Iblis?
-
Ahmad,
I agree with you. The word has more than one meaning and it can mean 'unclear.' There are alot of people here who don't want to realize that a word can have more than one meaning. Secondly, you are part right about 'fa' it can be 'sabaabiyah' but it doesn't have to be. Fa and wa in Classical Arabic (not modern Arabic) can have the very same meaning. You can see this in different Quranic texts where wa is used in one text and 'fa' is used in another in the same place.
Godbless,
proGod -
Peace Ahmed,
Peace Joe
mate the opposite of decisive is "Unclear"
This is true. I do not think this ayat is speaking of opposites as you are.
I also don't think that the clear arabic verse should be translated as you think it is
Allah is saying the Quran has clear verses and unclear verses
I do not believe God is sending unclear signs .
you see your confusion is coming from the following
Aya means two things in arabic
- A miracle
- A verse in the Quran
so 37 is talking about verses in the Quran not signs like the sun and the moon
the sun and the moon are clear signs that Allah exist
the whole Quran is a clear Sign (miracle) the Allah is exists
the verses in the Quran is something else than signs, they are Ayata (verses) words to be read, within the context there might be a hidden sign., but not in every verse you will see a hidden sign for sure
your lack of arabic is evident
Allah said here is the Quran that I sent you
The ayat we are speaking of does not say this.
Ayat means two things in arabic
Miracles
and
verses in the Quran
can't be clearer than that
in it we will find Muhkam Ayat (very clear and have very well established meaning) and others that are Mutashabihat (unclear), and we will see some people with sick heart who will try hard to explain those UNCLEAR verses, seeking discord or just seeking to explain it,
In this sign there is mentioned ta'wila-hu which means the interpretation which they, who seek to cause fitna/sowing dissention, desire. These it is who make an interpretation of the cosimilar signs based on their desire to cause fitna. They do not heed the direction of interpretation of these cosimilar signs according to the firm ayatin in alkitab/the decree.
I don't know what you are talking about above, but it seems you chose to follow a difficult path, good luck
while NONE will know its meaning but Allah, however the true submitters will say both are from Allah and they will declare their belief in both the Clear and the Unclear verses
I believe those with knowledge shoud verify all things . We are given the keys to unearth the authenticity of alquran which is a clear reading.
I will look at the verses later and try to understand what you mean, no hold on I remember 1736
your total interpetation to it is 100% flawed, the verse never said people with knowledge should verify all things, this is misleading
the verse says "PEOPLE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE SHOULD NOT ARGUE"
like what many are doing herr with the arabic language which they have very lil knowledge, this is funny indeed, verse 1736 is exposing those
you see pepole with sick hearts WILL TRY TO CHASE THEIR MEANINGS to try (Ta'awiloh) (Explain it) or to cause discord, this can not be the case with "CLEAR SIMILAR VERSES"
I agree that people will seek to cause fitna in the interpretations of their desire of the cosimilar signs.
Ayat in verse 37 means VERSES not signs
can't be cleaer than this
the believers on the other hand will not try either, they will just accept it as both from Allah
The mumin are people possessed of understanding and do not just accept anything.
Understanding that Allah exist and the Quran is His book, not understanding the cosmos
mate your point is a total non sense, sorry
No need to apologize. We disagree. My views are nonesense to different people besides yourself.
if you are offended, just in case I'm sorry
the same root can be used to compose words with totally different meanings
I totally agree with you.
finally we agreed, thank you lol
they are unclear which one of them, and that is also another context to the verse, but I accept the first one that they said all the cows look similar
I do not think it is because the people are unclear that they are asking. This is a case where people do not follow simple direction and in ignorance ask for unnecessary details.
well, that is what verse 1736 is talking about, you may also check 5101-102
using your logic, then the Mutshabihat verses MUST BE THE SAME EXACTLY AS WELL THE SAME LETTERS, WORDS and ORDER, so when you see it for the first time they will look the same exactly
This is not my logic. What you are saying to me is very confusing.
well I might show an example then
got my point?
I got your point, but you totally blew out of proportion what I meant. What you are talking about now is not what I was saying. When I said similar I was not talking about the same words, letters, etc.
well, that is what "Shabah" means, they look the same
i.e. an apple will look like an apple
a cow will look like a cow
words will look like words
a twins will be "Shabah" each other
and you will be UNCLEAR which one is who from the twins
and because the Kitab is in Arabic as Allah planned so, I will rsort only to the arabic language to understand it, make sense bro?
Certainly, I get you completely.
I have no problem to accept that meaning, but you should know that the arabic word Mutashabihat also means UNCLEAR
I understand that it can mean such. This I never denied.
we are even then, LOL
Please stop gloating about your arabic this and your arabic is that. I understood you the first time when you said arabic was your native tongue. You do not need to repeat it so many times. Layth too speaks arabic and has translated mutashabih as similar. His interpretation, like mine, differs from yours. Joe
well, your request is very strange, and I?m not gloating it, it is a fact, but I would be happy if Layth would like to discuss this matter with me (the Mutshabihat matter) in fact it is much more convenient for me to discuss it with someone who speaks Arabic fluently
Peace Joe
-
Peace Ahmed
Joe
Likewise Joe
Ahmed
-
well, your request is very strange, and I?m not gloating it, it is a fact, but I would be happy if Layth would like to discuss this matter with me (the Mutshabihat matter) in fact it is much more convenient for me to discuss it with someone who speaks Arabic fluently
Peace Ahmed,
Your viewpoint seems to hold that only a person fluent in Arabic is capable of understanding the reading and this can be shown to be false; but is ultimately irrelevant.
The God is not an Arab God - the dialogue and conversations described in the reading didn't even happen in Arabic (and this is one of the reasons I have previously argued gives rise to the different renditions of the passages) - there is nothing special or sacred about Arabic.
The reason it is irrelevant however is not for these reasons, but because people have the ability to act in a righteous way without the need to know Arabic - or even to have read the koran.
Peace/
-
well, your request is very strange, and I?m not gloating it, it is a fact, but I would be happy if Layth would like to discuss this matter with me (the Mutshabihat matter) in fact it is much more convenient for me to discuss it with someone who speaks Arabic fluently
Peace Ahmed,
Hello bro
Your viewpoint seems to hold that only a person fluent in Arabic is capable of understanding the reading and this can be shown to be false; but is ultimately irrelevant.
Not exactly a general point, it is a point when it comes to discuss the hard subjects, like Iblis or verse 37 or verse 1736
But for the majority of the Quran, possibly 80% to 90%, anyone can understand it even the ones who don't speak Arabic, i believe, me and you understood the Khanzir issue the same
The God is not an Arab God -
I agree, but the Quran is an Arabic Quran, which is a message that is repeated numerous times, this repetition make look Mutashabihat to you, while for me the verses looks Muhkamat to me
?We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that ye may learn wisdom.?
(2)
-> Why you think Allah said an Arabic Quran?, why He did not say ?He sent down the Quran??, I know it was said as such without the ?Arabic? word in many other locations, but why in here?,
Will the message be repeated?, let?s see
?Thus have We revealed it to be a judgment of authority in Arabic. Wert thou to follow their (vain) desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither protector nor defender against Allah.?
(37)
-> The Quran was called here ?Hukman? i.e. ?judgment of authority?, but again the word ?Arabic? proceeded the word ?Hukman?, why, you think?
?Thus have We sent this down - an arabic Qur'an - and explained therein in detail some of the warnings, in order that they may fear Allah, or that it may cause their remembrance (of Him).?
(113)
-> The same repetition that it is ?an Arabic Quran?, the verse here does not look Mutashabihat to 122 nor 1337, while we have the same similar message within, what do you think?
?(It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein) in order that they may guard against Evil.?
(2
-> Again the Quran was called ?Arabic Quran?
?A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;-?
(3)
-> The Quran was called ?the Arabic Quran? again, but look how the Arabic Quran came after ? verses are explained in detail?
?Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur'an that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities and all around her,- and warn (them) of the Day of Assembly, of which there is no doubt (when) some will be in the Garden, and some in the Blazing Fire.?
(7)
-> Same message bro ?The Arabic Quran? that will be used warn the cities around, would you reckon the Mothers of cities mentioned in the verse means only the Arabic major cities, or every city in the Globe?
I reckon it is every city in the globe and whatever is around each of them, but we know that all cities don?t speak Arabic, so why Allah say Arabic Quran in here?, what do you reckon?
?We have made it a Qur'an in Arabic, that ye may be able to understand (and learn wisdom).?
(3)
-> This is a good verse, can you see Allah is saying ?We ha made it a Quran in Arabic?, so we will be able to understand?
Who do you reckon will comprehend it quicker without being religiously oriented, I mean regarding words, grammar and meanings- Someone with an Arabic mother tongue OR
- Someone with a foreigner mother tongue who does not speak Arabic
?
I?m talking literally here, you don?t even have to be a Muslim for the above question
?And before this, was the Book of Moses as a guide and a mercy And this Book confirms (it) in the Arabic tongue; to admonish the unjust, and as Glad Tidings to those who do right.?
(12)
-> Nice sequence for the verses I brought on the table, in the above verse the Quran was called ?An Arabic Tongue?, why you reckon?
?We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic and clear tongue.?
(103)
-> Again the Quran was called ?Arabic and Clear Tongue?, this is really an important question, why you reckon the clear Arabic tongue was used in a metaphor manner to describe the Quran ?
Would that mean that someone who is a native Arabic speaker will understand it quicker?, not to believe I mean just to understand the clear Arabic words and clear Arabic sentences used
You see the way most Muslims here especially the Quran alone ones make a fuss of the clear Arabic words and come up with totally different means that will render the Quran ?UNCLEAR?, i.e. the Quran lied
?In the perspicuous Arabic tongue.?
(195)
-> And finally the Quran was described again as ?perspicuous Arabic tongue?
Do all the above verses ?Ayat? sound Mutashabihat to you?
Truly they sound Muhkamat to me because their meanings are crystal clear, now I will take the chance and show you two verses that anyone can call similar verses and even relativity will have no effect, we will all agree, I don?t need to post the English meaning, just look at it and compare please
(47)
(122)
-> There is no difference whatsoever between the above 2 verses in sure no. 2, what do you think of the reason it was repeated?, as well, would you classify both as Mutashabihat?, and if so can you please explain how it can be used to cause discord? thanks
the dialogue and conversations described in the reading didn't even happen in Arabic
I will concede that we don?t know what language used within the conversation
(and this is one of the reasons I have previously argued gives rise to the different renditions of the passages) ?
But it was told to us by Allah in Arabic, He created all the languages as He told us in the Quran, and He chose the Arabic out of?m all to finish His message with
there is nothing special or sacred about Arabic.
truly, there is something special but not sacred about that language I can try to explain but it is going to be hard as I?m not a qualified Arabic language teacher rather a native Arabic speaker who knew the grammar at my early days really well, you may search the net better and I can help with any question later,
Do you think after all that repetition by Allah ?The Arabic Quran?, ?The Clear Arabic Tongue? and ?The Arabic Hukom?, is possibly a statement from Allah that there is something special about this language?
The reason it is irrelevant however is not for these reasons, but because people have the ability to act in a righteous way without the need to know Arabic - or even to have read the koran.
Peace/I still say we need the basic guidance from our God as He promised Adam and Abraham, you can act righteous and reject the Quran but you will be rewarded for the good deeds only in this life then no life will be after while you will be alive, very scary indeed
Peace
-
Peace Ahmed,
It is blindingly obvious that the reading is in the Arabic script and language; whether the text mentions it or not.
However you have highlighted something that now should arouse in you another question. Why would this word "AAarabiyan" mean Arabic when it is painfully obvious what it is.
The reason should be clear to you if it isn't already.
It's because the meaning of "AAarabiyan" does not mean Arabic the language but rather related to the root meaning 'Aruba Ain-Ra-Ba
To express one's mind clearly, to be pure and free of faults, eloquence, pure
It is a description not of which language it is in, but its quality as the surrounding statements always highlight. It is obvious what language it is - it would be pointless me saying that this post is in the English language - would it not?
Peace.
-
Peace truth
I agree it will be pointless, unless there is a message behind it, the message is really known and proven which is the main miracle in the Quran is the Arabic language used, that is why it included a challenge for any Arabic professional to right three lines like it In the Arabic Language, lol
now according to your metaphor explanation, the above challenge will not make any sense and is nothing but a joke
peace bro
-
Peace truth
I agree it will be pointless, unless there is a message behind it, the message is really known and proven which is the main miracle in the Quran is the Arabic language used, that is why it included a challenge for any Arabic professional to right three lines like it In the Arabic Language, lol
now according to your metaphor explanation, the above challenge will not make any sense and is nothing but a joke
peace bro
Peace Ahmed,
On the contrary, it is quite easy to write 3 lines of Arabic language.
It is difficult on the other hand to write three lines of faultless, clear minded, pure and eloquent language.
I hope this makes it even clearer.
Regards.
-
The challenge was not realy to right 3 lines like it bro, it was to write a sura like it and because the smallest sura is three verses I just rendered it 3 lines, in fact three verses is like a line and a half
yep I can write 100 lines in arabic, even 1000 lines in arabic, even 10,000 lines, BUT CAN ANY OF THE LINES BE LIKE THE ARABIC QURAN? NO for sure, because many tried and failed over the history, and can discuss this with you if you wish
but truley if you know how to read arabic then you read all the hadith and compare it with the Quran, you will know HOW DIFFERENENT IS ALLAH WORDS from the human words, and a language like Arabic is requred for Allah to take the upper hand, because it is a very special language regarding its structure
the challenge is to write in arabic not in any other language and must be like the Quran style and with a message, not just meaingless arabic words
what you suggested make it complicated not clearer, sorry bro
peace
-
Peace Ahmed,
You are still hanging on to the "Arabic is special" myth. I can assure you that had the God chosen any language on the earth - no matter which one it was; a reading from the God in that language would be equally faultless and equally inimitable.
Linguists and philologists have examined languages of humans from all over the planet and find that each language is equally as rich as any other in terms of its concepts and features. Though they may differ they are all a reflection of the amazing creation of the God - the human brain that is able to understand and communicate language.
3022 And from His signs are the creation of the heavens and the Earth, and the difference of your languages and your colors. In that are signs for the world.
Please try to see your "Arab elitism" for what it is. The God is indifferent to the language a person speaks or understands. Each language is able to convey the truth.
You can't say that a truth expressed in the Arabic language is twice as true as one in another language.
I hope you understand.
Regards.
-
ok bro thank you
peace
-
Salaam All,
I thought that Iblis discussion was to an end shock
Peace Sis Majidah
-
Ahmad,
I agree with you. The word has more than one meaning and it can mean 'unclear.' There are alot of people here who don't want to realize that a word can have more than one meaning. Secondly, you are part right about 'fa' it can be 'sabaabiyah' but it doesn't have to be. Fa and wa in Classical Arabic (not modern Arabic) can have the very same meaning. You can see this in different Quranic texts where wa is used in one text and 'fa' is used in another in the same place.
Godbless,
proGodsorry bro I just saw your comment
Yes man I agree that the Fa can also means Wa but in the context it sound like the Fa Al Sababia to me, have you heard about the Fa Al Sababbia?, I'm basing it on the context of the extra info provided that he was one of the Jinn, if we consider the Fa as Wa, try replacing it in the verse with Wa and read it in arabic if you can, it will sound really odd, while it may be gramatically correct
but I will still accept it as Wa if it is gramatically correct, for me it will not change the coclusion that Iblis was a Jinn and was given a rank of a Malak
Peace be with you brother
-
Salam all,
Since I have any evidence from the Reading that the malaika are also jinn, and whatever the meaning attributed to the word illa (except, but...), my understanding at this stage about the satute of Iblis didn't change. Neither Adam nor Iblis lost their statutes (human being and jinn respectively) before and after they were driven out aljannat. 1850 is clear and didn't need any interpretation, imho.
Thank you all for your understandings.
Peace and best wishes
-
Peace Ahmed Bahgat,
I do not know, as Allah did not say the malaika were created with freewill
If you do not know then you should gain knowledge and reexamine your conclusions. The fact is that obedience or disobedience is meaningless if one doesn't have freedom of choice.
As well I careless to know,
How can you gain knowledge if you don't care?
but it is enough to know that the humans are higher than the malaika because they have freewill while they don?t
Higher than controllers!? Don't you find this a little presumptuous? Most humans are only higher when it comes to ignorant boasting and arrogance.
I agree, but noit any human, only the bad guys are called Shaitan, like the terroristys for example
The great reading is not some kind of entertaining Hollywood flick where one can identify the "bad guys/terrorists" because they usually wear dark clothes and speak with a Middle Eastern accent. In 6112 those who are exceeding in rebellion ("shayatin") are not described as "bad guys", they are described as people who invent decorated words to deceive people. The worst lies are those baseless decorated stories that people attribute to The God without knowledge. For example, we heard the entertaining but baseless story about Adam and mythical Eve living for 40 years in paradise, the snake, the apple and you know the rest.
However that is just a nickname, Iblis was a Jinn nicknamed Shaitan
This is funny. I don't think that The God uses "nicknames" in the great reading like Hollywood nick naming bad guys "Scarecrow" and "The Joker". Moreover, this comment shows your ignorance of the Arabic language. The word "shaitan" is not a meaningless label. It is an Arabic intensified common noun of the form "fa3lan" that has a meaning that you can easily look up in Classical Arabic dictionaries. It has a meaning of "something that exceeded the limits, something intensely burned and something wasted'. Some Classical Arabic dictionaries say that the letter "noon" is part of the root and in this case its form is "fay3al" and it is derived from the root "sh t n" instead of "sh y t / sh a t". In this case, the meaning is "one who diverted from his destination".
well, I can take it as any of the following possibilities
- Allah ordered Iblis to prostrate in another event that is later on to the angel ones
This is baseless conjecture.
- Allah made Iblis to think (fooled him) that iblis became an angel and the order was given to all in the vicinity as him being an angel virtually but not for real, bear in mind that Allah was fooling Iblis, this is evident from the Quran when Iblis said...
The Arabic word ?Aghwaitani? does not mean ?put me in the wrong? rather it means ?TO FOOL?, so verse 1539 should be literally and briefly as follow
?Iblis said God as you fooled me I will fool them all
and the same word was used in verse 1542 to describe the ones who will follow Iblis as ?Ghaween? ?Fools?
Again, you are showing your ignorance of Arabic. Here is the meaning of "ghawa" and "aghwa" from Lisan Al-3arab
()
As you can see, there is nothing here about "fooling". The meaning has to do with misguiding NOT fooling. This is consistent with what we are told allover the great reading about The God guiding and misguiding whom He wills (not fooling).
This is false because according to 3372, everything had the freedom to CHOOSE whether to accept the trust or not.
Yes.
Mate, I?m sorry before you accuse me of being wrong I would love that you support your claim, while you did by posting a reference to a Quran verse without any elaboration by you
3372 is clear. It is indisputable that one must have freedom of choice BEFORE he can accept or refuse something.
So let me elaborate and prove to you that I was right, not sure if you are wrfong or not really, I?m talking about what I know according to the Quran that I studied well Alahamdullellah and still studying it, here is the verse
YUSUFALI We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof but man undertook it;- He was indeed unjust and foolish;-
PICKTHAL Lo! We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth and the hills, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it. And man assumed it. Lo! he hath proved a tyrant and a fool.
SHAKIR Surely We offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to be unfaithful to it and feared from it, and man has turned unfaithful to it; surely he is unjust, ignorant;(72)
-> where exactly that it says everything have freewill?,It is common sense. Again, one must have freedom of choice BEFORE he can accept or refuse something.
let?s look at Yusuf Ali translation ? We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof but man undertook it;- He was indeed unjust and foolish;-?, what is wrong here bro?, it says clearly that the Trust to the (HEAVENS, THE EARTH AND THE MOUNTAIN) was offered and the declined to undertake it
firstly the verse does not say everything only three things mentioned, while I agree that the heaven and earth cover a lot of things, but it does not cover humans, jinn, and animals.
It covers everything in the heavens and the earth but the controllers are not part of the heaven and the earth as per 1649
- And to The God complies/obeys what is in the heavens and what is in the earth from a mover, and the controllers, and they are not being arrogant.
So the controllers were not offered the trust.
secondly, what is trust mentioned in the verse?, the ? ? pronounced ?Al Amana?, It is simply to have a freewill and be held accountable,
This is baseless conjecture. There is nothing in 3372, 20115 or anywhere else in the great reading that says that the trust/"al-amana" is free will. This is either your own false invention or someone else's false invention that you blindly borrowed.
the Quran describe our failure to carry the ?Amana? in the following verse
?We had already, beforehand, taken the covenant of Adam, but he forgot and We found on his part no firm resolve.?
(115)
Again, nothing here says that the trust/"amana" is freewill. Bring any proof.
-> This Amana that was declined by the heavens and earth and mountains means that since that moment they have no freewill, this sound really true, I can see the same stars every day, I can also see the sun every day, possibly the sun may want to have a date with another star like Sirius for example?, just kiddin mate , but truly it seems that the Sun and the moon have no freewill, or what do you think?
It seems so because they CHOOSE to obey The God. They know something that we don't. That is why we are described as IGNORANT for accepting the trust in 3372.
well the Quran actually told us about an event when after Amana was offered to the heavens and Earth, let?s look at it
?Then He directed Himself to the heaven and it is a vapor, so He said to it and to the earth Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said We come willingly.?(11)
-> You see, after Allah created the heaven and earth and they declined the Amana they were told to stay on course willingly or unwillingly, they preferred to come stay on course willingly,
The expression "willingly or unwillingly" becomes meaningless nonsense if they didn't have freedom of choice to choose between "willingly OR unwillingly". You said yourself that they PREFERRED (i.e. CHOSE) to come willingly. So you are contradicting yourself.
while a human like me and you can go astray with our freewill that was given to us, that Amana that Adam carried
From the great reading, we can see that HUMANS too will come to The God willingly or unwillingly. It is no different than the rest of creation.
Again I can?t see anything in the Arabic verse that suggest the slightest that Iblis seems confident that he knows the future, the verse does not even suggest that he knows the future while not being confident, the verse does not say what you suggested at all, it simply says that Iblis will attack the humans from all directions
?"Then will I assault them from before them and behind them, from their right and their left Nor wilt thou find, in most of them, gratitude (for thy mercies).?
(17)
He clearly sees that MOST WILL NOT BE THANKFUL. The God doesn't correct his prediction by saying "no you are wrong and most will be thankful". Instead, The God confirms his prediction by saying "I will FILL hell of you and all those who follow you".
The Quran actually told us that the Jinn can?t know the unseen
?Then, when We decreed (Solomon's) death, nothing showed them his death except a little worm of the earth, which kept (slowly) gnawing away at his staff so when he fell down, the Jinns saw plainly that if they had known the unseen, they would not have tarried in the humiliating Penalty (of their Task).?(14)
-> I.E. The Jinn failed to know that Soloman is dead for long time, while they thought was was still alive a leaning on his staff
Yes, the "jinn" don't know the hidden. However, per 714 "iblis" was given respite until the time of resurrection. Thus, it is clear from passages such as 848 that he can see the hidden
- And when the one who exceeded the limits decorated for them their works, and he said "There are no defeaters from the people for you today and I am a savior for you." So when the two groups saw each other, he returned on his two heels, and he said "I am innocent from you, I SEE/UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU DO NOT SEE/UNDERSTAND, I fear The God, and The God is severe in punishment."
they diod not disobey God because they have no freewill and MUST OBEY ALL THE TIME, Iblis had a freewill to decline
So according to you someone who has freewill can't obey The God and only mindless mechanical things without ability to choose can obey Him. This is logically false.
didn?t you ask yourself if they know that Adam will shed blood and cause mischief why the prostrated to him then?, because they have no choice
They obeyed because they CHOSE to obey The God because The God knows best, NOT because they have no choice.
at least if they declined to prostrate using their good argument that humans will shed blood and cause mischief on earth it would have merit than Iblis argument that he is better than Adam because he was created from fire
But they already presented that argument when The God told them about His decision and The God refuted it. I don't think that the controllers are mindless tape recorders that keep repeating the same argument after it has been refuted before.
The malaika CAN NOT BE TESTED, they have no freewill
Make sense?No, it doesn't make sense. There is nothing in the great reading that says that the controllers are mindless mechanical objects that have no freedom of choice.
On the other hand, there is evidence that they have free choice. For example
They CHOSE to question The God's decision (230).
They CHOSE to hide in themselves what they really thought (233).
They CHOSE to act on their own and kill an innocent boy in 1880-81.
They CHOSE to obey The God and obey Adam while one of them ("iblis") didn't.
Had they inhabited the earth, they too would get a messenger (1795).where you got that they argued from?
One gets this picture by putting 230, 233 and 3969 together. Besides, questioning a decision made by the Almighty is certainly not a good thing.
they only wondered and because Allah is the Most fair and Just He allowed them to question Him, exactly as he allowed Iblis to Question God, as you can Question God, but you have freewill to submit like Iblis and like me, the Malaika has no free will and has to submit all the time, that does not mean they are not allowed to ask a question though
To be able to "question", you have to choose to question. Thus, you MUST have freedom of choice. From your statement, you seem to understand that our ability to question results from our freedom of choice but you fail to apply the same logic to the controllers. Thus, your statement above sounds contradictory.
well again you interpretation is very flawed they were asked to prostrate not to obey Adam, but how the angels can see the future?, they said they know nothing except what Allah told them 232
I don't think that they were asked to bang their foreheads on the floor. Wiping one's forehead on the floor is meaningless. Someone who makes any kind of physical gesture, whether it is banging his head on the floor or on a holy wall, but doesn't obey The God hasn't really done "sujud". Hence, it is not surprising that the majority of those who do it disobey The God.
So my question is do you believe there is a physical entity called Malaika? (yes /No)
I do not mean statusThere is a group described as controllers/"malaika" just like there is a group described as "mu'minin"/"those who have faith". Both groups are populated by creatures but their membership of the group is not based on their physical properties, it is based on their status. Like "iman", "taqwa", etc. "mlk" is also a status. This is clear and simple as per 326, which you totally ignore.
You have failed to address the clear statement in 326 that "mlk" is a status that is given and taken away at will by The God.
that is fine that is exactly what I?m talking about he was given a status of malaika, did you read this in my comment or not
No, I didn't see that in your comments. The fact is that ALL controllers/"malaika" were given that status by The God as per 326.
anyway do you believe that Angels is just a status or a physical entity like me and you?
Angels are mythical biblical creatures flying around in white robes and halos and I am sorry, but unlike you, I don't believe in biblical fairy tales.
As for the controllers, those two aspects are not mutually exclusive. One can be a physical human and earn the non-physical status of "mu'min" at the same time. Similarly, any creature even a cockroach can be given the status of "malak"/controller by The God. This is common sense in light of 326. The God's hands are not tied.
The Malaika are also for real, Allah described them in great details, yes Ma la Ka is to control, but what is the point arn;t the malaika control a lot of things?
Perhaps if you understood 326, you would understand the point and see that The God doesn't pointlessly describe them as "malak"/controller.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace sister Marie, all,
Since I have any evidence from the Reading that the malaika are also jinn, and whatever the meaning attributed to the word illa (except, but...), my understanding at this stage about the satute of Iblis didn't change. Neither Adam nor Iblis lost their statutes (human being and jinn respectively) before and after they were driven out aljannat. 1850 is clear and didn't need any interpretation, imho.
I don't think that anyone here addressed the clear statement in 326 that "mlk" is a status that can be given to ANYONE and taken away from ANYONE by The God.
The controllers are not seperate "creatures" no more than messengers are seperate non-human "creatures" and we are asked to have faith in both. Messengership is a status given by The God to whom He wills in the same way that "mlk"/control is a status given by The God to whom He wills.
I hope this helps to clarify the issues.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace bro Ayman,
Excellent post, revisiting this discussion, about choice...it brings to mind quantum mechanics and Feynman's sum over paths.
-
Peace Ahmed Bahgat,
peace bro
I do not know, as Allah did not say the malaika were created with freewill
If you do not know then you should gain knowledge and reexamine your conclusions. The fact is that obedience or disobedience is meaningless if one doesn't have freedom of choice.
no I'm sorry bro, it will not help my belief in any way, I'm also abiding by 5101-102, but be my guest to understand the quran the way you want it
As well I careless to know,
How can you gain knowledge if you don't care?
well the knwledge I needed to make belief was acquired, now I don't need to open the doors for Satan to flaw my belief, but you are welcome to do it, I'm aviding with 5101-102
but it is enough to know that the humans are higher than the malaika because they have freewill while they don?t
Higher than controllers!? Don't you find this a little presumptuous? Most humans are only higher when it comes to ignorant boasting and arrogance.
no bro, you logic does not makie any sense to me, let me explain
you have freewill
the malaika don't
who is higher then?, well my 14 years old daughter answerd the question as the Humans are surely higher
I agree, but noit any human, only the bad guys are called Shaitan, like the terroristys for example
The great reading is not some kind of entertaining Hollywood flick where one can identify the "bad guys/terrorists" because they usually wear dark clothes and speak with a Middle Eastern accent. In 6112 those who are exceeding in rebellion ("shayatin") are not described as "bad guys", they are described as people who invent decorated words to deceive people. The worst lies are those baseless decorated stories that people attribute to The God without knowledge. For example, we heard the entertaining but baseless story about Adam and mythical Eve living for 40 years in paradise, the snake, the apple and you know the rest.
I don't get what you say, but it is ok, I gained the knowledge to know God and I don;t need further knowledge about the secrets of the heaven and earth, I'm glad to wait till the judgment day to know
hell no what it will do to me if I know it now, lol
However that is just a nickname, Iblis was a Jinn nicknamed Shaitan
This is funny. I don't think that The God uses "nicknames" in the great reading like Hollywood nick naming bad guys "Scarecrow" and "The Joker". Moreover, this comment shows your ignorance of the Arabic language. The word "shaitan" is not a meaningless label. It is an Arabic intensified common noun of the form "fa3lan" that has a meaning that you can easily look up in Classical Arabic dictionaries. It has a meaning of "something that exceeded the limits, something intensely burned and something wasted'. Some Classical Arabic dictionaries say that the letter "noon" is part of the root and in this case its form is "fay3al" and it is derived from the root "sh t n" instead of "sh y t / sh a t". In this case, the meaning is "one who diverted from his destination".
my fault I guess, sorry I meant his name not his nick name, and for God, i reckon He can so what He wants
well, I can take it as any of the following possibilities
- Allah ordered Iblis to prostrate in another event that is later on to the angel ones
This is baseless conjecture.
well if it is, i reckon it is less conjecture that this flawed concept you want to convince me with, forget it as no way I will believe that flawed concept
- Allah made Iblis to think (fooled him) that iblis became an angel and the order was given to all in the vicinity as him being an angel virtually but not for real, bear in mind that Allah was fooling Iblis, this is evident from the Quran when Iblis said...
The Arabic word ?Aghwaitani? does not mean ?put me in the wrong? rather it means ?TO FOOL?, so verse 1539 should be literally and briefly as follow
?Iblis said God as you fooled me I will fool them all
and the same word was used in verse 1542 to describe the ones who will follow Iblis as ?Ghaween? ?Fools?
Again, you are showing your ignorance of Arabic. Here is the meaning of "ghawa" and "aghwa" from Lisan Al-3arab
()
As you can see, there is nothing here about "fooling". The meaning has to do with misguiding NOT fooling. This is consistent with what we are told allover the great reading about The God guiding and misguiding whom He wills (not fooling).
don't show me anyth9ing but the Quran please, I donlt accept anything but the Quran, now according to the Quran context, it means literally to fool, and I will insist on this understanding
This is false because according to 3372, everything had the freedom to CHOOSE whether to accept the trust or not.
Yes.
yes what?, where is your objections?
Mate, I?m sorry before you accuse me of being wrong I would love that you support your claim, while you did by posting a reference to a Quran verse without any elaboration by you
3372 is clear. It is indisputable that one must have freedom of choice BEFORE he can accept or refuse something.
absolutely wrong, sorry but you have your freewill to understand it the way you want
So let me elaborate and prove to you that I was right, not sure if you are wrfong or not really, I?m talking about what I know according to the Quran that I studied well Alahamdullellah and still studying it, here is the verse
YUSUFALI We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof but man undertook it;- He was indeed unjust and foolish;-
PICKTHAL Lo! We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth and the hills, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it. And man assumed it. Lo! he hath proved a tyrant and a fool.
SHAKIR Surely We offered the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to be unfaithful to it and feared from it, and man has turned unfaithful to it; surely he is unjust, ignorant;(72)
-> where exactly that it says everything have freewill?,It is common sense. Again, one must have freedom of choice BEFORE he can accept or refuse something.
well I'm not talking when God created the heavenm and earth I mean now, we donlt know tyhe past don't we?,
what you say is also a guess
let?s look at Yusuf Ali translation ? We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof but man undertook it;- He was indeed unjust and foolish;-?, what is wrong here bro?, it says clearly that the Trust to the (HEAVENS, THE EARTH AND THE MOUNTAIN) was offered and the declined to undertake it
firstly the verse does not say everything only three things mentioned, while I agree that the heaven and earth cover a lot of things, but it does not cover humans, jinn, and animals.
It covers everything in the heavens and the earth but the controllers are not part of the heaven and the earth as per 1649
I reject the word controller to refer to the angels, sorry, but you can insist on using it, but please when you dialogie with me, using it confusee me as I don't know what you are talking about when you sau controllers
- And to The God complies/obeys what is in the heavens and what is in the earth from a mover, and the controllers, and they are not being arrogant.
So the controllers were not offered the trust.
no they were not, the quran never said that, but you can have your wild guess I say
secondly, what is trust mentioned in the verse?, the ? ? pronounced ?Al Amana?, It is simply to have a freewill and be held accountable,
This is baseless conjecture. There is nothing in 3372, 20115 or anywhere else in the great reading that says that the trust/"al-amana" is free will. This is either your own false invention or someone else's false invention that you blindly borrowed.
I did not meant freewill only
the trust is to obey God while having a freewill
got it?
the Quran describe our failure to carry the ?Amana? in the following verse
?We had already, beforehand, taken the covenant of Adam, but he forgot and We found on his part no firm resolve.?
(115)
Again, nothing here says that the trust/"amana" is freewill. Bring any proof.
you are a confuse, I said the trust is to obey God while having a freewill
-> This Amana that was declined by the heavens and earth and mountains means that since that moment they have no freewill, this sound really true, I can see the same stars every day, I can also see the sun every day, possibly the sun may want to have a date with another star like Sirius for example?, just kiddin mate , but truly it seems that the Sun and the moon have no freewill, or what do you think?
It seems so because they CHOOSE to obey The God. They know something that we don't. That is why we are described as IGNORANT for accepting the trust in 3372.
well I agree
well the Quran actually told us about an event when after Amana was offered to the heavens and Earth, let?s look at it
?Then He directed Himself to the heaven and it is a vapor, so He said to it and to the earth Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said We come willingly.?(11)
-> You see, after Allah created the heaven and earth and they declined the Amana they were told to stay on course willingly or unwillingly, they preferred to come stay on course willingly,
The expression "willingly or unwillingly" becomes meaningless nonsense if they didn't have freedom of choice to choose between "willingly OR unwillingly". You said yourself that they PREFERRED (i.e. CHOSE) to come willingly. So you are contradicting yourself.
no I?m not contradicting myself, it seems it is abit hard for your brain to process it
here it is again
let?s just talk about the earth
we know that the arth refused the Amana, which I guess to stay on course without freewill
now when the order come to execute, Allah is warning the earth that due to the fact it refused the Amanah (to have freewill and abide by God laws) , to stay on course willingly, or if it does not then it will be forced to stay on course unwillingly, because the earth has no freewill, the earth realized this freewill issue and submitted to Allah and declared that it will stay on course willingly
while a human like me and you can go astray with our freewill that was given to us, that Amana that Adam carried
From the great reading, we can see that HUMANS too will come to The God willingly or unwillingly. It is no different than the rest of creation.
I?m sorry you are confused, humans can?t obey god and they will still live their life, so to classify humans that they will come to God unwillingly is misleading
Again I can?t see anything in the Arabic verse that suggest the slightest that Iblis seems confident that he knows the future, the verse does not even suggest that he knows the future while not being confident, the verse does not say what you suggested at all, it simply says that Iblis will attack the humans from all directions
?"Then will I assault them from before them and behind them, from their right and their left Nor wilt thou find, in most of them, gratitude (for thy mercies).?
(17)
He clearly sees that MOST WILL NOT BE THANKFUL. The God doesn't correct his prediction by saying "no you are wrong and most will be thankful". Instead, The God confirms his prediction by saying "I will FILL hell of you and all those who follow you".
and the point is?
The Quran actually told us that the Jinn can?t know the unseen
?Then, when We decreed (Solomon's) death, nothing showed them his death except a little worm of the earth, which kept (slowly) gnawing away at his staff so when he fell down, the Jinns saw plainly that if they had known the unseen, they would not have tarried in the humiliating Penalty (of their Task).?(14)
-> I.E. The Jinn failed to know that Soloman is dead for long time, while they thought was was still alive a leaning on his staff
Yes, the "jinn" don't know the hidden. However, per 714 "iblis" was given respite until the time of resurrection. Thus, it is clear from passages such as 848 that he can see the hidden
sorry, what is the relation of Iblis given the respite and him known the future
what a confusion, if that non sense is true, then why he didn?t know what will happen to him ?to prostrate??
- And when the one who exceeded the limits decorated for them their works, and he said "There are no defeaters from the people for you today and I am a savior for you." So when the two groups saw each other, he returned on his two heels, and he said "I am innocent from you, I SEE/UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU DO NOT SEE/UNDERSTAND, I fear The God, and The God is severe in punishment."
I reckon Iblis is confused, he is saying it to embarrass the humans, Iblis does not fear God, Allah never said that Iblis feared him, it is Iblis who he is saying it and sure Iblis is a clear cut liar
they diod not disobey God because they have no freewill and MUST OBEY ALL THE TIME, Iblis had a freewill to decline
So according to you someone who has freewill can't obey The God and only mindless mechanical things without ability to choose can obey Him. This is logically false.
well your logic is also false
what I mean that with the freewill some humans will choose to obey God and some will choose not to obey God
is that hard to understand or what?
didn?t you ask yourself if they know that Adam will shed blood and cause mischief why the prostrated to him then?, because they have no choice
They obeyed because they CHOSE to obey The God because The God knows best, NOT because they have no choice.
well Allah only created the Humans and The Jinn for the Ibada (belief while having freewill)
sorry I did not see the angels or any other creature included with these two
at least if they declined to prostrate using their good argument that humans will shed blood and cause mischief on earth it would have merit than Iblis argument that he is better than Adam because he was created from fire
But they already presented that argument when The God told them about His decision and The God refuted it. I don't think that the controllers are mindless tape recorders that keep repeating the same argument after it has been refuted before.
who said they are mindless tape recorders?
Not me
The malaika CAN NOT BE TESTED, they have no freewill
Make sense?No, it doesn't make sense. There is nothing in the great reading that says that the controllers are mindless mechanical objects that have no freedom of choice.
I did not say that, but in the great reading, it only said Humans and Jinns were created to Belief in Allah using the freewill
On the other hand, there is evidence that they have free choice. For example
They CHOSE to question The God's decision (230).
Non sense, sorry it does not mean that they raise a question that they have freewill, unless you understand it as they are not allowed to talk either
They CHOSE to hide in themselves what they really thought (233).
you are wrong, they didn?t hide themselves, it only means they discussed the matter between them thinking or possibly God read their minds
They CHOSE to act on their own and kill an innocent boy in 1880-81.
you are confused the verse does not talk about the angels, rather a righteous man whom Moses accompanied him
do you know
They CHOSE to obey The God and obey Adam while one of them ("iblis") didn't.
Had they inhabited the earth, they too would get a messenger (1795).Malaika do not obey Adam, where you got this nonsense from?
Well the above verse sayd if the earth is inhibited by Malaika, then Allah would have sent a Malak messeger to them, this is a response from Allah to the fool humans who though that Allah will send the angels as messengers
where you got that they argued from?
One gets this picture by putting 230, 233 and 3969 together. Besides, questioning a decision made by the Almighty is certainly not a good thing.
wrong, asking a question is too far from arguing
they only wondered and because Allah is the Most fair and Just He allowed them to question Him, exactly as he allowed Iblis to Question God, as you can Question God, but you have freewill to submit like Iblis and like me, the Malaika has no free will and has to submit all the time, that does not mean they are not allowed to ask a question though
To be able to "question", you have to choose to question. Thus, you MUST have freedom of choice. From your statement, you seem to understand that our ability to question results from our freedom of choice but you fail to apply the same logic to the controllers. Thus, your statement above sounds contradictory.
again I insist on my understanding because rasing a question is allowed when it comes to the All Fair and Just Allah, but that does not mean they have freewill
Yafaloon Ma Yo?maroon? i.e they do what Allah ordered them to do
Now I?m not sure if Allah allowed them to raise a question, but at least I know He did not prevent them from asking any question.
well again you interpretation is very flawed they were asked to prostrate not to obey Adam, but how the angels can see the future?, they said they know nothing except what Allah told them 232
I don't think that they were asked to bang their foreheads on the floor. Wiping one's forehead on the floor is meaningless. Someone who makes any kind of physical gesture, whether it is banging his head on the floor or on a holy wall, but doesn't obey The God hasn't really done "sujud". Hence, it is not surprising that the majority of those who do it disobey The God.
I don?t understand what yo are talking about above
So my question is do you believe there is a physical entity called Malaika? (yes /No)
I do not mean statusThere is a group described as controllers/"malaika" just like there is a group described as "mu'minin"/"those who have faith". Both groups are populated by creatures but their membership of the group is not based on their physical properties, it is based on their status. Like "iman", "taqwa", etc. "mlk" is also a status. This is clear and simple as per 326, which you totally ignore.
another Arabic ignorance comment,
well Molk does not means Malaika, it means you own something, like to be a KING, like KING FAHD
do you consider KING Fahd or the Queen of England, Malaika?
Mate you are a real confuser
You have failed to address the clear statement in 326 that "mlk" is a status that is given and taken away at will by The God.
no I didn?t fail, but it seems you failed to understand what the verse is talking about
a hint, King Fahd, and Queen Elizabeth, how about this hint ?Saddam Hussain?
that is fine that is exactly what I?m talking about he was given a status of malaika, did you read this in my comment or not
No, I didn't see that in your comments. The fact is that ALL controllers/"malaika" were given that status by The God as per 326.
what can I say, please learn the Arabic again
anyway do you believe that Angels is just a status or a physical entity like me and you?
Angels are mythical biblical creatures flying around in white robes and halos and I am sorry, but unlike you, I don't believe in biblical fairy tales.
well I do to a degree
As for the controllers, those two aspects are not mutually exclusive. One can be a physical human and earn the non-physical status of "mu'min" at the same time. Similarly, any creature even a cockroach can be given the status of "malak"/controller by The God. This is common sense in light of 326. The God's hands are not tied.
ok but what that has to do with the belief in Allah and His angels?
Do you believe in the angels as creatures created by Allah to force his laws? (Yes, No)
The Malaika are also for real, Allah described them in great details, yes Ma la Ka is to control, but what is the point arn;t the malaika control a lot of things?
Perhaps if you understood 326, you would understand the point and see that The God doesn't pointlessly describe them as "malak"/controller.
I would suggest that you try to understand that ?Molk? has nothing to do with ?Malak?
This is a joke bro
Peace,
peace
-
Peace sister Marie, all,
Since I have any evidence from the Reading that the malaika are also jinn, and whatever the meaning attributed to the word illa (except, but...), my understanding at this stage about the satute of Iblis didn't change. Neither Adam nor Iblis lost their statutes (human being and jinn respectively) before and after they were driven out aljannat. 1850 is clear and didn't need any interpretation, imho.
I don't think that anyone here addressed the clear statement in 326 that "mlk" is a status that can be given to ANYONE and taken away from ANYONE by The God.
The controllers are not seperate "creatures" no more than messengers are seperate non-human "creatures" and we are asked to have faith in both. Messengership is a status given by The God to whom He wills in the same way that "mlk"/control is a status given by The God to whom He wills.
I hope this helps to clarify the issues.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
peace
you need to know what is the difference between "Molk" ans "Malak"
that is what is causing your confusion
Salam