Nearness and Guidance -> Knowledge and Wisdom = Peace and Prosperity

[Man_of_Faith]

,

There may be updates to older posts which I have not written yet based on improved understanding.

Regarding the word hajj I think I still have the same understanding as when I last wrote about it though. However, the passages I have attempted translation on I could probably do better today.

I know there are quite some pages to browse through on this thread, so just take it carefully and do not hurry.

When I begun writing on this general topic I had the title phrase "Nearness and Guidance -> Knowledge and Wisdom = Peace and Prosperity" on my mind. A lot has been added to that since then, although I suppose I can say that the argument is still valid. Since then, my insight has grown several times. I do however still say that doing/being good is the essence of our faith albeit the belief argument has changed a little into what I call immersion. I do no longer deem that GOD expects people to believe, and that concept is open to abuse, but whoever realizes themselves in what is ALLAH (you can see another post from March 19 concerning what I say about the word ALLAH) will be eligible for "transition" (&#1577. By realization is meant to take on that spirit of mind and be together in ALLAH as the rest of people (angels, prophets, righteous people etc). I am working hard to prove that words like actually refer to such phenomena. This word means 'to realize' literally. I also say that is not a root but it is + i.e. the comes from the root and can be said being simply with a grammatical prefix attached to it to say be + of (thereof integrity). It is more talking about immersion than anything else like belief.

You may know that in Christianity people believe that (amen) means "may it be so" and their idea is not wrong at all. There probably used to be scholars who knew something. In the Biblical Gospels amen is amen (they have not translated it) and the text uses another word for faith/belief, so one can add to the suspicion that amen is not supposed to mean any of those two words. Jesus probably spoke Hebrew/Aramaic so the Biblical texts are more than likely derived from that language even if Greek was prominent due to the occupation influence. In the Gospels, amen is used in such a way that one can easily see it is meant to say "realize, realize" when Jesus says "amen amen I say to you". Another reason is because both Christians and Muslims say amen/amin after prayers and that is because they wish their prayer to be "realized". I have worked hard for perhaps a couple of years on the phenomenon of amen and I see a pattern and also in Arabic it does not refer to to belief/faith. You can believe/have faith and it is perhaps an advantage, but it is not really what GOD is expecting. You need to have faith that you can realize yourself too in whatever you venture into.

So with that knowledge and wisdom at hand, I would say for salvation (actually it says "transition&quot according to Qur'an the people have to realize themselves in ALLAH (BE THAT IT IS) by "BISMILLAH ALRAHMAN ALRAHEEM", i.e. "with the spirit of 'THAT IS' Benevolent, Merciful', and every other typical trait of GOD there is. If GOD is something then others are supposed to attain the same image. Jesus was not out bicycling (Swedish saying) or misquoted when he said "I am in the Father and the Father is in me". That is the way he willed to show but people, particularly the clergy, got extremely upset by his words, since according to the sectarian dogma that is a clear blasphemy.

5116 in Qur'an is misrepresented; it is supposed to clear out the misconception that people have concerning Jesus being part of a trinity, i.e. separate from GOD rather than inside the realm (ALLAH). I worked hard today to clear it out. Jesus clears out what he said and he said that he made no distinction of his soul compared to that of ALLAH. He did the will of the Father in unity, just as everyone else righteous.

You have further signs from the Biblical "Old Testament" (Tanakh/Torateh) in that GOD said to Moses in response to his question "Who are you?" "I AM THAT AM I". This is a hint to the dynamics of the GOD phenomenon and this was perhaps a 4000 years ago approximately. Hence the real information on how GOD works has been with people for millennia yet the sects always blur what have been said with their traditional Pagan mindset. GOD said to Moses "Go you to the 'Children of Israel' and say 'I AM' has sent you". ALLAH and ELOH(IM) are third-person variants of what GOD said to Moses about the phenomenon.

The famous 'Ten Commandments' say "do not make an image of anything in Heaven or Earth to worship". This commandment is part of the revelation about the dynamics of the GOD phenomenon to the 'Children of Israel' and it explicitly means "NO IMAGE" (even if the image is called ALLAH) and it includes a materialized view of GOD as an entity at all and goes along with the 'I AM THAT AM I' statement. Actually our mind is some severe case of schizophrenia rotfl

I mean we pray to 'The Rabb' and this is an authentic practice, but in truth in ways we pray to ourselves since our 'Rabb' is not separate from us. That means if we pray to the 'Rabb' and treat 'The Rabb' as some sort of slave/secretary that will do all the hard work for us as long as we "worship", then nothing will become realized. The sectarians are not aware of this. 'The Rabb' word could also be regarded as Jesus puts it "Father", because it is something that will foster us (you can check Lane's for the root to see the idea).

Jews regard 'Rabbi' as teacher and 'The Rabb' is like your foster parent. You see that before you can understand this lesson you have to separate the spirit from the flesh because this is absolutely disconnected from jinn world and thus the usual Father - Son concept does not work the same. You see all Jesus taught about the Father - Son stuff were merely parables. Jesus never implied that he was some separate beastly Son of GOD. His best utterance to clear that out was the famous "I am in the Father and the Father in me". If we can find the spirit (by being able to subdue our beastly self) and "tune in" then we can gain "The Rabb" as our Father, this is what Jesus basically tries to convey. It is a kind of complicated (to explain) symbiotic condition. Anyway, it relates to a part in 'Genesis' where the text says that GOD created man in its image". Well, it is true, but that is the goal to be, i.e. in the image of GOD.

As you can see, what the disciples wrote about Jesus is not a pack of lies after all but are fairly much according to the truth. It is mostly mistranslation causing problems and one has to understand what he meant.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam roshan,

After you wrote your post I took a look at those passages.

What I can see is that the "flesh" is what the jaan (&#1606 is referring to here in 5515. refers to in commotion (animated) of light (Quran's word for energy or the kind of phenomenon atoms are of. It does refer to light and that is why nahar is day in Arabic because light is attached). For a human we can say it is like the flesh is from nothingness, i.e. nothing you can touch which refers to the nature of atoms and molecules.

There is no mention of any smokeless fire here. It is an idea of ignorant minds. Nothing can be made of fire because it is a chemical reaction and not a substance. It is a reaction that turns the substance from one to another (ashes/coal) and is caused by excessive heat greater than its flammability and is caused by the reaction of energy (friction, relationship to other atoms etc).

It is quite logical that jaan refers to flesh if jannateh refers to garden (Arabic words are very descriptive in their nature). Gehenna refers to the permanency of being doomed to eternal flesh (what differs from jan it is the which means attached like in nahaar (day) rather than facing dissolution (the real goal for us). I think few actually know that (Gehennom) actually refer to this. The word is derived from with being formed just like the word for day in Arabic to mark a state/condition (attachment).

Of course the sects do not want you to have this knowledge because they are slaves to the flesh.

And no, jinn are hence no supernatural invisible beings except a distracting illusion.

In 5514 it appears to refer to the image of a spirit that man is supposed to attain. It speaks a about some sort of magnification/growth. It is very likely not speaking of clay in any way. GOD made man to be in its image. The jaan (flesh) is a distraction. You must perceive this spirit to stay on track. Like Jesus said "separate the spirit from the flesh". By this lesson above I suppose you can even understand his words.

Salaam

[seekingthetruth]

,

There may be updates to older posts which I have not written yet based on improved understanding.

Regarding the word hajj I think I still have the same understanding as when I last wrote about it though. However, the passages I have attempted translation on I could probably do better today.

I know there are quite some pages to browse through on this thread, so just take it carefully and do not hurry.

When I begun writing on this general topic I had the title phrase "Nearness and Guidance -> Knowledge and Wisdom = Peace and Prosperity" on my mind. A lot has been added to that since then, although I suppose I can say that the argument is still valid. Since then, my insight has grown several times. I do however still say that doing/being good is the essence of our faith albeit the belief argument has changed a little into what I call immersion. I do no longer deem that GOD expects people to believe, and that concept is open to abuse, but whoever realizes themselves in what is ALLAH (you can see another post from March 19 concerning what I say about the word ALLAH) will be eligible for "transition" (&#1577. By realization is meant to take on that spirit of mind and be together in ALLAH as the rest of people (angels, prophets, righteous people etc). I am working hard to prove that words like actually refer to such phenomena. This word means 'to realize' literally. I also say that is not a root but it is + i.e. the comes from the root and can be said being simply with a grammatical prefix attached to it to say be + of (thereof integrity). It is more talking about immersion than anything else like belief.

You may know that in Christianity people believe that (amen) means "may it be so" and their idea is not wrong at all. There probably used to be scholars who knew something. In the Biblical Gospels amen is amen (they have not translated it) and the text uses another word for faith/belief, so one can add to the suspicion that amen is not supposed to mean any of those two words. Jesus probably spoke Hebrew/Aramaic so the Biblical texts are more than likely derived from that language even if Greek was prominent due to the occupation influence. In the Gospels, amen is used in such a way that one can easily see it is meant to say "realize, realize" when Jesus says "amen amen I say to you". Another reason is because both Christians and Muslims say amen/amin after prayers and that is because they wish their prayer to be "realized". I have worked hard for perhaps a couple of years on the phenomenon of amen and I see a pattern and also in Arabic it does not refer to to belief/faith. You can believe/have faith and it is perhaps an advantage, but it is not really what GOD is expecting. You need to have faith that you can realize yourself too in whatever you venture into.

So with that knowledge and wisdom at hand, I would say for salvation (actually it says "transition&quot according to Qur'an the people have to realize themselves in ALLAH (BE THAT IT IS) by "BISMILLAH ALRAHMAN ALRAHEEM", i.e. "with the spirit of 'THAT IS' Benevolent, Merciful', and every other typical trait of GOD there is. If GOD is something then others are supposed to attain the same image. Jesus was not out bicycling (Swedish saying) or misquoted when he said "I am in the Father and the Father is in me". That is the way he willed to show but people, particularly the clergy, got extremely upset by his words, since according to the sectarian dogma that is a clear blasphemy.

5116 in Qur'an is misrepresented; it is supposed to clear out the misconception that people have concerning Jesus being part of a trinity, i.e. separate from GOD rather than inside the realm (ALLAH). I worked hard today to clear it out. Jesus clears out what he said and he said that he made no distinction of his soul compared to that of ALLAH. He did the will of the Father in unity, just as everyone else righteous.

You have further signs from the Biblical "Old Testament" (Tanakh/Torateh) in that GOD said to Moses in response to his question "Who are you?" "I AM THAT AM I". This is a hint to the dynamics of the GOD phenomenon and this was perhaps a 4000 years ago approximately. Hence the real information on how GOD works has been with people for millennia yet the sects always blur what have been said with their traditional Pagan mindset. GOD said to Moses "Go you to the 'Children of Israel' and say 'I AM' has sent you". ALLAH and ELOH(IM) are third-person variants of what GOD said to Moses about the phenomenon.

The famous 'Ten Commandments' say "do not make an image of anything in Heaven or Earth to worship". This commandment is part of the revelation about the dynamics of the GOD phenomenon to the 'Children of Israel' and it explicitly means "NO IMAGE" (even if the image is called ALLAH) and it includes a materialized view of GOD as an entity at all and goes along with the 'I AM THAT AM I' statement. Actually our mind is some severe case of schizophrenia rotfl

I mean we pray to 'The Rabb' and this is an authentic practice, but in truth in ways we pray to ourselves since our 'Rabb' is not separate from us. That means if we pray to the 'Rabb' and treat 'The Rabb' as some sort of slave/secretary that will do all the hard work for us as long as we "worship", then nothing will become realized. The sectarians are not aware of this. 'The Rabb' word could also be regarded as Jesus puts it "Father", because it is something that will foster us (you can check Lane's for the root to see the idea).

Jews regard 'Rabbi' as teacher and 'The Rabb' is like your foster parent. You see that before you can understand this lesson you have to separate the spirit from the flesh because this is absolutely disconnected from jinn world and thus the usual Father - Son concept does not work the same. You see all Jesus taught about the Father - Son stuff were merely parables. Jesus never implied that he was some separate beastly Son of GOD. His best utterance to clear that out was the famous "I am in the Father and the Father in me". If we can find the spirit (by being able to subdue our beastly self) and "tune in" then we can gain "The Rabb" as our Father, this is what Jesus basically tries to convey. It is a kind of complicated (to explain) symbiotic condition. Anyway, it relates to a part in 'Genesis' where the text says that GOD created man in its image". Well, it is true, but that is the goal to be, i.e. in the image of GOD.

As you can see, what the disciples wrote about Jesus is not a pack of lies after all but are fairly much according to the truth. It is mostly mistranslation causing problems and one has to understand what he meant.

Salaam

Thank you so much for this deep and intersting post, i like the way you connect things together to get a bigger picture. Your insight make Islam more spiritual than traditional one"which is merely stric practices and rituals you say and do so and so & you would be forgiven for all what you've done" , which i think it is the most important aspect of Islam that has lost nowadays, even in sufi sects, which is purely spiritual , you find idolizing of people "preachers" or graves "mausoleum" .

I agree with you about if believing would affect our fate in hereafter or not, i do not think God has created us to remind him of his glory only, our mission here is much bigger than that. My vision is still blurring but i am still searching about it. Your insight here is very helpful.

Regarding "" and the story of Jesus or the concept of "i am in Allah and Allah is in me" , it is great input to clarify these meanings. I always thought that when a person reaches this condition and unconsciously say "i am in God and God in me", i thought it is a psychological state occurs as result of certain psychological practices " e.g. in Sufism or Buddhist". Your input make it well elaborated for me.

I found some opinions that consider that there are many Rabbs, and Allah is the greatest Rabb, it was confusing for me at first till i read this verse more carefully

"What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" He replied "I am better than he; you created me from fire and him from clay"
712

How could Satan simply arguing with God if he was the greatest? and in this verse also

"He said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant , or were you among the haughty?" He said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay."
3875-76

Regardless of the nature of the satan or the actual story , you can see that even in this verse there is an argument with God. May be there are another meanings for these verses, but if it with this meaning, i can't imagine that this argument is with Allah.

Regards,

[hawk99]

Anyway, I tend to be inclined to say that a jinn is a person who simply loves the world,

Peace Man of Faith, Jinn folk do not necessarily love the world, many are governed
by degrees of hate.

Interesting thread here

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606995.msg359133#msg359133

Please read surah Al Jinn (73)

The Jinn can be believers

`Some of us are righteous, and some are less than righteous; we follow various paths.

`When we heard the guidance, we believed therein. Anyone who believes in his Lord will
never fear any injustice, nor any affliction.

`Among us are the submitters, and among us are the compromisers.' " As for those who
submitted, they are on the right path.

God bless you

peace

[roshan_m]

Salaam roshan,

After you wrote your post I took a look at those passages.

What I can see is that the "flesh" is what the jaan (&#1606 is referring to here in 5515. refers to in commotion (animated) of light (Quran's word for energy or the kind of phenomenon atoms are of. It does refer to light and that is why nahar is day in Arabic because light is attached). For a human we can say it is like the flesh is from nothingness, i.e. nothing you can touch which refers to the nature of atoms and molecules.

There is no mention of any smokeless fire here. It is an idea of ignorant minds. Nothing can be made of fire because it is a chemical reaction and not a substance. It is a reaction that turns the substance from one to another (ashes/coal) and is caused by excessive heat greater than its flammability and is caused by the reaction of energy (friction, relationship to other atoms etc).

It is quite logical that jaan refers to flesh if jannateh refers to garden (Arabic words are very descriptive in their nature). Gehenna refers to the permanency of being doomed to eternal flesh (what differs from jan it is the which means attached like in nahaar (day) rather than facing dissolution (the real goal for us). I think few actually know that (Gehennom) actually refer to this. The word is derived from with being formed just like the word for day in Arabic to mark a state/condition (attachment).

Of course the sects do not want you to have this knowledge because they are slaves to the flesh.

And no, jinn are hence no supernatural invisible beings except a distracting illusion.

In 5514 it appears to refer to the image of a spirit that man is supposed to attain. It speaks a about some sort of magnification/growth. It is very likely not speaking of clay in any way. GOD made man to be in its image. The jaan (flesh) is a distraction. You must perceive this spirit to stay on track. Like Jesus said "separate the spirit from the flesh". By this lesson above I suppose you can even understand his words.

Salaam

Peace MoF and I appreciate your insight, especially connecting jnn to the Jahannam and its eternal 'fleshiness'. But what then does 'salsalin kalfakhar' means in 5514 in the relation of human creation?
Looking forward to your insight on it and thank you again for taking your time

Best
M.

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam hawk99,

They can be full of hate or love. What they have in common is that they do not see/think beyond this fleshly world.

If you read the chapter, you can see that they were jinns that when they heard the recital came to appreciate it. It is to be regarded that they were jinns but may have changed perception subsequently.

A jinn can be fairly righteous because it does not have to do with that. You can see atheists who are inclined towards good. Jinns can also be seen to include people who are atheists and see only this world due to impaired ability to reflect and think beyond barriers or deluded by other jinns. A jinn is not automatically evil because of being one, but since they do not know the truth they are often inclined towards the signals of the flesh, i.e. their instincts (shaytaan).

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam roshan,

Concerning 5514; anasan in the passage does not refer to the fleshly beast we are inside of but the image of a creation we were made as bodyless souls. The bodies we reside in because we choose to "eat of the tree" (probably an ancient parable). It was not originally so, but we chose desire and a part of us disobeyed GOD. Today, when we are here in this "test environment" we see if will change or continue further indulgence until complete absorption into the flesh.

But 5514, it refers to the creation/formation of the human soul/consciousness and that was made of a perfect formula, since it was in the pristine image (of GOD). It is an empty soul with no bias whatsoever. Human children are born with such pristine albeit empty soul attached to animalistic bodies. You can see documentaries that children are innately good. It is the flesh and animal instincts (shaytaan) that turn us into imperfect beings. It is their instinctive drive which causes them to seek jinn knowledge due to it and become biased by adults. The adults are what gives the children their evil nature together with the instincts of the beast (desire etc).

"Kalalfakhar" is actually comprising of a root word plus prefix letters. The root is Fa-Kha-Ra which has several meanings according to a famous lexicon such as Lane's. One of them is "excellent quality". So the word is K - Al-Fakhar. Salsal (&#1604 which precedes it is a bit harder, but I could interpret it as "blueprint" or the image as in which something is formed and to be followed. Why it has gotten the connotation with clay is beyond me.

It looks like a scribe error in the passage though due to that the 'k' is put before AL. The word could be which would give a comprehensive meaning. It would mean the same but it is more comprehensible to read and interpret. Then it would mean is part of the same primitive root as words like which would make a meaning such as that I said about the perception was made perfect, before the Jaan influence of 5515. They go hand in hand. Min Sal salak al-fakhar, of perception, your perception is perfect. But as I can see, you need to look at the whole passage to make it comprehensible "khalaq al-anasan man sal, salak al-fakhar". "Your perception perfect". The soul is indeed perfect without bias. The chapter is just a continuous riddle and you need to reflect upon what you read. It does not help if you have a poor interpretation. It is not a coincidence why the chapter mentions Jaan straight thereafter because it is our great trap in life and an illusion due to the nature of it (as I explained in the previous post). This environment makes us imperfect. It also looks like the passages in the context are slightly poetically written such as riddles usually are. The repetitive passages such as 5516 show this.

Hope you got an answer from this. It just shows how poor interpretation there is. And I would argue that Arabic does not have a root more than three syllables, i.e. trilateral roots at most, so salsal should not be able to be its own root. It clearly looks like a scribe error.

It also shows GOD created the flesh (world jaan) and not an evil spirit. But the flesh is the temptation if you indulge in it like our ancestor Adam did with the "fruit of the forbidden tree". Our own animalistic drive is Shaytaan.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

I correct myself from the previous post to roshan. is most likely its own word, but a compound of twice in a row. It appears to suggest the same that I said though and that is copy or identical to something (perception), like a fixed image. Blueprint was maybe not a bad suggestion.

I still consider the kaf to be part of the previous word though, i.e. . It would imply that the anasan's "image" is innately perfect without bias.

implies that something is of excellent quality.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

And sorry again, the k in k - alfakhaar is likely original. It gives an implicating argument that the salsal was caused to be excellent. I need to think a bit more before I throw myself towards answering.

It does change little though to my reasoning.
I would still say the traditional interpretation is imaginative at best.

Edit It is important to notice that the riddle-like chapter uses very much in it. The prefix on is likely so it is like an emphasis on all excellent, except that the prefix is written together as . The AL is still from the usual AL prefix (to be). We need to remember AL is also from its own root (something like originate/relate to/nearness to). The kaf (of &#1604 gives emphasis on totality. The funny thing is that the affixing here may consist of a combining of several roots in one.

See how The Rabb teaches.

Salaam

[roshan_m]

Peace Man of Faith,

your interpretation of those verses is so insightful and beautiful, thank you so much. Wow, it's really unbelievable how much such pure meaning of those words might get corrupted so much.. but on the other hand it's not surprising.. it seems that Quran is intellectually speaking so 'revolutionary' that it's true meaning had to be suppressed by imams and rulers.

Stay blessed sun
M.

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam roshan,

Obviously it blends with the Genesis of the Bible nicely when it says man was created in GOD's image. This is also our goal to be after the "eating of the forbidden fruit" which I consider an ancient parable. It ought to have had to do with an immersion into the flesh (jaan) rather than the sectarian version. It seems the flesh was the temptation and shaytaan is easily said the instinctive drive of our beast body which gladly leads us to live like that body is a sort of permanency which appears to be the trap.

In the narration, when Adam is deceived into "eating the fruit", THEN the body becomes clear to him as if he could not see it. I rather see that Adam was still in pure spirit form prior to the event. And his soul became biased very literally by the flesh. It was the temptation of the flesh that lured Adam.

If Shaytaan exists or existed I have not ruled out, but the phenomenon Shaytaan works through the flesh which is important to us. Our animalistic nature is one testament to that.

Now, our mission is to seek dissolution from the nightmare Adam triggered. We should seek to regain the spirit form we once possessed. The best way is to not give in and live according to the beast but rather separate ourselves from its desires and seek the spirit.

The drive of the body is not GOD's image but of the jinn. Children with their little bias is sign the souls are innately good but the environment including their own beast bodies turn them into jinn unless they become realized (mumins) in Allah.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

Let us take a look at what I have to say about certain Arabic words. You can see it as a summary of sorts in this thread and what I go on about in other threads.

I do not yet have any finished reinterpretation of Quran, but I am currently in progress of making an English translation plus a sort of appendix for the original Arabic Quran as a grammar guide and language tutorial. The Quran will involve an edited Arabic in the form of removal of most diacritics and basically only retain the "madda" markers (e.g. &#1570. That is how I perceive the original manuscript to have looked like before scholars messed with it. Consider it like an honest scribe sat down and properly made a copy of the manuscript without adding anything.

As I have understood, the diacritics were added to present a help for interpreters and probably the original interpreters too who added them and they are used as a help with pronunciation which is not really required as long as you can manage the sound of the individual (consonant) letters. Many of the markers are redundant because you can both pronounce and comprehend the text without them. Arabic works like the tones when you play an instrument, they resulting resonance sound is a result of the combination of tones. The resonance can be modified like with a piano's pedal and a lingering finger (madda).
Anyway, back to the intention with this post about word summary.

• saad-lam-meem/salawa Follow something closely is the root's fundamental meaning and that means to keep something in your perception.

• musalla - An objective/attributable form like a specimen of the original root. If salawa means to keep perceiving something then musalla is the attribute you can gain it from. For example, Abraham is musalla in a passage and it refers to his lesson or work as a beacon to follow. Lane's lexicon has a good example with a horse race where musalla can be said to hang on tight to someone who leads.

• • salawateh/salawat - This is the resulting object of having been given perception by what is musalla. It can also be seen as guidance while refers to guiding someone. Someone who is a symbol (attribute) of guidance is , i.e the horse to chase. Abraham is a musalla according to a passage in the second chapter (2125).
    Salawa has nothing to do with praying or connection whatsoever as per literal meaning.

• huda - This is another misinterpreted word. It does not refer to guidance but to grace/blessing/gift. This can be verified by a lexicon such as Lane's. Despite what people say, yahood shares the same root and it supposedly is to convey that someone is sort of a "chosen (gifted) person". It is used very arrogantly by those who call themselves Jews. It is usually called Zionism today even if the very word yahood may be arrogant enough.

kh-ra-ra - usually interpreted fall down, but I would say it means "change from one condition/place to another", i.e. turn (into). I would say the famous al-akhar, usually marking 'The Hereafter' shares this root and the word means 'The Transition' basically. It is used to find an excuse to use sujud as prostrate in the context.

• jiim-nun-nun - Used to symbolize a mysterious supernatural and invisible being (&#1606, but the root means "something that covers the integrity of something". It can be used to symbolize 'flesh' but also garden because it covers the Earth. A jinn is a person who cannot think beyond their beastly perception and do not excel spiritually (nas). The root and following words are thus very literally "down to Earth" so to say.

To be continued, if GOD permits

[runninglikezebras]

A jinn is a person who cannot think beyond their beastly perception and do not excel spiritually (nas). The root and following words are thus very literally "down to Earth" so to say.

721-3 How do you understand these verses? To me they show the opposite of what you are claiming here. Furthermore the jinn were created from smokeless fire not from clay like man. This contradicts your understanding of jinn meaning flesh.

7179 tells us many of the jinn and mankind will end up in Hell. Not all. This means they are entirely capable of submitting to God if they chose to.

5156 And I (All?h) created not the jinns and humans except they should worship Me (Alone).

Does God ask the jinn to worship God alone knowing they are incapable of it? Your understanding of jinn renders almost every verse about them to contradiction. 7214 explicitly states jinn claiming some of them to be Muslims.

What entitles you to ignore the aramaic word where the arabic word jinn is etymologically derived from means "cover/hidden"?

Peace

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

Jinn is not a supernatural and strange being. Jinn refers to the instinctive/fleshly/beastly drive.

If the jinn is an invisible ethereal being how are they supposed to interact in the context? Have you thought about such things?

How about the jinn in Solomon's court who suggests a very worldly idea of how to conquer the dominion of the queen while a man with distinctive knowledge came up with a much better idea hinting that he was not a jinn because he could think outside of the box.

The passages which involve creation of the Jann are rather talking about the creation of the flesh, and naar is Quran's substitute for energy which is a word for light in Arabic. It refers to the nature of the universe where the visual part of it is actually made of energy. If you cleave a nucleus of an atom you will have a huge energy discharge. And there is no mention about any smokelessness, this is just an inference.

Naas is the human spirituality as according to the image GOD created it in. It is the kind of spiritual affinity we are struggling towards if we realize ourselves.

And we do that by NOT succumbing to the visual reality which is rather an illusive reality and that is by not allowing ourselves to be like animals giving in to our primitive instincts (shaytaan). It is easy to seek pleasure in the flesh and indulge and accept it blindly.

Everyone is capable of coming towards GOD as long as they realize themselves. Mostly the reference to jinn in Quran is whenever a person is thinking worldly on a beast level with such limitations. It is a path you take in your ignorance because no one would intentionally take such path unless being deluded.

It would be that when jinn and nas are mentioned together in the Arabic the text refers to spirit and flesh. If spirit and flesh combined are going to Naar then it marks a permanent binding to the flesh like a curse. You who understand would seek dissolution from the flesh and not more of it.

Jinn is beastly desires (shaytaan) if its source is from thence and if naas is addressed then it is a spiritual affinity. We should learn not to listen to much to the jinn.

Regarding 721-3 which you gave reference to, the common translations are lackluster. They are escaping from their Al-Jinn. I cannot sit and translate every passage right now, but jinn here does not relate to a separate being but one and the same except the spirit and the flesh.

In 5156 is the same. It speaks of body and soul. Not different types of race. The human is 1. A soul 2. A body. The soul is attached to that body (beast). Jinn is the flesh = the beast/body.

Same is you can find a Jannateh on Earth because it is also something that covers it, i.e. a garden. Both use the same root, for the same reason.

Gehennom refers to the permanence of the flesh which you saw that GOD would send naas and jinn into naar. It also uses the same root even if it may not look like it. It is the grammatical formula which causes the confusion. It is not always possible to narrow-mindedly behold the nature of roots in Arabic.

The in refers to attachment and the refers to "thereof" as in applied attribute. A similar formula is used for the Arabic word for day nahaar, the shows attachment (of light). Naar is the root for light/energy. See how Arabic grammar works? Gehennom and Nahaar have similar formula in their structures.

So you see these words I said are derived from the root which refers to flesh (something that envelopes something).

Not that I think my elaboration will help you for you are probably so stubborn on your supernatural beings that you cannot appreciate it. Perhaps someone else will read and comprehend for this is suitable for everyone.

Salaam

[runninglikezebras]

Salaam,

Jinn is not a supernatural and strange being. Jinn refers to the instinctive/fleshly/beastly drive.

If the jinn is an invisible ethereal being how are they supposed to interact in the context? Have you thought about such things?

Glad you asked. Yes! Eg massless particles are all around us and interacting with our reality all the time. Invisible and supernatural are not synonyms, let's get that sorted out first.

How about the jinn in Solomon's court who suggests a very worldly idea of how to conquer the dominion of the queen while a man with distinctive knowledge came up with a much better idea hinting that he was not a jinn because he could think outside of the box.

The passages which involve creation of the Jann are rather talking about the creation of the flesh, and naar is Quran's substitute for energy which is a word for light in Arabic. It refers to the nature of the universe where the visual part of it is actually made of energy. If you cleave a nucleus of an atom you will have a huge energy discharge. And there is no mention about any smokelessness, this is just an inference.

Naas is the human spirituality as according to the image GOD created it in. It is the kind of spiritual affinity we are struggling towards if we realize ourselves.

And we do that by NOT succumbing to the visual reality which is rather an illusive reality and that is by not allowing ourselves to be like animals giving in to our primitive instincts (shaytaan). It is easy to seek pleasure in the flesh and indulge and accept it blindly.

Everyone is capable of coming towards GOD as long as they realize themselves. Mostly the reference to jinn in Quran is whenever a person is thinking worldly on a beast level with such limitations. It is a path you take in your ignorance because no one would intentionally take such path unless being deluded.

It would be that when jinn and nas are mentioned together in the Arabic the text refers to spirit and flesh. If spirit and flesh combined are going to Naar then it marks a permanent binding to the flesh like a curse. You who understand would seek dissolution from the flesh and not more of it.

Jinn is beastly desires (shaytaan) if its source is from thence and if naas is addressed then it is a spiritual affinity. We should learn not to listen to much to the jinn.

You keep reiterating this refusing to show any linguistic nor quranic evidence for what you say. Even ignoring the etymological roots of the words.

Regarding 721-3 which you gave reference to, the common translations are lackluster. They are escaping from their Al-Jinn. I cannot sit and translate every passage right now, but jinn here does not relate to a separate being but one and the same except the spirit and the flesh.

Then why does Quran many times mention Jinn next to humans. In whole Quran they are described in a parallel structure from their creation to their end. When your translation is ready I'd like to see it because as I understand your interpreation right now there are countless problems with it. Most prominently, how can body/beast claim to be muslim if it's a seperate entity from the spirit as you profess? Are bodies chasing their seperated human minds? It's just too irrational.

In 5156 is the same. It speaks of body and soul. Not different types of race. The human is 1. A soul 2. A body. The soul is attached to that body (beast). Jinn is the flesh = the beast/body.

So beasts can be muslims as they state in surah 72. But at the same they cant? Do you still understand what you are saying yourself?

Same is you can find a Jannateh on Earth because it is also something that covers it, i.e. a garden. Both use the same root, for the same reason.

Gehennom refers to the permanence of the flesh which you saw that GOD would send naas and jinn into naar. It also uses the same root even if it may not look like it. It is the grammatical formula which causes the confusion. It is not always possible to narrow-mindedly behold the nature of roots in Arabic.

The in refers to attachment and the refers to "thereof" as in applied attribute. A similar formula is used for the Arabic word for day nahaar, the shows attachment (of light). Naar is the root for light/energy. See how Arabic grammar works? Gehennom and Nahaar have similar formula in their structures.

The reason why they all share the same root is simple. They are all hidden. We can't perceive paradise yet, nor hell. Neither can we perceive the intelligent creation of Jinn.

So you see these words I said are derived from the root which refers to flesh (something that envelopes something).

Not that I think my elaboration will help you for you are probably so stubborn on your supernatural beings that you cannot appreciate it. Perhaps someone else will read and comprehend for this is suitable for everyone.

Salaam

For reference

janna
be mad
janna
cover, conceal Aze cennet, Ful aljanna, Hau aljanna, Hin jannat, Per jannat, Tur cennet, Uzbdzhannat borrowed from Ara

All you did was swap the root word's meaning from cover, conceal to flesh. If that were true we would see it confirmed in the related occurences in other languages. The opposite is true. They all mean covering/concealing everywhere. Nowhere do they mean flesh. The meaning of shield, something one conceals behind to defend oneself should reveal to you what it means. Unless you think shields are made of flesh of course.

Peace

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

No. I am not ignoring to show any historical references. You can look up the root in a lexicon and how it is applicable for something that covers something else. It can be skin or it can be a garden covering the ground. The cover of a body is even definitions in the Lane's.

So no, you falsely accuse me of not providing any reference besides my own analysis of the word itself.

It is interpreters somewhere thousand years ago who came up with some conjecture concerning the word because it looked to them like there were a differentiation between a naas and a jinn. They were not thinking it might have to do with flesh and soul. And in traditional Abrahamic faith you have to be wary of your fleshly impulses.

There may also be a reason why in Latin the word Gens was used for a worldly person and later Gentile in English. Or perhaps a mere coincidence that there is a word that means exactly the same and is phonologically very similar?

You have such an easy time accepting sectarian superstition and yet rebuke Sunnism. Jinn is just an inference from an age people were very superstitious due to lack of education and interpreters have failed to interpret Quran as intended by the author.

What do you mean perceive paradise yet? Jannateh is a visible garden and not paradise exclusively and is used for any garden, even here now on Earth. That is just a deceptive argument you have swallowed without enough reflection. You can cross check in Quran that Jannateh indeed is used for any garden.

The word jannateh uses the root because it is something which covers a surface. It is an object reference.

does not mean hidden. There are other Arabic words for that. It is just a made up definition. The word means that covers something. Please check a dictionary instead of sitting here arguing traditional conjecture with no basis.

refers to what covers something. The root would refer to cover. Even in English you can use the word body of something, a shell. Stop being evasive and read up in a dictionary and learn something instead of listening blindly to people who have failed to comprehend and come up with conjecture.

Otherwise stop circular reasoning in this thread. I have heard your argument and it is noted. And I have another explanation than your superstitious invisible beings.

Even Lane's refers to as "greater part of mankind" because of its connotation with worldliness.

But if you have nothing new to say I will refrain from answering your post. No circular reasoning. Please check a dictionary and come up with a counter argument that is solid and not just repetition of the same invisible nonsense of tradition. I am a researcher and I avoid being biased.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

To continue on that list I started compiling.
ketaab - Decree/knowledge - I am a bit undecided on the term usage here albeit I do not consider the word to mean book whatsoever. That is a false inference and a too strong generalization and materialization of the word. This also solves the nonsensical "People of the Book" reference. It is merely those who adhere to knowledge this 'ahl al-kitab'.

is the root of the above mentioned word and it means to decree something as in give information/knowledge. If someone has been decreed something then they have knowledge involved of the instruction. I would literally say though that kutub means "to make knowledgeable (with substance)" much like instruct.

Ketaab was one of the first words I learned about and that it means decree has been my knowledge for between 1-2 years now. It is one of those words I am 100% sure about. I did not accept that the word means book because it is not applicable where traditional interpreters have used it in Quran. It is incoherent, plus it brings fixation and near idolatrous relationship with that recitation (Quran). The word is meant explicitly to be ambiguous considered the substance or abstract because knowledge may look different in different minds even if they follow certain common principles (see the 'Commandments&#039.

The second chapter's first sentence starts with this word and the first phrase says "this is the knowledge...".

• iman/amen - This word surely requires a lot of attention being as misinterpreted as it is. First of all, you can scrap everything about belief (guessing/uncertainty) because that is completely off. The word is actually from the root just as which means 'of' (attribute-giver/agent). It can be said to be a benefactor (you can see Lane's for a verification) or detriment based on positive or negative attribute. consists of an alif plus the from the root and together they means 'be (there)of' literally. I tend to translate it coherently as 'to realize (oneself)'. If we go down on letter level ('the Innate Letter Meaning' method) it is " Be - Thereof Integrity" which I consider on morpheme level to verify my argument. Of course most appear not to accept my controversial method so I work hard to verify it through traditional means as well. It goes hand in hand with the immersion nature of GOD's realm.

By other words, mere belief will not take one anywhere but one has to realize themselves in what they have discovered and come to their senses about. Just to believe in good seems to be enough truly because who is not good but GOD? It is mostly about affinity and conceptualization, and there is not exactly any true religion (Paganism) out there but to be of soundness (Muslim). Muslim is not a religious/sectarian label but an attribute (the meem can be said to be the absolute minimum morpheme of as a prefix). The Arabic would not even use such prefixes AL or Meem if the word was meant as a proper noun (a name).

esm (from root &#1608 - traditionally interpreted and translated as "name" does translate very poorly as such. It is an attribute reference like identification (you can check Lane's for verification). Its usage in a passage with Abraham and "naming you Muslims" has led to a reinforcement of the misconception about Muslim as a label and name. Middle-Eastern (semitic) tradition put much emphasis on the meaning of names and names always have an abstract and spiritual meaning rather than concrete labels. It is like a spirit tag. 'Esm' is hence not a word for name in Arabic and in the passage with Abraham (ref 227 the language says "consciousness thereof (be) you ".

Same applies to anywhere the language uses esm like "Bismillah" (in/with the consciousness/spirit of Allah). If you are esm Ishmael you have a consciousness of the tag given there etc. So in 2278 Abraham did not name people Muslims. First of all, AL - M SALIM is incompatible to be a name, particularly by the meem attribute reference prefix. The passage says that people should consciously be OF ATTRIBUTE al-salam (sound). It is the same logic as the (b'ism Allah). The passage 17 says that people should have a conscious awareness of ALLAH, i.e. be Allah. And Allah is not a proper noun either and is usually treated as plural by the grammar, for a reason. You can say Allah is a collective for those who join.

• ALLAH - (&#1607 Another word of misconception. This one is a phenomenal word because it interestingly says "is related who is". It has a long service history and is likely at least 4000 years old and has probably as many errors attributed to it as it is old. The important thing is that this is not an individual name of the Rabb (&#1576 but a clarifying collective defining noun often followed by relevant attributes (the basmala contains &#1605 and they actually give main attributes of how a man should be since we are talking about an assimilation/immersion rather than separation of what is the GOD phenomenon.

This teaching is very difficult for people to accept and many people would surely call it heretical and a blasphemy, and know that Jesus was persecuted and even executed for an identical teaching.

The word Allah/Elohim (&#1605 has a reference from when Moses inquired of GOD concerning the nature as to which GOD replied "I am who am I" and so was the GOD phenomenon called "is that it is" (ELAH) in third person. God also told Moses to go to the 'Children of Israel' and say "'I AM' has sent me". You probably see what is the nature (dynamics) of ALLAH/GOD.
Every righteous person who addresses GOD in Quran uses Rabb or Ya Rabb and not Ya Allah, for a reason. It is similar to originator or even Father (albeit not biological). Jesus probably used Father as a substitute for Rabb.

However to say Ya Allah would make no sense since without any external reference (attribute) it has no real meaning or you can say you address multiple entities involved under the plural nature of Allah and no single consciousness (separate "node" in the platform Allah - refer to the functionality of the Borg in Star Trek if you are familiar with that fiction).

Rabb - Needs no real introduction I suppose. This is the personal address for your originator. It has more the meaning of sustainer (lit. Constitution With/in), but substitutes such as teacher, master or even Father could probably be used in English, depending on what kind of relationship you have with The Rabb. I would define The Rabb as my (foster) Father, so beyond sustainer I also let this phenomenon foster/teach/rear me, without any relationship on a fleshly biological level. That is a sort of sustenance and it is my relationship to The Rabb.

I would say like Jesus "I am in the Father (Rabb) and the Father (Rabb) is in me". We are not separate. There is only One, absolute Oneness.

Understand that this is how the immersion and assimilation actually works. The phenomenon is hard for a jinn (beast) mind to understand and you need to separate yourself from it and find the spirit so that you can comprehend the symbiotic relationship you should have with The Rabb. GOD is not a separate entity and no separation should be made. The sectarian (Pagan) doctrines are a hoax. You can only worship (honor) The Rabb by attaining the same image (attributes).

To be continued, if GOD permits.

Salaam

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam,

To clarify; means to cover something, but not like conceal but like an outer layer of something. Flesh is my generalization of the word even if it is not far away and "body" ("something that embodies or gives concrete reality to a thing; also a sensible object in physical space" - Merriam Webster Dictionary) can be said is the more literal translation of jinn, but flesh is a more metaphorical description particularly when nothing in truth is more or less alive even if being a stone or an animate body, since everything of the 'jann' is made of naar (light/energy - Arabic seems to put little difference between the two).

It is actually so that our bodies to the main part is made of stone because compressed decomposed material will over time turn into stone (it is true, read up on science!).

Fundamentally, when you eat food you eat something formed out of stone by the Ruh Quds (traditionally the Holy Spirit). Deeper philosophies would reveal that man is not formed out of clay but of stone. However, Quran does not say the physical body (jinn) is made of clay but of naar which is in fact true. The soul (nas) is made of an excellent image and has potential, but not if it listens to the body's (jinn) instincts (shaytaan). Yes, this is how the original story is supposed to sound like if distortion in interpretation is accounted for, in Quran.

If you have a jinn (possession) it is the body which has a defect and not some supernatural invisible invasion. This possession ideas they had in the past was because they did not have knowledge of psychological disorders.

I am not ruling out that there are evil spirits, but they are not separate from the "flesh" (jinn) itself but is it. Diseases; viruses, bacteria, genetical defects, these are your jinn anomalies which are spoken of as if the language says "possession" when the root is used, usually , the same as garden because a garden is also a body. Such evil is not GOD because GOD is not evil but all good. Diseases affects also the good and also those who would never have their faith affected by calamity, so the GOD is testing argument is weak. We should not make GOD responsible for this. On the other hand, strong faith and soundness of the soul may reduce the negative impact of them.

I know this sounds like the ancient Gnosticism, but there is something in it and Quran tells it this way as well, i.e the flesh is evil. There is a reason why religious tradition, even Islam, Judaism, tells people to abstain from beastly desires. Sadly, due to the extreme misinterpretation of Quran it may look like Quran promotes fleshly instincts which it actually does not.

The Transition, Al-Akhar - traditionally Hereafter, uses the root and the root means "move from one condition to another", i.e. change/turn (you can verify this in a lexicon like Lane's) and will basically mean a dissolution from the flesh, a separation. The Naas (soul/senses) will leave the Jinn (body), but appears that if you fail the ascension you will be given a new body and experience Gehennom , a permanency of the "flesh". My knowledge is still limited on the dynamics of this and whether this is eternal or it will be like in East Asian faiths where it is until they manage, if they ever do, to separate the spirit from the flesh (jinn). And the interesting is that it is Quran which teaches this.

The eternal flesh fate could be because the more you reincarnate the more broken your soul becomes until it is a soul which is a "robot" to the bodily instincts (shaytaan).

The phenomenon called GOD puts no one in Hell except puts your soul in a new jinn (body). Hell is Earth, it seems, there is no Hell to be created. However, because the planet Earth seems to eventually be destroyed, there may be only a number of attempts. Now we come into the 'Karma' system of Hinduism and Buddhism, but there is something in it.
Of all people on Earth, I find that Buddhists keep the original prophetic integrity intact of the true information, but not without error. These people have also fallen victim to the image making by a worship of Buddha, the classical fleshly delusion of materialization of what is deemed the divine.

If we move back to , I have problems understanding why people interpret it as "hidden". It is a great misconception because the word tells about what is the body of something, "a covering". And the body of something is generally quite visible. Not always (oxygen and other gasses), but they can be measured and are not supernatural.
And, has the connotation as garden, even here on Earth and it is very visible. It does not make it less clear when you consider that a garden is a body of land, and is a covering. The human also has a body, and it is a cover, and this is the jinn.

So when the body says nas and jinn it says soul and body, as simple as that. No mysterious invisible paranormal being.

The person in Solomon's court was someone who was thinking in a worldly (beastly - jinn) way and could yield a result of similar quality. The idea to conquer the Queen by brute force was his, while the one marked ('alem) by knowledge (ketaab) suggested diplomacy.

means that the person had a jinn disposition. 'min' works much like 'of' in English. By other words, he let himself be controlled by the beast body. You can check a dictionary for a definition of ayn-fa-ra.
Eventually I hope I can make someone overwhelmed that they can comprehend that I am telling the truth and what I research on in Quran is the real interpretation. Personally I find I am already saying more than enough for people to be able to be convinced.

Not sure when the misconception about jinn came about, but I am only strengthening my faith that Quran was in the hand of people who could barely read it less understand it.

Interestingly, it feels like Jewish clerics and scholars or Persian (Pharisee) clerics or scholars used their blinded Aramaic/Hebrew insight to decipher it and with their sectarian bias. The jinn traditional argument is so tainted by superstition. The funny thing is that jinn usually means the straight opposite of hidden, a covering that can usually be beheld quite literally. It should be obvious when Arabic seems to have so many words for hidden, but my suggestion is that ghayb is the real hidden word meaning what cannot be perceived with the eye, the common jinn senses, and that is true, you cannot use the classical five senses (jinn) to perceive GOD but you need the "sixth sense" which you can only enable when you suppress or control the ordinary senses.

I will continue later, if GOD permits (and the moderators do not ban me for heresy).

Salaam

[runninglikezebras]

"...except Iblis. He was one of the jinn..."

Iblis, a malaika (234), being in 'beast-mode' - as you define jinn - utterly contradicts the definition of malaika in Quran. Malaika praise God (2120, 413. Nothing is closer to God on a spiritual level than mailaika. On top of that Iblis predates the creation of any physical body that is required for the animal instinct which you equate jinn with to even exist. When Iblis was created from fire, there was no fleshly body yet. This was only created with the creation of Adam, made from clay.

@MoF, have you overlooked this? You are creating countless contradictions in Quran by your interpretation of Jinn. Add to this the etymological evidence majnn 'mad' (literally, 'one whose intellect is hidden&#039, junn 'madness', and jann 'embryo, fetus' ('hidden inside the womb&#039 - all sharing the same root, all referring to something hidden. I think your understanding of Jinn is utterly flawed. I wouldn't call it heretic but a rather catholic/mistaken perspective on things while ignoring the etymology of the root word.

Peace

[Man_of_Faith]

Salaam zebra,

It is the common interpretation that is flawed. Jinn does not refer to something hidden but a body.

Madness is written with the same form as garden, i.e. jannateh and it could be said to be something that covers someone/something. A mental disorder covers your soul and body from letting it work properly. refers to a (standalone) object.

If I create some kind of contradiction is because the traditional interpretation is in contradiction with he truth.

Besides, please do not lecture me about the etymology of without studying the phenomenon first. You seem to have just sold yourself out for a cheap interpretation and first-hand dictionary reference, particularly based on a word with thousands of years of history including sectarian bias. But if you like your hidden supernatural beings keep them, but you have to bring better arguments around here.

You cannot use jannateh to refer to a not yet seen paradise because the word is used in everyday Classical Arabic to refer to a garden as visible as it can be and it is a BODY OF LAND, covering something (al-ardh/the earth).

If the word is used for fetus/embryo is because it is a simplification of to say to have a body inside, a fetus.

And I have said it before, this is etymology taken from such as Lane's Lexicon. And I am not sure what kind of Catholic perspective you are talking about.

Gehennom refers to the same, it is a permanent attachment the body. Even the very flawed traditional interpretation gives mention of that people in Hell are given new bodies. Want linguistic parallels I can say the reason why day in Arabic is is because means light. Compare that to (gehennom) which uses the root and not because of any hidden connotation but because of an "attachment to body attribute".

Come on. Drop your sectarian delusion. You have claimed to have left traditional Islam behind and you fall for cheap traps like these induced by the same people you claim to reject. Either that or bring proper scientific studies over how the language can refer to some kind of superstitious supernatural being. It is so illogical and yet you propagate it using sectarian translations which have no basis with reality but teach just a (Pagan) sect/religion.

If something is hidden then a nas is that for it is your spirit/soul. A'nas is "to sense " referring to the senses. Nafs is your person, all combined as you appear on Earth.

But if you have nothing else to say but criticism without a foundation then please refrain from posting here because it is not for circular reasoning in here. I think I asked before, so could please you be courteous. I have made progress with somewhat scientific or at least logical and rational research methods but you are at square one with no independent research mirroring the sectarian bias of the crazy clergymen you claim you reject. I even brought information despite the risk of bias from lexicons due to criticism and they just confirm what I say. Get over it and quit being proud, you have been fooled. We all have to one extent or another.

Salaam