Muhammad's name
-
Peace be upon you,
Yes, neither "ahmad" nor "muhammad" in used as a name, but a description for us to emulate. They both are derivatives of the word "hamd" which I take as "exaltation".
When you awaken your will (Isa, son of mary), then after that comes "exaltation".
-
idolfree1 wrote...
When you awaken your will (Isa, son of mary), then after that comes "exaltation".yeah! and when we become abraham (sacrificing our dearest in way of god) we beget isaac (glad tidings from the god)! also we have to become arjuna (unwavering, single-pointed concentration) to get to see 'real' krishna (the actual and absolute countenance of god rather than the perceived!)! lolz, just kidding...dont mind! i personally dont think jesus is an allegory if thats what u said there!
peace be upon you -)
-
Peace be upon you,
i personally dont think jesus is an allegory if thats what u said there!
Thats fine. However, the story of Jesus is the same story that has been given since the beginning of recorded spirituality, and it has always been an allegory.
You dont believe that there was a real man who brought life to the dead and made the blind to see literally? Do you?
-
idolfree1 wrote...
Thats fine.cool! -)
idolfree1 wrote...
However, the story of Jesus is the same story that has been given since the beginning of recorded spirituality, and it has always been an allegory.is that the truth according to u (ur reasoning and rationale) or are u stating the truth? -)
idolfree1 wrote...
You dont believe that there was a real man who brought life to the dead and made the blind to see literally? Do you?yeah! -S
peace be upon you -)
-
Peace be upon you,
Quote
idolfree1 wrote...
However, the story of Jesus is the same story that has been given since the beginning of recorded spirituality, and it has always been an allegory.is that the truth according to u (ur reasoning and rationale) or are u stating the truth?
I'll put it to you like this, the same basic story that has been given since the beginning can only be VERIFIED (the essence of TRUTH) by taking it as an allegory and LIVING it to see if its true. Otherwise we are left with blind faith which can never be proven, and therefore can never be "truth".
But there is no compulsion on you, just sharing what I had to share.
Lets get back to "ahmed".
-
idolfree1 wrote...
I'll put it to you like this, the same basic story that has been given since the beginning can only be VERIFIED (the essence of TRUTH) by taking it as an allegory and LIVING it to see if its true. Otherwise we are left with blind faith which can never be proven, and therefore can never be "truth".for 1, u said the story of jesus was the same that has been given since the beginning of recorded spirituality! however ,any mention of 'jesus son of mary' is absent in the old testament or even other scriptures which outdate the new testament and quran! so it would indeed merit thought as to why this allegory was absent in the earlier scriptures! however, and for the rest of this, like u said it would be hijacking this thread, so let us happily disagree! -)
idolfree1 wrote...
But there is no compulsion on you, just sharing what I had to share.cool! -)
idolfree1 wrote...
Lets get back to "ahmed".u mean the allegorical 1? lolz! i dont take him as an allegory either, but let us leave it for the time being as this thread deals an issue other than allegory! however i do wonder whether 'ahmad' or 'muhammad' was his name or they were just kind of 'labels'! in anycase, this thread does not deal with that either! -)
peace be upon you -)
-
Peace be upon you,
Yes, neither "ahmad" nor "muhammad" in used as a name, but a description for us to emulate. They both are derivatives of the word "hamd" which I take as "exaltation".
Peace All
For those who say Ahmed is a description NOT a name have really got it wrong, the Quran clearly told us that the up coming messenger after Isa HIS NAME IS AHMED, the verse never said his description is Ahmed, LOL
YUSUFALI And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"
PICKTHAL And when Jesus son of Mary said O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One. Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say This is mere magic.
SHAKIR And when Isa son of Marium said O children of Israel! surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said This is clear magic.
(6)
-> See, ? ?, i.e. ?His Name is Ahmed?, LOL again
I rest my case regarding the name Ahmed which PICKTHAL tranlsated as "The praised one" but the issue we have is it a name or a description and we can see that PICKTHAL translated still as name because the absolutely clear and abvoius for a child who just started talking arabic that "Ismaho" menas "His name"
Peace
-
Peace be upon you,
I'll be happy to share with you the story of Ausar and Auset and other virgin birth stories in anoher thread. The old testament is not the only spiritual teaching. Or maybe you discount the spiritual teachings of certain groups of people.
Lets get back to "ahmed".
u mean the allegorical 1? lolz! i dont take him as an allegory either
So "ahmed' was a real person and "muhammad" was a real person too? Please elaborate.
-
ahmedbahgat wrote...
I rest my case regarding the name Ahmed which PICKTHAL tranlsated as "The praised one" but the issue we have is it a name or a description and we can see that PICKTHAL translated still as name because the absolutely clear and abvoius for a child whi just starting talking arabic that "Ismaho" menas "His name"yeah, but if jesus said to them his name was to be 'ahmad', how would they have reacted to a 'muhammad' claiming to be that messenger? -)
idolfree1 wrote...
I'll be happy to share with you the story of Ausar and Auset and other virgin birth stories in anoher thread. The old testament is not the only spiritual teaching. Or maybe you discount the spiritual teachings of certain groups of people.lolz! chill! u had written in ur allegory "isa, son of mary"! it was 'jesus, son of mary' who i said is missing from scriptures post newtestament and quran! i am sure there are other such examples in other teachings, zoroaster arguably being 1 of the most prominent! -)
idolfree1 wrote...
So "ahmed' was a real person and "muhammad" was a real person too? Please elaboratehuh? -S i think i said they are perhaps 'labels' or adjectives, maybe his name was something else! or maybe 'ahmad' was his name an 'muhammad' was an adjective used by god! or maybe jesus spoke an allegory and used 'ahmad' instead of 'muhammad'! lolz! like i said i already posted a thread and i have been wrecking my head over it! cry in anycase, like i said this thread deals with something else! -)
peace be upon you -)
-
ahmedbahgat wrote...
I rest my case regarding the name Ahmed which PICKTHAL tranlsated as "The praised one" but the issue we have is it a name or a description and we can see that PICKTHAL translated still as name because the absolutely clear and abvoius for a child whi just starting talking arabic that "Ismaho" menas "His name"yeah, but if jesus said to them his name was to be 'ahmad', how would they have reacted to a 'muhammad' claiming to be that messenger? -)
Hello
Very easy
Mohammad was the only prophet came after Jesus as far as I know from the history, and the verse said a prophet after me
cheers
-
Does that mean his proper name is "Ahmad"?
It could be...I think we should start a debate about the meaning of the word "ism".
Anyway, If we assume that "Ahmad" or "Muhammad" is indeed a quality of this person, rather than his proper name, then don't you think it's strange not to know the actual name of such a historic figure??
I agree with member "thegod" in that this "ahmed" or "muhammed" was not an allegory. He was a real person. If we refuse this , then how was the Reading revealed?? Did God throw printed mushafs from the sky for the people to read???
There WAS indeed a Arab man who preached the reading in the area around the Jordan Valley in Northern Arabia, in the 6th Century AD, and who later emigrated southwards to "Yathreb" where he was greeted as a hero.
Who is burried in that tomb at the mosque in Medina?? Or is this another joke on the part of the Saudi Governement?
My question is If we accept this messenger as a true historic figure and not an allegory, then isn't it strange that his real name is never mentioned??
-
pazuzu wrote...
Does that mean his proper name is "Ahmad"?jesus told his people the messenger's 'ism' will be "ahamd" (61 ; 6)! well, the only hitch is that the quran itself uses the name 'muhammad' as well (472)! ummm...i can think of these 3 possibilities
-
both "ahmad" and "muhammad" have something to do with 'praise', so perhaps both have been used as either a marker or an adjective or both!
-
his name was "muhammad" but while jesus gave them the tidings he used "ahmad" as an allegory to point towards "muhammad"!
-
his name was "ahmad" and perhaps god used "muhammad" (as an adjective) as commendation!
-
he was known as both "ahmad" and "muhammad"!
well, these are merely my opinions and neither truth nor my truth based on presence or absence of anything!
another verse says that this messenger has been mentioned in both the torah and the injeel (7 157)! ofcourse, this opens up the issue for a wider discussion! however, i think i wont be around much longer! cry
-
-
the Quran clearly called jesus by two names
-
Isa
-
Masih
so what is the bloody problem when the Quran called the last messenger by two names?
-
-
Who do you think is burried in that tomb at the mosque in Medina??
Are the Saudis hiding something from the masses?? twisted
-
Peace be upon you,
"muhammad" and "ahmed" are YOU! (if you achieve that level) as well as anyone else who achieves that level. Yes, there was a human being who wrote this book. We dont know his name. Its not a book about him. Its a book about becoming "muhammad".
There is no one in that grave, just flesh turning back to dirt.
-
pazuzu wrote...
My question is If we accept this messenger as a true historic figure and not an allegory, then isn't it strange that his real name is never mentioned??muhammad is most surely not an allegory! as for his name, its probably almost a sure thing it is "muhammad"! he has been adressed quite ferquently as muhammad and there is no reason to believe it was not muhammad!
as for "ahmad", i think jesus perhaps used it as an allegory to point towards "muhammad"! or maybe he was also known as ahmad, which in itself would not be a very uncommon thing!
pazuzu wrote...
Who do you think is burried in that tomb at the mosque in Medina??as for who is buried in the tomb, let the tomb be in peace, whoever be buried therein! when the graves are overturned, all secrets will be made manifest! but till then we have the quran to be sure that muhammad was indeed the messenger of allah and not an allegory! -)
-
Peace be upon you,
muhammad is most surely not an allegory! as for his name, its probably almost a sure thing it is "muhammad"! he has been adressed quite ferquently as muhammad and there is no reason to believe it was not muhammad!
There is plenty of reason. Why is it that in other instances, a word with MU added to it just means that the object takes on that quality, but when it comes to HAMD, when we add MU to it it becomes a persons name?
Which verse can you provide where a human being was addressed by the PROPER NAME Muhammad, rather than being a common description?
as for "ahmad", i think jesus perhaps used it as an allegory to point towards "muhammad"! or maybe he was also known as ahmad, which in itself would not be a very uncommon thing!
salaam, islam, muslim
hamd, ahmad, muhammad
Just different forms. Not a name.
-
idolfree1 wrote...
There is plenty of reason. Why is it that in other instances, a word with MU added to it just means that the object takes on that quality, but when it comes to HAMD, when we add MU to it it becomes a persons name?lets go by ur understanding! 'hmd' means praise? muhammad would mean 'who praises'? so u are saying 'who praises' cannot be used as a name? am i right so far?
idolfree1 wrote...
Which verse can you provide where a human being was addressed by the PROPER NAME Muhammad, rather than being a common description?lets see this verse...
3340 Mohammed was not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
now let us replace "muhammad" with ur understanding
"quality" was not the father of any man among you, but he is the messenger of God and the seal of the prophets. And God is fully aware of all things.
idolfree1 wrote..
salaam, islam, muslimhamd, ahmad, muhammad
Just different forms. Not a name.
names are different forms of a word as well! -S
if u dont mind tell me how according u the quran was delivered to humankind! and support it with verses from the quran -)
peace be upon you -)