazhar
thank you. i will read the link today in quite and clear mood D isa!Writing Arabic in English which does not pronounce the sounds of Arabic is something I consider ridiculous.
Write the Words in Arabic, and it will help avoid all stupid and unsubstantiated generalised assertions. Diacritic marks representing vowels are the built in aspect of Arabic language. It would be stupid of a so called scholar if he thinks that the vowels were added into the language after three hundred years of their pronouncement.
i'm totally agree with you, just there are many people who say, that the Quran should be studied without vowels, because Allah sent the quran without vowels- and in the different versions (hafs warsh etc) we can see, that one time ql means qul and other time qala- so Now if we be aware of these facts, then the assertion of Edip still beyond logic? what is your advice ?
thank you for you help
Salam )Salam
-
Salam Mazhar
thank you. i will read the link today in quite and clear mood D isa!i'm totally agree with you, just there are many people who say, that the Quran should be studied without vowels, because Allah sent the quran without vowels- and in the different versions (hafs warsh etc) we can see, that one time ql means qul and other time qala- so Now if we be aware of these facts, then the assertion of Edip still beyond logic? what is your advice ?
thank you for you help
Salam )Salam
Edip does not, and his godfather RK too did not, know the basic fact about Arabic that it is a language of syllables. The shortest syllable that conveys meanings comprises of at least one sonsonant and a vowel. This renders it a unique language; and each and all its words are therefore unique. A change in vowel on a consonant of a word otherwise looking similar to another will make the difference in meanings that might be poles apart.
-
It is preposterous to say that beause only consonants are represented graphically that the voewels do not matter. The vowels are there even if you do not see them. People cannot speak without vowels and people have pronounced the Qur'an and heard the Qur'an with vowels, and may be far more than read. People have many times been illiterate and not because of that the didn't know what they said or know nothing nor poetry nor narrations. Quite the opposite, the memorizing capacity was greater.
On the other hand, by that ruly, then chinese doesn't have neither consonants nor vowels, so just simply we know absolutely nothing in chinese, everything is unknown. Arabic writing is not more misterious than chinese, nor even than the so called hebrew, and the latter seems not to be a matter of contention for anybody, in spite of it.
Salaam