Why to guive proof from Koran if this isn't the book of God?

unknownuser

Peace Bilal76,

Good questions.

In my undersanding, it is simply a matter of fact that Reality/Nature/Life teaches and disciplines every humankind of whatever gender, race, size, color, domain, environment, circumstance, etc., etc., when a child?s upbringing is brought up right from birth as he/she grows to admonishing experiences and facing real challenges of Reality/Nature/Life presented, laid out and witnessed first hand in their own paths and ways of lives as called for.

With that said, all that is mentioned in the Quran are the reflections/thoughts/experiences/events of Reality/Nature/Life as seen and understood by a wise matured philosophical man who delivered the message to the people of his time (including Jews and Christians), enlightening the very past, present and future of his own vision from time to time as events unfolded. These historical messages were then later appropriated, collated and revamped in a book form named Quran by the very scribes of his time to be read, studied, understood and reflected upon for future generations to take heed.

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

You think we have confusion over the meanings of al kit?b and al qur'?n?

Peace Leyla

I?m not sure who do you mean by ?We??, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Then please explain the following if al kit?b is not the universal decree but the qur'?n itself

Why is the qur'?n in 10/37 described as taSd?q alladh? bayna yadayhi wa tafS?l al-kit?bi l? rayba f?hi min rabbi-l-'alam?n???

Well, we need first to think what is ? between Allah hands??, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

This clearly shows that qur'?n is not al kit?b itself but rather it is tafS?l of al kit?b used as a cognate to tasd?q of what is bayna yadayhi (which does not mean previous?, as in previous books?, as some claim).

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

Also see that in 12/111 explains this further, also refering to the tafS?l and the taSd?q but using instead of al kit?b the term kulli shey'in.

Again, it is talking about the Quran and its stories of the past and whatever the Quran says is Tasdiq to what is between Allah hands, what that thing is? I don?t know because the Quran in 12111 didn?t say what it is, also the Tafsil in the verse means Allah will explain the Quran to the believers

Does al kit?b in 6/38 better suit the universal decree or the qur'?n??

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

It will be silly for Allah to tell us that He has a book up there that manages the universal laws while we only need to pay attentions and believe in another book called The Quran, I guess Allah may have a liberary of Books up there, but we only need to care about one book of them called the Quran, and that is what we will be held accountable against not against the Books He has up there

Why does someone who has ilm from al kit?b powers of manipulating apparent reality when al kit?b is al qur'?n and not the universal decrees?? (read 27/40)

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

I respect your personal opinion, but to me the qur'?n points to something else.

Likewise

peace again,

Peace

Leyla

Peace Ahmed

we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands,

No, actually I do not think that.
Where did I say so?
You misunderstood my point here.

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

Sorry, I think you are wrong. Read the whole verse.
Al kit?b here is not al qur'?n.
The verse clearly says that al qur'?n is tafS?l al kit?b, not that al qur'?n is al kit?b.
At least not when you let the pure words stand as they are and don?t add any assumption.

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

I perfectly agree with you here. However, although the qur'?n is kit?bun (a book) it is not al kit?b (the one book).

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

Yes, right. But here it is not kit?bun, it is not any book. It is clearly al kit?b, the book. There can only be one!
And you are right, this one al kit?b is not al qur'?n. Exactly my point.
And since All?h never confuses words and has the most specific language of all al kit?b will always mean al kit?b in al qur'?n.
The one and only al kit?b.

peace again,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands,

No, actually I do not think that.
Where did I say so?
You misunderstood my point here.

Peace Leyla

ok no worries

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

Sorry, I think you are wrong. Read the whole verse.
Al kit?b here is not al qur'?n.
The verse clearly says that al qur'?n is tafS?l al kit?b, not that al qur'?n is al kit?b.

the verse cearly says "Tafsil Al Kitab La Raib Fihi", ie. the explanation of the Kitab la raib fihi, it never said the Quran is the Tafsil of another Kitab

At least not when you let the pure words stand as they are and don?t add any assumption.

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

I perfectly agree with you here. However, although the qur'?n is kit?bun (a book) it is not al kit?b (the one book).

I agree with you that it is not the one book Allah authored, but I mean it is the only law that we will be held accountable to by Allah

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

how many Allah have?, humans can only speculate, I won't

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

Yes, right. But here it is not kit?bun, it is not any book. It is clearly al kit?b, the book. There can only be one!

as I said, Al Kitab does not mean The one book, it only mean the book and can be one out of many

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

And you are right, this one al kit?b is not al qur'?n. Exactly my point.
And since All?h never confuses words

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

and has the most specific language of all al kit?b will always mean al kit?b in al qur'?n.

of ourse it means The Book, but again, which one?, you will not be able to come with an answer other than specualtuions and conjectures

The one and only al kit?b.

which one?

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

peace again,

Leyla

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Ahmed

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Can you please elaborate on this

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

Thanks,
Tay

Leyla

Peace Ahmed

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

The la raib fihi does not change my point at all.
Sorry, I don?t see that.
The whole verse speaks about hadha-l-qur'?nu. Every statement here is about it, including the description as tafS?l al kit?b la raib fihi.

Again, please let the words stand as they are.

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

Yes, but a specific one. That?s why I added 'one'. Only to stress that.
It is a specific one, not any of an uncertain number.

Let me ask you
If I would say 'al bayt' would you say that I am talking about any house or about a specific house that I have in my mind ??????

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

Sorry, that?s too much human assumption for my taste. )
I can not deduce this knowledge of yours from any verse of the qur'?n.

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

By the way the verse talks about al kit?b, not about al qur'?n.
And it even stresses my point.
Why?
Because it mentions umm ul kit?b.
And what do we know about umm ul kit?b?
E.g. 43/3-44
tells us that umm ul kit?b is directly with All?h and also that al qur'?n is within umm ul k?t?b.
So, umm ul kit?b is not a part of al qur'?n (as your reading of 3/7 would say) but instead al qur'?n is within umm ul kit?b.
So, al kit?b in 3/7 can not be al qur'?n.

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Really? Are you talking about verses about some book (kit?b) or a specific book, the book (al kit?b).
Please show me a verse that clearly says that al kit?b refers to any earthly book without ambiguity. I would be thankful for that.

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Because I already greeted you with peace in the beginning. So, this 'peace' was a second 'peace'. I said 'peace' a second time, I said it again.

And again peace,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

The la raib fihi does not change my point at all.
Sorry, I don?t see that.
The whole verse speaks about hadha-l-qur'?nu. Every statement here is about it, including the description as tafS?l al kit?b la raib fihi.
Again, please let the words stand as they are.

Peace Leyla

The arabic words stand clear as light, the verse never said that the Quran is a tafsil to anything in this verse, the verse said that Tafsil Al Kitab is going to happen 100%, that is what it was said and the same sentnce was repeated zillions of times in the Quran.

Not going to buy your wrong explanation, sorry

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

Yes, but a specific one. That?s why I added 'one'. Only to stress that.
It is a specific one, not any of an uncertain number.

Then it makes no sense as the verse says that the explanantin of that book is La Raiba fihi, so I'm sot really sure why Allah wants to explain something to us that we don't have neither we will be held accountable against it?, it must mean the Quran 100%

Let me ask you
If I would say 'al bayt' would you say that I am talking about any house or about a specific house that I have in my mind ??????

Logically speaking it means any house, unless you say My house, Allah never said my book in the verse

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

Sorry, that?s too much human assumption for my taste. )
I can not deduce this knowledge of yours from any verse of the qur'?n.

what I said will make sense to my child

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

By the way the verse talks about al kit?b, not about al qur'?n.
And it even stresses my point.
Why?

the Quran was also referred to as kitab in many locations, therefore this verse is mutashabihat and no one will ever know what book in this verse except Allah, I will just take it as the Quran because it was said as such about the Quran in many locations

Because it mentions umm ul kit?b.
And what do we know about umm ul kit?b?

I only need to know about one book named Al Quran, you want to speculate about the books Allah may have, go for it, i'm out of this unreasonable discussion

E.g. 43/3-44
tells us that umm ul kit?b is directly with All?h and also that al qur'?n is within umm ul k?t?b.

Nice try, the Umaa Al Kitab mentioned in this verse in another Kitab Allah has , that is why it says "indana"

But what is funny that you want to link this Umma Al Kkitab here with the one in 37, very funny indeed, it only shows your lack of Arabic, may Allah help you

So, umm ul kit?b is not a part of al qur'?n (as your reading of 3/7 would say) but instead al qur'?n is within umm ul kit?b.
So, al kit?b in 3/7 can not be al qur'?n.

Umma Al kitab is nothing but a metaphor that means the mother of the book, and in every context this metaphor will express different meaning

In 37 it mean those muhkamat verses are the mother of the book, i.e. the foundation of the book

Try harder please

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Really? Are you talking about verses about some book (kit?b) or a specific book, the book (al kit?b).
Please show me a verse that clearly says that al kit?b refers to any earthly book without ambiguity. I would be thankful for that.

I'm talking about all verses with the word Kitab or Al Kitab is mentioned

I will show you verses that Al Kitab was referring to the Quran explicitly more than once

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Because I already greeted you with peace in the beginning. So, this 'peace' was a second 'peace'. I said 'peace' a second time, I said it again.

And again peace,

Leyla

ok excuse my ignorcane

Regards

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

Can you please elaborate on this

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

Thanks,
Tay

Hello Taj

I will mate after I have my midday nap as I just put my son to sleep and must take the chance to have a bit of sleep

give me 3 hours mate

Salam

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Hello Taj

I can tell you need your nap D
But you've had your last warning! Next time you call me "Taj", I'm calling you "Afifah", deal?

Looking forward to your reply.

Peace,
Tay <----spelled T - a - y

unknownuser

Hello Tay

Sorry mate for the mix up with Taj again, Can you please give me the benefit of the doubt because the key ?Y? is diagonally next to the key ?J??, just kiddin bro

Verse 37 is very important verse in the Quran, without it, many would have found some unexplainable confusion in the Quran, exactly like the Bible, but the Bible does not have a verse like 37 indeed. It seems the Author of the Quran was fully aware of all possibilities to include a verse like 37 in the Quran, let me walk you through it bit by bit bro

?He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say ?We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?

(7)

-> ? ?, ? He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book?, ?The Quran? is referred to as ?Al Kitab?, i.e. Al Kitab in verse 37 means 100% ?Al Quran?, i.e. Al Quran was sent down to Mohammad by Allah.

-> ? ?, ? In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book?, another clear sentence, Allah is saying to Mohammad and anyone who will read the Quran for that matter, in this book there is verses basics or fundamental of established meaning, 37 must be one of those as we will see while walking through it, some thought that 37 is a Mutashabihat verse, I even thought the same previously, but I quickly managed to understand that 37 can?t be Mutashabihat, because it is actually telling us the fact that there is Mutashabihat verses and why they were included in the Quran. Humans may expect that a book of guidance should be as clear as it can gets, which I agree, however let?s not forget that the Quran is also used to test everyone, i.e. it is a guidance (Muhkamat) and a test (Mutashabihat) at the same time, this is an awesome planning by the Al Mighty Allah, we read, in the Quran there will be Muhkamat verses, we didn?t read that All the Quran will be Muhkamat verses, those Muhkamat verses were also described as Umma Al Kitab, i.e. the foundation of the book, therefore the context suggest to the believers that the Muhkamat are the ones that they should care about, what about the rest of the Quran then?

-> ? ?, ? others are allegorical?, here is the rest of the Quran, the other portion of the Quran verses are Mutashabihat, i.e. allegorical, i.e. hard to understand, i.e. confusing, this is not a coincidence, it is part of the plan as Allah has just told us that He included those allegorical verses in the Quran, now it is about time to ask why He did that?, we don?t need to look any where, we only need to continue reading the verse.

-> ? ?, ? But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its meanings,?, the mighty plan objective is revealed, these deliberately inserted allegorical verses are there to expose those in whose hearts is perversity (believers or not, it applies to both), because those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, There is a very important hint in here, those seeking discord, in which community they are seeking that discord?, it has to be the believers community, therefore we have a double test in hand, a test for the unbelievers to see if they will seek discord by speculating the different meanings of those Mutashabihat verses, and another test for the believers to expose who will follow that discord, it can also be considered a test to the unbelievers who don?t search for the meanings of these verses neither seek discord between the believers, it will be a test for them exactly like the believers to see if they will follow that discord or not. This is awesome planning, it may sound not fair at the first glance, but if we consider the following, I guess it has to be fair

In this life, this is how a tester creates a test, he/she includes in the test a bit of tricky questions, he/she never tell us what sort of tricks they will include though, and yet the process is fair and square to all, in the case of this life test, The Tester ?Allah? has told us in advance what the trick is ?37?, THIS IS FAIRNESS AT ITS MAX, WHAT IS STRICKING IS, MANY STILL LISTEN TO THAT DISCORD THEN FOLLOW IT AS WE SEE ON THIS WEB SITE AND MANY OTHER WEB SITES

-> ? ?, ? but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah?, here is the denial that NO ONE WILL KNOW THE MEANING EXCEPT ALLAH, some people who try to twist the meaning of this crystal clear verse by saying there is a ?Waw? after ?Allah? which means ?And?, i.e. what will follow the Waw should share the action with Allah, the action here is knowing the meaning of those Mutashabihat verses, this is 100% wrong as I will prove ?LOGICALLY SPEAKING? later, but we must take note that this bit also started with a Waw, this does not mean it is sharing what was before it, this is clear from the context before it, the Waw was translated ?But? however ?Waw? means ?And?, it is also common knowledge to start a new sentence with a Waw, EXACTLY AS THIS SENTENCE AND THE ONE AFFTER IT AND THE ONE AFTER THE ONE AFTER IT as we will see next.

-> ? ?, ? And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say ?We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord??, here is a new sentence started with a Waw, and clearly means that the ones with knowledge will believe in both Muhkamat and Mutashabihat verses as BOTH FROM OUR GOD, WHY THEY SAY THAT, IF THEY MANAGED TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUE MEANINGS OF THESE MUTSHABIHAT VERSES?, the Mutashabihat should be Muhkamat for them, yet they referred to them as BOTH, see, this is the logical refute to those who claim the people with knowledge will also crack these Mutashabihat verses and know its true meanings, I guess they are mixed up in what ?Rasikhoon fi Alilm? means, I think they might be thinking that it is science, but quite the contrary the Ilm in the verse means ?knowing Allah?, nothing more as science doesn?t fit in the description of the people with knowledge, because we can see an illiterate human who knows Allah better than many educated ones.

-> ? ?, ? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?, this bit started again with a Waw, as an indication of a new sentence, and it can be understood as being part of what the people with knowledge said or just another message from Allah, this mix up can?t make the verse Mutashabihat as in either cases ?Allah or Al Rasikhoon fi Alilm? who is saying it, the message is clear that ? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?

Clear from the above that Allah deliberately inserted Mutashabihat verses to test all of us, some will try to search for its meanings seeking discord or just for the sake of searching for its meaning as if they are smart, others may listen to that discord and flaw their beli ve but the true subnitters in Allah will just take it for granted as from Allah without searching into its Mutashabihat meanings

Peace be with you

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Thanks for your thoughful reply.
I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points
1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.
2- If I accept your understanding that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand. And even though the Qur'an states that we should verify information, Allah authored ayat that should be accepted blindly.

It doesn't quite fit, bro.

Peace,
Tay

mquran

Ahmed Im not sure who do you mean by We?, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Many kitabs mentioned? Like what ? Al-quraan mentions itself as 'kitaab' and mentions 'al-kitaab'. That's it.

Well, we need first to think what is between Allah hands?, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

So you think the 'hi' as Allah ? What's your reason for thinking so?

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran The Kitab was definite to happen by Him

All the arabic in the world won't help if you don't have a basic grasp of logic. How can al-quraan BE al-kitaab if al-quraan is TAFSEELUL kitaab?

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

So in al-quraan, you have National Geographic as well? Why don't you read 6/38 and see the context.

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

You don't care about the lesson Allah gave you? Oh , I forgot, you think it's history. Allah sent us a 'hudan linnaas' but only for historians and arguing with Christians. Well done.

By the way, its not kitaab in 27/40, its AL-KITAAB. The individual had knowledge of AL-KITAAB.

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Just as you can show us how you arrived as your salaat conclusion, no doubt. When you 'have time'.

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book, The Quran is referred to as Al Kitab, i.e. Al Kitab in verse 37 means 100% Al Quran, i.e. Al Quran was sent down to Mohammad by Allah.

Funnily, here it means 'al-kitaab' whereas it could mean 'many books'. This is proof of how a non-quranic understanding will be full of contraditions.

Here's a passage to get you going

That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to ABRAHAM (to use) against his people We raise whom We will, degree after degree for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.We gave him ISAAC and JACOB all (three) guided and before him, We guided NOAH, and among his progeny, DAVID, SOLOMON, JOB, JOSEPH, MOSES, and AARON thus do We reward those who do good. And ZAKARIYA and JOHN, and JESUS and Elias all in the ranks of the righteousAnd ISMAIL and ELISHA, and JONAS, and LOT and to all We gave favour above the nations and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren We chose them, and we guided them to a straight way.This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them . This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These were the men to whom We gave AL-KITAAB., and authority, and prophethood if these (their descendants) reject them, Behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who reject them not.

All these guys are mentioned and Allah says He gave them AL-KITAAB. Not many kitaabs. Did you miss this 500% in your 20 years of reading al-quraan, Ahmed?

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

Thanks for your thoughful reply.
I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points

Peace Tay

1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.

it does not contradict any, because all the Muhkamat are fully detailed and are the ones that we should uphold confidently, the other Mutashabihat "confusing ones", we are only required to believe in it as from Allah

The fact of the matter that 37 is telling us about the Mutshabihat verses and its objective, makes the Mutshabihat clear to us that was put there for a purpose and this means very muhkam to me

2- If I accept your understanding that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

it does because you also have the wrong undersding for 1736, that wrong understanding is promoted here by a few ignorants of the Arabic language

1737, clearly sayd "DON'T Argue (stand/stop) in matters where you lack knowledge beacuse we are responsible for all our senses and we must give account in how we deployed our senses

no contradiction whatsoever

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand.

it is not me who said that, it is the clear and muhkam arabic verse 37

And even though the Qur'an states that we should verify information, Allah authored ayat that should be accepted blindly.

yep, and just for argument sake and assuming that 1736 meaning is the wrong one as you understand it, then when I try to verify the mushabihat verses and find out that it has many meanings beyond doubts then I have to follow 37 and not to chase which one is the right meaning out of many "I assumed that all different meanings logically fit"

It doesn't quite fit, bro.

your understanding to 1736 is the one that doesn't quite fit, I can elaborate on that if you wish

Peace,
Tay

Peace

unknownuser

Ahmed I?m not sure who do you mean by ?We??, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Many kitabs mentioned? Like what ? Al-quraan mentions itself as 'kitaab' and mentions 'al-kitaab'. That's it.

try to search for the word Kitab and Al Kitab and you will see than many books were mentioned

Well, we need first to think what is ? between Allah hands??, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

So you think the 'hi' as Allah ? What's your reason for thinking so?

what a dumb question, firstly you assumen that I'm thinking then you are asking me why I'm thinking this way? lol

your question is invalid body

All the arabic in the world won't help if you don't have a basic grasp of logic. How can al-quraan BE al-kitaab if al-quraan is TAFSEELUL kitaab?

Haha what a laugh

Al Quran is tafsil Al Kitab, where you got this from first? can you direct to me to a verse?

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

So in al-quraan, you have National Geographic as well?

Haha, another dumb comment

why don't you walk us through it instead opf just putting the verse number, I'm sure you do that to avoide being exposed that your understanding to most Quran verses are flawed

please do and walk us through the Quran verses to enlighten us

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

You don't care about the lesson Allah gave you?

and what lesson that is?, the Quran is full of lessons, you are one hell of a confuser, I guess you are the one that was born without logic in the head

Oh , I forgot, you think it's history.

sure many things in the Quran are history

Allah sent us a 'hudan linnaas' but only for historians and arguing with Christians. Well done.

I can see very well following that Huda, lol

By the way, its not kitaab in 27/40, its AL-KITAAB. The individual had knowledge of AL-KITAAB.

I donlt acceot you sneaky short comments on any Quran verse, you must bring the verse here and walk me through it if you want me to dicuss the Quran with ya, other than that any Quran comment by you will be ignored

Just as you can show us how you arrived as your salaat conclusion, no doubt. When you 'have time'.

first of all, I don't know why you don't get it, I need not to show anything to anyone, I onnly liase with the ones I respect and to answer their questions, all the rest of humans in the world will be ignored, very simple rule in my Book

Funnily, here it means 'al-kitaab' whereas it could mean 'many books'. This is proof of how a non-quranic understanding will be full of contraditions.

you suffer from a very law IQ Mister Q, I concuded this already, Al Kitab was mentioned numerous times in the Quran and it referred to many other books, but I will only prove that to the others whom are identified in my book to liase civily with but only iof they raise the Question with me

Here's a passage to get you going

That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to ABRAHAM (to use) against his people We raise whom We will, degree after degree for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.We gave him ISAAC and JACOB all (three) guided and before him, We guided NOAH, and among his progeny, DAVID, SOLOMON, JOB, JOSEPH, MOSES, and AARON thus do We reward those who do good. And ZAKARIYA and JOHN, and JESUS and Elias all in the ranks of the righteousAnd ISMAIL and ELISHA, and JONAS, and LOT and to all We gave favour above the nations and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren We chose them, and we guided them to a straight way.This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them . This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These were the men to whom We gave AL-KITAAB., and authority, and prophethood if these (their descendants) reject them, Behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who reject them not.

All these guys are mentioned and Allah says He gave them AL-KITAAB. Not many kitaabs. Did you miss this 500% in your 20 years of reading al-quraan, Ahmed?

Haha, what an ignorance, it was mentioned singualr as a single book for each, NOT the same book for all, you are so funny

peace

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

it does not contradict any, because all the Muhkamat are fully detailed and are the ones that we should uphold confidently, the other Mutashabihat "confusing ones", we are only required to believe in it as from Allah

I'm sorry, but this makes zero sense bro. To believe in something that you call "confusing" as part of Allah's guidance does not serve it's purpose as guidance. How, exactly, would you be guided by something which you don't understand?

1737, clearly sayd "DON'T Argue (stand/stop) in matters where you lack knowledge beacuse we are responsible for all our senses and we must give account in how we deployed our senses

I didn't get that from 1737. Perhaps you meant 1736? If that's the case, then please break down the translation for us, as it seems you stand alone in your understanding...

Transliteration Wala taqfu ma laysa laka bihi AAilmun inna alssamAAa waalbasara waalfu-ada kullu ola-ika kana AAanhu mas-oolan
Literal And do not follow the tracks/accuse of evil deeds what knowledge is not for you with it (you have no knowledge of)
Free-Minds And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of
Rashad Khalifa You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself
Yusuf Ali And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge
Shakir And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge;
Pickthal (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.
Arberry And pursue not that thou hast no knowledge of
Hilali/Khan And follow not (O man i.e., say not, or do not or witness not, etc.) that of which you have no knowledge
Malik You shall not follow anyone blindly in those matters of which you have no knowledge.
QXP And you shall not follow blindly any information of which you have no direct knowledge.
Palmer And do not pursue that of which thou hast no knowledge
Rodwell And follow not that of which thou hast no knowledge

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand.

it is not me who said that, it is the clear and muhkam arabic verse 37

No, bro, it is YOUR understanding of the verse, which, in this case, is not consistent with the rest of the Qur'an.

yep, and just for argument sake and assuming that 1736 meaning is the wrong one as you understand it, then when I try to verify the mushabihat verses and find out that it has many meanings beyond doubts then I have to follow 37 and not to chase which one is the right meaning out of many "I assumed that all different meanings logically fit"

See, the problem with this argument is that you assume every ayah must have only ONE meaning, and that if it has more than one meaning, then it is somehow invalid. This is your subjective view, and you are surely entitled to it. But realize that it is not universal. Your view is not perfect, nor is your judgement infallible.

An ayah having more than one meaning, in my opinion, only further amplifies the potency of the words and their author. Who else but Allah can author ayat that have multiple truths attached to many words?

your understanding to 1736 is the one that doesn't quite fit, I can elaborate on that if you wish

Please do, as it's not just my understanding but that of every single Qur'an translator.

Peace,
Tay

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

it does not contradict any, because all the Muhkamat are fully detailed and are the ones that we should uphold confidently, the other Mutashabihat "confusing ones", we are only required to believe in it as from Allah

I'm sorry, but this makes zero sense bro. To believe in something that you call "confusing" as part of Allah's guidance does not serve it's purpose as guidance. How, exactly, would you be guided by something which you don't understand?

Peace Tay

I called it confusing, but did I called it confusing to ME?, NO I DID NOT

I called it confusing seeing how the many different humans working hard to make up different meanings and amazingly all the meanings fits and some contradict each other, therefore it is confusing to the general audience not to me

To me I saw all this happening and when comparing it to 37, all made sense to me and I?m not confused any more, therefore I submitted to Allah and believed in these verse AS BEEN SENT BY ALLAH, I never said I believe in a specific meaning to those verse, for example 43 is a mutashabihat verse and I can elaborate on that

Therefore what I believe in is the fact that those are mutashabihat verses deliberately inserted in the Quran by Allah as per 37 and 37 has given me an example of what I should do as the people with knowledge did, by not chasing the meaning or believing in (concluding) a specific meaning and just believing that it was sent by Allah to test the ones whose hearts have perversity

1737, clearly sayd "DON'T Argue (stand/stop) in matters where you lack knowledge beacuse we are responsible for all our senses and we must give account in how we deployed our senses

I didn't get that from 1737. Perhaps you meant 1736? If that's the case, then please break down the translation for us, as it seems you stand alone in your understanding...

Yep you are right, I meant 1736

Transliteration Wala taqfu ma laysa laka bihi AAilmun inna alssamAAa waalbasara waalfu-ada kullu ola-ika kana AAanhu mas-oolan
Literal And do not follow the tracks/accuse of evil deeds what knowledge is not for you with it (you have no knowledge of)
Free-Minds And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of
Rashad Khalifa You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself
Yusuf Ali And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge
Shakir And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge;
Pickthal (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.
Arberry And pursue not that thou hast no knowledge of
Hilali/Khan And follow not (O man i.e., say not, or do not or witness not, etc.) that of which you have no knowledge
Malik You shall not follow anyone blindly in those matters of which you have no knowledge.
QXP And you shall not follow blindly any information of which you have no direct knowledge.
Palmer And do not pursue that of which thou hast no knowledge
Rodwell And follow not that of which thou hast no knowledge

I discussed this in great details before, I will try to find the comment again and post it here

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand.

it is not me who said that, it is the clear and muhkam arabic verse 37

No, bro, it is YOUR understanding of the verse, which, in this case, is not consistent with the rest of the Qur'an.

oh yeh, and it is the understanding of most well known and solid Muslims, like Omar, Abu Bakr and hundreds of scholars came after them

well let me through all their understanding into the rubbish bin, I really careless how they saw it, IT IS THE CLEAR ARABIC WORDS that I walked you through it sentence by sentence, ironically you didn?t show us what is your understanding to 37

yep, and just for argument sake and assuming that 1736 meaning is the wrong one as you understand it, then when I try to verify the mushabihat verses and find out that it has many meanings beyond doubts then I have to follow 37 and not to chase which one is the right meaning out of many "I assumed that all different meanings logically fit"

See, the problem with this argument is that you assume every ayah must have only ONE meaning,

of course the muhkamat have one meaning (the majority), but the mutashabihat have more than one meaning (the minority)

now if most of the verses of the Quran have more than one meaning as you claim, then THIS IS A DAMN CONTRADICTIION TO YOUR CLAIM THAT THE QURAN IS EASY AND FULLY DETAILED

and that if it has more than one meaning, then it is somehow invalid.

it is not invalid, it will just destroy your claim that the quran is fully detailed and easy to understand, also it will divide the people not to unite them

your argument has - 100 sense, I meant (minus 100)

This is your subjective view, and you are surely entitled to it. But realize that it is not universal. Your view is not perfect, nor is your judgement infallible.

of course my judgement is not infallible, but I?m glad that my judgment here that is based on the clear Arabic words that I walked you through it is the same judgment as the big guns in Islam, like Mohammad the prophet for example, Mohammad actually discussed 37 a lot in many history records, would you like to see the history records by Mohammad?

An ayah having more than one meaning, in my opinion, only further amplifies the potency of the words and their author. Who else but Allah can author ayat that have multiple truths attached to many words?

of course I accept that argument, however not the case with mutashabihat of the many understandings are contradictory, also because Allah has told us that the Quran will have such mutashabihat verses, then some verses must fall into this category

the other ones you are talking about that have different meanings standings generations, are very muhkamat verse

your understanding to 1736 is the one that doesn't quite fit, I can elaborate on that if you wish

Please do, as it's not just my understanding but that of every single Qur'an translator.

Peace,
Tay

Ok as I told you earlier it was discussed in details but I have to find the comment and bring it in here

peace

mquran

try to search for the word Kitab and Al Kitab and you will see than many books were mentioned

There are no such verses. The reason you're asking me for verses is because you can't produce any evidence as usual.

what a dumb question, firstly you assumen that I'm thinking then you are asking me why I'm thinking this way?

On the contrary, I always assume you're NOT thinking. Thinking people come to the right conclusions. You seem to think al-quraan is a book of history, so you can't be thinking.

Haha what a laugh

Al Quran is tafsil Al Kitab, where you got this from first? can you direct to me to a verse?

In 25 years, you've never come across the ayaat? Have you been reading blindfolded?
Because you've been writing with your ego, you can't even see the ayat Leyla posted for you. Tsk tsk...

why don't you walk us through it instead opf just putting the verse number, I'm sure you do that to avoide being exposed that your understanding to most Quran verses are flawed

please do and walk us through the Quran verses to enlighten us

Fair request. Here you go

There is not an animal (that lives) on the earth, nor a being that flies on its wings, but (forms part of) communities like you. Nothing have we omitted from the Book, and they (all) shall be gathered to their Lord in the end (6/3

did you encounter this in your 25 years of reading?

and what lesson that is?, the Quran is full of lessons, you are one hell of a confuser, I guess you are the one that was born without logic in the head

So you can't understand the lesson? Well, you should look up why. Al-quraan actually tells you why too....

sure many things in the Quran are history

Ah brilliant. Who calls al-quraan 'asaatirul awwaleen', Ahmed? Did you encounter this in the last 25 years?

I donlt acceot you sneaky short comments on any Quran verse, you must bring the verse here and walk me through it if you want me to dicuss the Quran with ya, other than that any Quran comment by you will be ignored

So you can't see the verse has AL-KITAAB instead of kitaab? Maybe you need another 25 years.

first of all, I don't know why you don't get it, I need not to show anything to anyone, I onnly liase with the ones I respect and to answer their questions, all the rest of humans in the world will be ignored, very simple rule in my Book

Yes, ignore what you can't deal with. Being a programmer, you surely know of the ostrich algorithm.

you suffer from a very law IQ Mister Q, I concuded this already, Al Kitab was mentioned numerous times in the Quran and it referred to many other books, but I will only prove that to the others whom are identified in my book to liase civily with but only iof they raise the Question with me

So even though God uses the word 'kutuub', here He used 'al-kitaab'. Your God has a poor knowledge of Arabic. I guess now you need to teach even God Arabic.

And please don't give me NONSENSE about speaking civilly. You don't know the meaning of the word. Right from the beginning, your language is provocative, quarrelsome and RACIST. That's how you create a facade around your lack of knowledge about al-quraan. The truth is, you've never encountered these verses before and they challenge your world-view. This is evidenced by the poor responses you've come up with. Al-quraan is history. God means 'many books' when he says 'al-kitaab'. And you call other people 'laughable'. A good long look in the mirror would help, believe me.

Haha, what an ignorance, it was mentioned singualr as a single book for each, NOT the same book for all, you are so funny

Is that so? So why is the word KULLUN not present in the verse. Why is AL-KITAAB instead of kitaabun. Come on Ahmed, you can do better than that. Al-quraan is contradicting you at every turn, as usual.

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

Therefore what I believe in is the fact that those are mutashabihat verses deliberately inserted in the Quran by Allah as per 37 and 37 has given me an example of what I should do as the people with knowledge did, by not chasing the meaning or believing in (concluding) a specific meaning and just believing that it was sent by Allah to test the ones whose hearts have perversity

OK, so you believe the guidance you received from 37 in particular is that you should not attempt to find the guidance in certain verses? Fair enough, I guess.

oh yeh, and it is the understanding of most well known and solid Muslims, like Omar, Abu Bakr and hundreds of scholars came after them

I was not aware that Omar and Abu Bakr authored books. Could you reference their writings?

IT IS THE CLEAR ARABIC WORDS that I walked you through it sentence by sentence,

Yes, THE CLEAR ARABIC WORDS that YOU INTERPRETED! Please let's not go through this again.

ironically you didn?t show us what is your understanding to 37

yes, I did. Here it is again

I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points
1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.
2- If I accept your understanding that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

You stated

it is not invalid, it will just destroy your claim that the quran is fully detailed and easy to understand, also it will divide the people not to unite them

A the people are already divided doing it your way
B multiple meanings does not mean it is difficult to understand, it simply means it has multiple meanings.

Therefore, your statement "your argument has - 100 sense, I meant (minus 100)", is 100% negated wink

of course my judgement is not infallible, but I?m glad that my judgment here that is based on the clear Arabic words that I walked you through it is the same judgment as the big guns in Islam, like Mohammad the prophet for example, Mohammad actually discussed 37 a lot in many history records, would you like to see the history records by Mohammad?

Yes, please provide reference to some of the books Muhammad authored.

of course I accept that argument, however not the case with mutashabihat of the many understandings are contradictory

Please provide an example for us.

the other ones you are talking about that have different meanings standings generations, are very muhkamat verse

Such as??

Ok as I told you earlier it was discussed in details but I have to find the comment and bring it in here

Please do.

Peace,
Tay

unknownuser

try to search for the word Kitab and Al Kitab and you will see than many books were mentioned

There are no such verses. The reason you're asking me for verses is because you can't produce any evidence as usual.

Haha, here we go mister IQuran

Al Kitab in 22 means Al Quran

Al Kitab in 253 means Al Torah

Al Kitab in 1951 means Al Torah

Al Kitab in 181 means Al Quran

Do you want more?

I have about 161 examples

what a dumb question, firstly you assumen that I'm thinking then you are asking me why I'm thinking this way?

On the contrary, I always assume you're NOT thinking.

you have just contradicted yourself, thanks for the show

Thinking people come to the right conclusions.

Haha, another confusing comment

I guess it should be, properly thinking people come to the right conclusions, not those who are on speed

You seem to think al-quraan is a book of history,

now this is funny, you just contradicted yourself again, LOL, now I?m thinking again

so you can't be thinking.

omg, now I?m back to not thinking

please, can you make up your mind?

Am I thinking?

or

Am I not thinking?

Haha what a laugh

Al Quran is tafsil Al Kitab, where you got this from first? can you direct to me to a verse?

In 25 years, you've never come across the ayaat? Have you been reading blindfolded?

firstly how anyone can read a book blindfolded?

Possibly David Coperfield, What do you reckon?

Secondly I?m not David Copperfield

And finally, another stupid comment by you

Because you've been writing with your ego, you can't even see the ayat Leyla posted for you. Tsk tsk...

Try one more time, but next time, speak on your behalf not others, if you see that the verses she posted are relevant then why not you walk me through it WORD BY WORD?

Other than that, it seems to me that you have nothing to say but non sense

why don't you walk us through it instead opf just putting the verse number, I'm sure you do that to avoide being exposed that your understanding to most Quran verses are flawed

please do and walk us through the Quran verses to enlighten us

Fair request. Here you go

There is not an animal (that lives) on the earth, nor a being that flies on its wings, but (forms part of) communities like you. Nothing have we omitted from the Book, and they (all) shall be gathered to their Lord in the end (6/3

Havn?t I respond to her regarding this verse?

Of course I did, now it seems you are the one that have a veil on the eyes

did you encounter this in your 25 years of reading?

how about you?

It seems it is not you who encountered it, but Leyla, LOL

and what lesson that is?, the Quran is full of lessons, you are one hell of a confuser, I guess you are the one that was born without logic in the head

So you can't understand the lesson?

Nister IQuran, I said Lessons, not lesson, there is an S at the end

Well, you should look up why. Al-quraan actually tells you why too....

firstly which lesson out of the lessons?

Secondly, donlt post your silly and confusing comment without walking me through the verses WORD BY WORD, other than this I will consider you have nothing to say to me and I do too, I only reply to your harassments

sure many things in the Quran are history

of course

Ah brilliant. Who calls al-quraan 'asaatirul awwaleen', Ahmed? Did you encounter this in the last 25 years?

here we go another manipulation by the professional

firstly let me ask you, is 'asaatirul awwaleen' means history?

now I got you cornered, LOL

I donlt acceot you sneaky short comments on any Quran verse, you must bring the verse here and walk me through it if you want me to dicuss the Quran with ya, other than that any Quran comment by you will be ignored

So you can't see the verse has AL-KITAAB instead of kitaab? Maybe you need another 25 years.

Haha, mate, I donlt want to read your confusion, please don?t direct your non sense to me any more, you can direct it to the other though, thanks

first of all, I don't know why you don't get it, I need not to show anything to anyone, I onnly liase with the ones I respect and to answer their questions, all the rest of humans in the world will be ignored, very simple rule in my Book

Yes, ignore what you can't deal with. Being a programmer, you surely know of the ostrich algorithm.

no, I don?t but I will leave it to you, I really don?t want to listen to your non sense, please don?t direct it to me, but you can direct it to the others though, thanks

you suffer from a very law IQ Mister Q, I concuded this already, Al Kitab was mentioned numerous times in the Quran and it referred to many other books, but I will only prove that to the others whom are identified in my book to liase civily with but only iof they raise the Question with me

So even though God uses the word 'kutuub', here He used 'al-kitaab'. Your God has a poor knowledge of Arabic. I guess now you need to teach even God Arabic.

go away

And please don't give me NONSENSE about speaking civilly. You don't know the meaning of the word. Right from the beginning, your language is provocative, quarrelsome and RACIST. That's how you create a facade around your lack of knowledge about al-quraan. The truth is, you've never encountered these verses before and they challenge your world-view. This is evidenced by the poor responses you've come up with. Al-quraan is history. God means 'many books' when he says 'al-kitaab'. And you call other people 'laughable'. A good long look in the mirror would help, believe me.

Haha, what an ignorance, it was mentioned singualr as a single book for each, NOT the same book for all, you are so funny

Is that so? So why is the word KULLUN not present in the verse. Why is AL-KITAAB instead of kitaabun. Come on Ahmed, you can do better than that. Al-quraan is contradicting you at every turn, as usual.

get the verse here again and walk me through it word by word, your unorganised comments will be ignored

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

Therefore what I believe in is the fact that those are mutashabihat verses deliberately inserted in the Quran by Allah as per 37 and 37 has given me an example of what I should do as the people with knowledge did, by not chasing the meaning or believing in (concluding) a specific meaning and just believing that it was sent by Allah to test the ones whose hearts have perversity

OK, so you believe the guidance you received from 37 in particular is that you should not attempt to find the guidance in certain verses? Fair enough, I guess.

Yes but only if those certain verses can not be explained using the Quran, if it will be explained using the different opinions then I will leave it out and I won?t care about it, I will only believe that it was sent by Allah and nothing more, just I donlt have the knowledge neither any human for that matter to know the meaning except Allah as per 37

So far I have never come to a mutashabihat verse that I should know what it means to follow, like marrying 4 for example, 43 is a clear cut mutashabihat verse, but because I believer the order to marry one was not mutashabihat, it will overwrite marrying 4 in the mutashabihat verse 43, therefore I will only follow the muhkam verse that told me to marry only one as this is better option for men, because men can never be fair between more than one wife, hence I won?t care what is the right meaning for 43, but I will listen to other opinions and possibly have my own but will never settle on one meaning as it is the proper meaning intended by Allah because no one will know except Allah as per 37

oh yeh, and it is the understanding of most well known and solid Muslims, like Omar, Abu Bakr and hundreds of scholars came after them

I was not aware that Omar and Abu Bakr authored books. Could you reference their writings?

come on bro, did I say they authored books?

No I did not

So why you are saying as such?

Anyway, I meant from the history records

IT IS THE CLEAR ARABIC WORDS that I walked you through it sentence by sentence,

Yes, THE CLEAR ARABIC WORDS that YOU INTERPRETED! Please let's not go through this again.

come on, you still insisting on me interpreting it, well let me surprise you, my interoperation was exactly like prophet mohammad interpretation, LOL

ironically you didn?t show us what is your understanding to 37

yes, I did. Here it is again

I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points
1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.

well, what it will indicate then?

And where is those ayats you say they will be a contradiction?

Come on bro, try to be a bit informative

2- If I accept your understanding

excuse me, it is not my understanding that you should accept, it is the common sense and the prophet understanding that you should accept, it just happened that m y understanding was exactly like the prophet understanding

that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

sorry, I will consider your statement a huge mistake unless youshow me WHERE IT SAYS IN 1736 THAT YOU SHOULD VERIFY THE INFORMATION FIRST

now I got you cornered, LOL bro

You stated

it is not invalid, it will just destroy your claim that the quran is fully detailed and easy to understand, also it will divide the people not to unite them

A the people are already divided doing it your way

My way only apply on me, I really care less who will buy it, I?m just happy and proud that my way regarding the verses in discussion was exactly as the prophet way according to the history records, but I knw that most Muslims don?t follow the prophet teachings properly

B multiple meanings does not mean it is difficult to understand, it simply means it has multiple meanings.

as long as the multiple meaning will not contradict each other neither it will contradict other verses in the Quran

Therefore, your statement "your argument has - 100 sense, I meant (minus 100)", is 100% negated wink

LOL, ok

of course my judgement is not infallible, but I?m glad that my judgment here that is based on the clear Arabic words that I walked you through it is the same judgment as the big guns in Islam, like Mohammad the prophet for example, Mohammad actually discussed 37 a lot in many history records, would you like to see the history records by Mohammad?

Yes, please provide reference to some of the books Muhammad authored.

come on bro, did I say Mohammad authored any books?

No I did not

It is called history records bro

of course I accept that argument, however not the case with mutashabihat of the many understandings are contradictory

Please provide an example for us.

I don?t need to provide any bro, I?m just a watcher to those whom verse 37 describes them, but I will try to explain 43 many meanings and show you the contradictions when I have a bit of time.

the other ones you are talking about that have different meanings standings generations, are very muhkamat verse

Such as??

I will show you a couple of examples later

Ok as I told you earlier it was discussed in details but I have to find the comment and bring it in here

Please do.

Peace,
Tay

Sure, all will come later today

peace