Human being
-
The procreation of Man - Anisogamy
The Grand Qur?n depicts the creation of First Human being and thereafter the creation of his extension with the choice of such words that mirror the unseen physical realities in picturesque manner, that we could visualize them even before our eyes might have caught their actual images/clips. Herein, we will study about the procreation of the living humanity who are the extension of first Human being.
In this section information how life originates in Male's body upto the moment Semen containing sperms is ready to be ejaculated in the "receptacle"
http//haqeeqat.pk/Human-Embryology.htm
Views, suggestion for improvement, critical review is requested.
-
Contd from post 1
Man's Origin History of his coming into being.
The narrative of Man taking existence in the Physical Realm is the first of many episodes mentioned in Qur?n.
Allah the Exalted informs us about history of the Creation of Man in picturesque verbal presentation in the Grand Qur?n that we might conveniently visualize the happenings.
http//haqeeqat.pk/Human%20origin.htm
-
I kindly suggest you first try giving proper explanation to the difference between and as well as between and and then you can perhaps come with a decent thesis.
Raw Material for Aadam and Insaan
http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/015.%20Al%20Hijr/15.28r.gif
http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.12p.gif
Every word, morphology, syntax and semantics is explained; please see here
http//haqeeqat.pk/Human%20origin.htm
-
Every word, morphology, syntax and semantics is explained; please see here
Yes, by stating Sad-Lam-Sad-Lam as a 4-lateral root, which right there is incorrect, for there is no such root in any Ancient Semitic languages, at least within pre-Islamic Semitic languages, nor there were any language using 4-lateral roots.
comes fromt root , from where eulogy, prayer, image comes from.
Not to mention NOWHERE does mean "Proper Noun - name of the First Man". or other definitions provided in the piece.
-
Yes, by stating Sad-Lam-Sad-Lam as a 4-lateral root, which right there is incorrect, for there is no such root in any Ancient Semitic languages, at least within pre-Islamic Semitic languages, nor there were any language using 4-lateral roots.
comes fromt root , from where eulogy, prayer, image comes from.
Not to mention NOWHERE does mean "Proper Noun - name of the First Man". or other definitions provided in the piece.
Any source?
Just quote one instance where in the context it is not proper noun out of 25 times.
-
Any source?
Plenty. Any reason for me to share? It is you who claims to be a "scientist" so you better do some work.
Just quote one instance where in the context it is not proper noun out of 25 times.
Just quote one source where it says it is a name for a First Man, outside of 230, which won't justify it, since I know this is a first thing you will try to bring up. Instead a source, which would prove such definition linguistically and not culturally.
Also I did not find any reasonable justification of = or vise-versa, nor did I find a coherent explanation of the difference between the two, as well as the "means" of their creation ( or ن, according to your thesis.
-
Plenty. Any reason for me to share? It is you who claims to be a "scientist" so you better do some work.
Just quote one source where it says it is a name for a First Man, outside of 230, which won't justify it, since I know this is a first thing you will try to bring up. Instead a source, which would prove such definition linguistically and not culturally.
Also I did not find any reasonable justification of = or vise-versa, nor did I find a coherent explanation of the difference between the two, as well as the "means" of their creation ( or ن, according to your thesis.
The evidence that is a proper noun is the book itself where it is mentioned 25 times.
Same words collocate with regard to creation of and in reference about raw material of initial creation.
is no root in Arabic. Just skim lexicons.
-
The evidence that is a proper noun is the book itself where it is mentioned 25 times.
You are clinging to the proper noun issue, yet I've repeatedly asked you to present how do you know means "First Man".
Same words collocate with regard to creation of and in reference about raw material of initial creation.
You mean the same "meanings" for completely different words, which bear different meanings? According to your logic man is made out of the same material as .
is no root in Arabic. Just skim lexicons.
What is Arabic? You mean the language composed in 8th-9th centuries? Or the "mixed" language called ?
There are countless of words stemming from , which is Semitic parent root for a lot of words people use, including prayer, eulogy, good deeds, image, shadow and many more.