What is Al-Kauthar?
-
Mazhar, when will you stop behaving like Rabbis? Again answer of a question by another question. If you want to point out an omission give an authentic and accepted reference. That is the literate?s way of having an argument.
You earlier said
Syntactic Explanation
This is a nominal sentence. It has Inna at the start. This imparts certain changes in iraab of its subject and predicate. Its subject gets or accusative case and predicate or nominative case.
It is a combination of particle and first personal plural pronoun
This is a whole sentence as well the predicate of sentence or . This is a verbal sentence. Due pronoun at end it is nominative case or
This is called Subject or . This is due being in or accusative case.
I told you it is NOT but is the second object of verb.
Say whether I correctly pointed out the omission.
-
Dear Mazhar, show me where the hell in this verse is a mention of Mohammad. I think even a blind of eyes can tell that much by just listening. Unfortunatly, but not ones blind of mind.
Most of the time you are mindless. Define who is referred by second person masculine pronoun "Ka" suffixed to the Verb. Who is he?
-
"Ka" is a second person pronoun. When you say "you" who do you address? Isn't it someone in front of you?
A pronoun in Arabic is definite and is referent for a specific person. You need to specify that person. Otherwise translation is vague. In English "you" can refer a woman, two women, many women, one man, two men, many men and combination of woman and man. But "Ka" refers only ONE Man.
-
Mazhar, do you agree there is "Inna" at the start of the verse or not? Let us decide this basic fact first.
I correctly said you are most of the time mindless. I agreed what you said about Inna. Its Noun you mentioned Na. Verbal sentence is its predicate. Last word is the object of verb NOT the noun of Inna. Otherwise what is Na the pronoun in the sentence?
-
This cannot make sense, how can Allah give Muhammad a god? kauthar comes from katheer, plenty, even the gist of the sura is about providing.
- Muhammad is not even mentioned in that verse. Musa met al khidr.
- Al Khidr is not a God. He was human.
The worship of al khidr turned into a form of polytheism when they started worshipping al khidr as a God himself. This verse clearly states, he was nothing but a creation of God. It has a double meaning too God explains he is the one having giving them the arts and crafts (technology).
@Mazhar and bkanwar2 all your arab linguistics won't get you anywhere the word is proper name and an aramaic loanword.
You can't brush this away as a fairy tale. The references to the helper god kothar are countless in western semitic inscriptions. In fact the burden is upon you to prove this is not referring to that same k-th-r cult worship.
Peace
-
- Muhammad is not even mentioned in that verse. Musa met al khidr.
- Al Khidr is not a God. He was human.
The worship of al khidr turned into a form of polytheism when they started worshipping al khidr as a God himself. This verse clearly states, he was nothing but a creation of God. It has a double meaning too God explains he is the one having giving them the arts and crafts (technology).
@Mazhar and bkanwar2 all your arab linguistics won't get you anywhere the word is proper name and an aramaic loanword.
Peace
Peace Bro,
you have a very strange way of reading Arabic, besides the Quran was revealed to Muhammad, each surah is independent, if Allah refers to a man that was not introduced in the surah it can only be the recipient of the revelation, i.e. Muhammad (P).
-
You are missing the true meaning. Saying we gave you al-khidr is equal to saying "we are the one who gave you crafts & arts/technology".
This rise of technology was attributed to kothar/al-khidr. God corrects this to be his gift not al-khidrs. He was human. The person being adressed is the reader, not muhammad or musa. But musa did meet al khidr.
It's similar to the cult of Alexander the great who was also by some worshipped as a half-god. Al khidr has more meaning to it as he is equal to ptah in Egypt religion, and attributed to be the first poet, smith, etc.
God gifted these skills to al kihdr because he was one in total submission aka muslim.
Peace
-
The reason you won't find any arab traditional explanations of the word is because it has been deliberately obscured. First of all kothar is not an arab God. He is a canaanite one. Identifying k-th-r correctly would have exposed their lies about the arab nomadic geolocation of Quran. Which is in fact canaanite.
Secondly, some have the tendency to misunderstand the verse and think it's an excuse to worship k-th-r. QED by theNabster. The opposite is in fact true.
Peace
-
God gifted these skills to al kihdr because he was one in total submission aka muslim.
Peace
Peace
Is Arabic your first language?
When Allah addresses the reader, it is usually as those who have believed, in the plural, or O you Mankind, or bani Adam, bani Israeel, or qaum 3ad, thamud, etc.
There is not a single verse in the Quran I am aware of, where an impersonal reader is addressed.
The Prophet is asked to read it, as the first Sura Iqra'a starts with Read.
Read it to the would be Muslims / Believers.
-
Arab is not my first language. But I don't see what you are disputing. Al-Khautar is literally mentioned in thousands of canaanite inscriptions worshipping him as a God. Please bring some proof it is referring to something else.
The aramaic roots of k-th-r all well established. I'm not making this up. I'm truly surprised you are even unaware of this explicit, literal reference to al-kothar. Regardless of who's being addressed.
I do feel however Quran is addressing only the messenger when explicitly mentioned, addressed. If you don't feel adressed by reading Quran, why on earth are you reading it?!
Peace
-
I correctly said you are most of the time mindless. I agreed what you said about Inna. Its Noun you mentioned Na. Verbal sentence is its predicate. Last word is the object of verb NOT the noun of Inna. Otherwise what is Na the pronoun in the sentence?
In your zeal of proving others wrong you just start nit picking. It is not "noun of Inna", its Inna's noun. I am sure you know this much from rest of the explanation. You just can't accept that your held beliefs could be wrong.
-
Arab is not my first language. But I don't see what you are disputing. Al-Khautar is literally mentioned in thousands of canaanite inscriptions worshipping him as a God. Please bring some proof it is referring to something else.
The aramaic roots of k-th-r all well established. I'm not making this up. I'm truly surprised you are even unaware of this explicit, literal reference to al-kothar. Regardless of who's being addressed.
I do feel however Quran is addressing only the messenger when explicitly mentioned, addressed. If you don't feel adressed by reading Quran, why on earth are you reading it?!
Peace
Sorry I disagree, you are incorrect, as wrong as Bukhari who claimed Al Kauthar was a river in Paradise for Muhammad...
and the Quran addresses Muhammad all along, unless otherwise stipulated, then the Reader needs to identify as Muhammad when he (or with modulation she) practices.
Who do you think is addressed in the numerous places where Allah says Kul, i.e. Say?
Peace
-
Sorry I disagree, you are incorrect, as wrong as Bukhari who claimed Al Kauthar was a river in Paradise for Muhammad...
and the Quran addresses Muhammad all along, unless otherwise stipulated, then the Reader needs to identify as Muhammad when he (or with modulation she) practices.
Who do you think is addressed in the numerous places where Allah says Kul, i.e. Say?
Peace
Then I am wrong together with 98% of the western scholars who don't abide to tradition. But feel free to consider archaeological evidence equal to hadith. You have a very weird definition of "messenger". When I use any kind of messenger I'm always on the receiving end.
This thread is going off-topic by debating who is being addressed. For those interested in a linguistically sound and archaelogically backed up identification they can find it in my posts.
Peace
-
Then I am wrong together with 98% of the western scholars who don't abide to tradition. But feel free to consider archaeological evidence equal to hadith.
Peace
I am not using Hadith, I am using basic semantics and language skills of an Arabic native speaker. I started reading the Quran in Arabic well before I was exposed to Hadiths about 20 years later...
Peace
-
Modern arabic has little in common with quranic arabic. Many of the words in modern arab semantics are proof of the huge impact these hadith had on the entire arab culture. Besides this, it is clearly a proper name.
I was never exposed to any hadith or indoctrination. When I try to identify words in Quran, I use arab lexicons but ALWAYS check the etymology which often leads me to aramaic. But this is besides the point. k-th-r's etymology is aramaic. Used as a proper name in Quran.
Peace
-
Modern arabic has little in common with quranic arabic. Many of the words in modern arab semantics are proof of the huge impact these hadith had on the entire arab culture. Besides this, it is clearly a proper name.
I was never exposed to any hadith or indoctrination. When I try to identify words in Quran, I use arab lexicons but ALWAYS check the etymology which often leads me to aramaic. But this is besides the point. k-th-r's etymology is aramaic. Used as a proper name in Quran.
Peace
Peace
Let's stop here.
-
In your zeal of proving others wrong you just start nit picking. It is not "noun of Inna", its Inna's noun. I am sure you know this much from rest of the explanation. You just can't accept that your held beliefs could be wrong.
Sorry I missed your previous post about agreeing. Let us not worry for a moment about technical syntactical lebelling of the sentence.
Please show me based upon root and measure/weight/wazan. How traditionalist are justified in its contruct that they claim it to be as a definite noun?