The "Ghayb" - let's find out what it means.
-
Peace,
As for arguments about from a single soul - Ahmed Ali translates this ...
41 O MEN, FEAR your Lord who created you from a single cell, and from it created its mate, and from the two of them dispersed men and women (male and female) in multitudes. So fear God in whose name you ask of one another (the bond of) relationships. God surely keeps watch over you.
My explanation is above, where the first 'intelligent soul' able to learn language comes about. That is "Adam" so to speak; then other 'humans' are progressively created out of the existing creatures.
Peace Oben
sorry mate, the verse didn't say "one nafs was created then all the rest was created from it"
it said" one nafs was created then its mate was created from it then from both all the rest of humans came"
Regards
-
Peace Oben,
The biggest misconception is of one species transforming into another ie. carrot to an orange etc. This is not what evolution means.
And that is not what I meant either, therefore agreed.
As for human with other species conception - "Oliver" was said to be a humanzee though this is disputed and controversial. The ethics behind doing such experiments is a barrier against such "research". You can google "humanzee" to see for yourself.
I did a search on 'humanzee' and found the following. The bold and underlined speak for itself
The Chuman (also known as the Humanzee or Manpanzee depending on which species is the father and which is the mother) is a hypothetical chimpanzee/human hybrid. Chimpanzees and humans are very closely related (most agree that they have 98.4% of their DNA in common), leading to contested speculation that a hybrid is possible.
There has been no scientifically verified specimen, although one, a performing chimp named Oliver, was popularized during the 1970s as a possible Chuman/Humanzee. Genetic tests conducted at the University of Chicago concluded that, despite Oliver's somewhat unusual appearance and behaviour, he was a normal chimpanzee , he had the same number of chromosones as normal chimpanzees, but shared a slightly different gene code. The "hybrid" claims were possibly a promotional gimmick. As a result of being humanized (habituated to humans rather than to chimps), Oliver was said to be attracted to female humans, but did not mate with chimpanzees.
However, there have been reports and rumors of humanzees reportedly "for centuries". Peter Damain, in his 11th-century De bono religiosi status et variorum animatium tropologia, tells of a Count Gulielmus whose pet ape became his wife's lover. One day the ape became "mad with jealousy" on seeing the count lying with his wife that it fatally attacked him. Damain claims he was told about this incident by Pope Alexander II and shown an offspring claimed to be that of the ape and woman.
A more recent rumor states that there was a common chimpanzee impregnated by human sperm in a laboratory in China. The story goes on to say that people in the area caught word of what was going on in the lab and rioted in disgust. All the scientists were evidently killed. The rioters let the innocent chimp live but did not bother to unlock her cage. She was found dead from starvation.
Another popular rumor in circulation is that a human woman was impregnated (either through bestiality or rape, depending on the story) but that she aborted the "abomination" soon after she found out she was pregnant. These rumors are, to date, unsupported, and are likely best classified as urban legends.
Taken from http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanzee
'Truth', do you seriously believe that man was not a creation of its own species but evolved through primates, such as apes and monkeys; hence apes/monkeys evolving through other prior species and so on? Does Quran support these views at all?
-
Peace,
As for arguments about from a single soul - Ahmed Ali translates this ...
41 O MEN, FEAR your Lord who created you from a single cell, and from it created its mate, and from the two of them dispersed men and women (male and female) in multitudes. So fear God in whose name you ask of one another (the bond of) relationships. God surely keeps watch over you.
My explanation is above, where the first 'intelligent soul' able to learn language comes about. That is "Adam" so to speak; then other 'humans' are progressively created out of the existing creatures.
Peace Oben
sorry mate, the verse didn't say "one nafs was created then all the rest was created from it"
it said" one nafs was created then its mate was created from it then from both all the rest of humans came"
Regards
I have no issue with this. In the part of the post you ignore it explains how this soul/intelligence is propagated in others once it occurs.
Apes have similar DNA, and morphology to humans, basic characteristics of our intelligence and yet they are not 'aware' in the same sense as humans. The conscious mind with intelligence and knowledge that it is accountable is unique to humans. It is this which represents the creation of "Adam".
The underlying clay is the substrate, and this I believe represents proto-humans. The creation does not occur from nothingness - from thin air but occured from an underlying creature.
Regards.
-
'Truth', do you seriously believe that man was not a creation of its own species but evolved through primates, such as apes and monkeys; hence apes/monkeys evolving through other prior species and so on? Does Quran support these views at all?
Peace Danish,
You only have to look at some politicians to know that humans did come from apes - George Bush's remarkable chimp like face is well documented.
On a more serious note however, I do think there was an underlying substrate to the creation of Adam - the clay - represents this.
If you can believe that within a single cell (an embryo) lies the ability to unfold and produce billions upon billions of cells specialised to interact and make a human - then why is it so hard to believe that the whole history of evolution is not similar in a sense.
I think those who shy away from the theory of evolution are those with strongly Judaeo-Christian thought who look down upon animals and cannot recognise the animal in themselves. A snobbery of sorts.
Regards.
-
Salaamun alaikum,
A "Ghayb" is anything a human does not know
for example if there is a country called "BlaBla" and I know that because i have been there but you don't know that and you never heard about it then it is Ghayb to you but not to me
I would disagree with Ahmed here because the verse 27/20 says
And he took a muster of the Birds; and he said "Why is it I see not the Hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees? (am kaana min al-GHA'IBEEN)
Sulaimaan has knowledge of hudhud but at that point in time, hudhud wasn't present. So ghaib refers to being not-there.
Peace Mquran
Another case of indirect ?Non deliberate? manipulation, what can I say, well, I will continue to do what I do and leave the rest on Allah swt
Bro you are back to the same flawed method of root thingy, this is wrong bro and you will never understand the Quran properly this way, sorry to tell you that
Here the verse bro
?And he reviewed the birds, then said How is it I see not the hoopoe or is it that he is of the absentees??
(20)
-> While I?m disappointed to see Muslims brothers and sisters mixed up about the Arabic Quran, at the same time it makes want to laugh due to some of the very funny argument I see, those arguments are funny only in front of a native Arabic speaker BTW LOL
Why on earth Mquran you make two different words the same meaning?
Let?s look at the words again
? ? ,and ??
Both pronounced as follow
?Al Gha? eb? and ?Al Ghayb?
Absolutely different but yet COMMON Arabic words
=> The first word ? ?, on the wazn ?Al Fa?el? and means ?an entity that is absentee, must be MALE,
The female equivalent is ??? ie.an entity that is absentee, must be FEMALE,
The plural of males or (males and females) together is ?? ie, absentees,?,
The plural for females only is ??? ie. absentees, must be ?FEMALES",
=> The second word ??, on the wazn ?Al F?al? and means ONE THING ONLY, ?The Unknowns? or ?The Unseens?, ?it can apply on any thing you can imagine of?
See, this root method is 500% flawed simply because of the following
The Arabic words are derived from a 2/3/4 letters root to create different words with different meanings, ?IT HAS TO BE DIFFETENT MEANINGS? otherwise why we need to drive new words by adding new letters from the first? see, we can use the same 3 root letter for all the words if the meaning is the same, or what do you think?, I think the Hispanic language is sort of that type of an easy language where verbs may be nouns and things like that as far as I heard about it, I may be wrong though
Hence, each of the derived Arabic words has its own wazn, Irab, meaning and message and has noting to do with the root other than it was driven from it to create the new word, got it Mquran?
See, I can show you about 30 derived Arabic words from the root ?Na Sa Ra?, and if the words mean the same then why the hell I have to drive 30 of them from the first place?
Simply because new words were created and each has its own entity and is independence of the root meaning the moment it is used in any sentence.
IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE, the word ?? which means ?The unknowns? or ?The unseens? is plural and the singular form is ? ? which MUST BE FEMININE that is why we have the ?Ta Marboota? at the end, this is effect means it is the same as the female absentee Arabic word which is ? ? as I explained earlier, ONLY THE CONTEXT WILL CONTROL THE MEANING NOT THE FLAWED ROOT METHOD, I WONDER HOW MANY TIMES I HAVE TO SAY IT BRO?, can you please tell me that you don?t believe me so I don?t waste your time and my time again?, thanks bro
Here is a few examples man
-
2720 above, the word used was ? ? and means ? absentees ? Male or (Males and Females) Plural?
-
77, the word used was ? ? and means ?absentees? , the plural was used as matter of respect to the single God ?very commonly known
?Then most certainly We will relate to them with knowledge, and We were not absent.?
(7)
- 8216, the word used was ? ? and means ?absentees?
14- ?And most surely the wicked are in burning fire,?
15- ?They shall enter it on the day of judgment.?
16- ?And they shall by no means be absent from it.?
(14)
(15)
(16)-> 8216 should be translated as ?And they (The Koffar) shall not be absentees from Hell?
- 775, we see an example of a single ?an unseen? which must be female as I explained earlier, the word used was ? ? without the ?Al? and means ? an unseen?, as you will see only the context defined its meaning
?And there is nothing unseen in the heaven and the earth but it is in a clear book.?
(75)
- 23, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?
?Those who believe in the unseen and keep up prayer and spend out of what We have given them.?
(3)
- 1149, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?, and is linked to the stories of the past, that will always stay ?Ghayb? to us because we will never see it
?These are announcements relating to the unseen which We reveal to you, you did not know them-- (neither) you nor your people-- before this; therefore be patient; surely the end is for those who guard (against evil).?
(49)
- 12102 and the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?, and was linked again to the stories of the past as well is part of the revelation hence MUST BE BELIVED, as well confirming that Mohammad was not with them ie, was ?Ghayb? to Mohammad
?This is of the announcements relating to the unseen (which) We reveal to you, and you were not with them when they resolved upon their affair, and they were devising plans.?, and is linked to the stories of the past, that will always stay ?Ghayb? to us because we will never see it
(102)
1961, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen? and was linked to the believe in the promise of paradise as believers only BELIEVE that it exists and they never saw it yet hence it is ?Ghayb? to them
?The gardens of perpetuity which the Beneficent Allah has promised to His servants while unseen; surely His promise shall come to pass.?
(61)
-> Can you see the words ?while unseen??
- 1822, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen? and was clearly used to describe those who will spread conjecture
?Some) say (They are) three, the fourth of them being their dog; and (others) say Five, the sixth of them being their dog, making conjectures at what is unknown; and (others yet) say Seven, and the eighth of them is their dog. Say My Lord best knows their number, none knows them but a few; therefore contend not in the matter of them but with an outward contention, and do not question concerning them any of them.?
(22)
- 139, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen? and we read that Allah is the one Who knows the unseen
?The knower of the unseen and the seen, the Great, the Most High.?
(9)
- 2149, above and the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?
?(For) those who fear their Lord in secret and they are fearful of the hour.?
(49)
- 2765, the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?, we can read clearly that ONLY Allah knows the ?Ghayb?, ie, not the Jinn, neither the Angels
?Say No one in the heavens and the earth knows the unseen but Allah; and they do not know when they shall be raised.?
(65)
- 5335 above and the word used was ? ? and means ?The unseen?, you will see here how the knowing the unseen is linked to seeing it
?Has he the knowledge of the unseen so that he can see??
(35)
I hope you get the message this time bro, there is more examples if you wish to see them, the point is this, yes there is a similarity between the two words ? ? and ??
? ? Is an absentee of an event who can not see what is going on
?? Is what happened/happens/will happen in that event or any other event for that matter that was not seen by the eyes
Peace
-
-
question of incest comes adam & eve were the 1st to evolve humans.
Well i dont see any quote anywhere or in these posts, which says adam & eve were MARRIED.
werent they spouce/partner to eachother ?
'childern of mquran' cannot be called mine. they are his. WE r called childern of adam, there cant be more MONEKYZEE fathers, monkeyzee or as quoted humanzee is out of logic.
hence evolved from a single cell
-
Knowledge is unseen in its pure form. It manifests to every individual in unique way as nature allows it.
Knowledge is God in its pure and complete form.
shanti/peace
-
AB Another case of indirect Non deliberate manipulation, what can I say, well, I will continue to do what I do and leave the rest on Allah swt
It's sad that you need to employ such a word 'manipulation'. Perhaps that temper of yours will fly if I said that you're non-deliberately kidding yourself by telling yourself you're Quranic. To me, you're not Quranic at all because you still employ methods foriegn to al-quraan. I will prove it below.
Bro you are back to the same flawed method of root thingy, this is wrong bro and you will never understand the Quran properly this way, sorry to tell you that
I appreciate you feeling sorry for me but I'm happy with my understanding and will strive to understand more with my current methodology. You should feel sorry for yourself because with your methodology of 'furqanising' the Arabic language, you will forever be stuck in the rut of consigning al-quraan to be its slave. Just look as your 'nasara' fiasco.
See, this root method is 500% flawed simply because of the following The Arabic words are derived from a 2/3/4 letters root to create different words with different meanings, IT HAS TO BE DIFFETENT MEANINGS otherwise why we need to drive new words by adding new letters from the first? see, we can use the same 3 root letter for all the words if the meaning is the same, or what do you think?, I think the Hispanic language is sort of that type of an easy language where verbs may be nouns and things like that as far as I heard about it, I may be wrong though
I never said it has the SAME meaning. I take roots to provide an underlying meaning which is systematically expounded by the act of 'wazan-isation' of a word. Therefore 'al-ghaibeen' in the maqaam of 27/20 will give us a physical experience of the nature of ghaib-ness. My proof of this is that al-quraan calls itself kitaaban mutashabihan mathany (39/23). Both words are tasbih to one another and are repeated. Why then would Allah mean 2 different things? Did He run out of words?
-
AB Another case of indirect ?Non deliberate? manipulation, what can I say, well, I will continue to do what I do and leave the rest on Allah swt
It's sad that you need to employ such a word 'manipulation'.
excuse me bro, there is nothing wrong with NON DELIBERATE manipulations, it is just an accident at the end
Perhaps that temper of yours will fly if I said that you're non-deliberately kidding yourself by telling yourself you're Quranic.
sure i can see it flying lol
To me, you're not Quranic at all because you still employ methods foriegn to al-quraan. I will prove it below.
Fine, I relly care what I'm to Alah no to you or to my wife for that matter lol , but let me read how you can prove it
Bro you are back to the same flawed method of root thingy, this is wrong bro and you will never understand the Quran properly this way, sorry to tell you that
I appreciate you feeling sorry for me but I'm happy with my understanding and will strive to understand more with my current methodology.
sure
You should feel sorry for yourself because with your methodology of 'furqanising' the Arabic language,
furqanising' the Arabic language shock , well that should sound funny more than serious lol
you will forever be stuck in the rut of consigning al-quraan to be its slave.
consigning al-quraan to be its slave. shock , far out bro, what was that?, what is this slave thingy?
Just look as your 'nasara' fiasco.
yep I'm waiting for you to concede as a man and a good muslim who is Quranic
See, this root method is 500% flawed simply because of the following The Arabic words are derived from a 2/3/4 letters root to create different words with different meanings, ?IT HAS TO BE DIFFETENT MEANINGS? otherwise why we need to drive new words by adding new letters from the first? see, we can use the same 3 root letter for all the words if the meaning is the same, or what do you think?, I think the Hispanic language is sort of that type of an easy language where verbs may be nouns and things like that as far as I heard about it, I may be wrong though
I never said it has the SAME meaning. I take roots to provide an underlying meaning which is systematically expounded by the act of 'wazan-isation' of a word. Therefore 'al-ghaibeen' in the maqaam of 27/20 will give us a physical experience of the nature of ghaib-ness. My proof of this is that al-quraan calls itself kitaaban mutashabihan mathany (39/23). Both words are tasbih to one another and are repeated. Why then would Allah mean 2 different things? Did He run out of words?
sorry bro i could no make any sense form the above, but don't worry man, let's leave it at that
but you said earlier you will prove below that I employ methods foriegn to al-quraan.and I could see you proving it yet
peace
-
excuse me bro, there is nothing wrong with NON DELIBERATE manipulations, it is just an accident at the end
Do you know what manipulation is? A believer is supposed to say 'same'na wa atha'na', not manipulate anything. And I didn't manipulate anything. The arabic language was manipulated yes. To this day, its entirety believes 'hadith' means 'hadith of the messenger'. That's how accurate it is.
furqanising' the Arabic language , well that should sound funny more than serious
It's a tragi-comedy no doubt. After all the sunni linguistics you've accepted, you still call yourself Quranic! How is this, mate ?
Furqanising the arabic language means, whatever you see in the dictionary, THAT'S what you will take to be the Quranic meaning. That's why your furqaan isn't al-quraan but al-qamoos.
yep I'm waiting for you to concede as a man and a good muslim who is Quranic
I don't mind being corrected at all. However, I expected to be corrected with something more substantial than 'my dictionary says so'.
but you said earlier you will prove below that I employ methods foriegn to al-quraan.and I could see you proving it yet
The above WAS my proof. Let me say it again for you because I feel you're an honest guy and perhaps I wasnt clear.
This is how it works for me.
Al-quraan is kitaaban mutashabihan mathany. This is means it has repeated similarities inside. Further, it tells us to 'rattilul quraanan tarteela' or compile the similarities within al-quraan. Ghaib and ghaibeen come from the same root. Therefore, compiling them on this basis would give us a clear picture of ghaib. 27/20 is something we can readily experience. Sulaimaan couldnt find hud2 and he said hud2 is from al-ghaibeen. Can you imagine what he meant ? Well, carry this meaning forward into other contexts and see.