Please Help Me.
-
peace Ahmed,
i don't really care whether they were real or not. Going by the Quranic lesson of verification, i would need clear proof of their existence to believe they were real. But it really doesn't matter. here's why
If we take the surah to be just a story, then we might need to prove them real. If we take it to be a story with a purpose, a lesson or moral for us, then it doesn't matter.
Because that person in the story, whether real or not, is used as an example. That example, and what we learn from it, is what's important. Not whether the person really lived or not. -
Peace
I find the benefit in the position these characters (or archetypes) exemplify. The story illustrates such wisdom as these 6/165; 9/34-35; 34/11; 40/29, 79-81; 63/9-10; 92/17-18
I feel if you take them as historical figures the teaching herein is not lost. I think it may be ignored if too much attention is held on the historical proof or biography of such people. Their mention in this context is meant to convey to the reader a particular idea or set of ideas.
Joe
-
After careful thinking. I feel the story of Abu Lahab is true and it is what it is. A factual account of The Prophets uncle - however it is not necessary to disgress into so much, as for it's time it was the story of abu lahab and his account, albeit it is short. The beauty of the Quran is that it is for all time, therefore after a period of time, it still serves it's purpose as an account of Abu Lahab but not necessarily in a historical context, it becomes allegorical. So from an allegorical perspective it becomes just as relevant.
A good example is the story of Yusuf in surah yusuf and moses and his travels, yes they're factual but what purpose did they serve as in the time of the prophet,because there wasn't any historical relevance for it in the Prophets time?It served as an allegorical device. So, I think stories in the Quran are temporal devices that are relevant throughout the ages.
-
peace all,
"abu lahab" literally means "father (of) flame" in Arabic. This is solid.
Theoretically, it could mean a proper name but equally it may not be.
As brother Joe said, I believe it is an archetype.
Furthermore, the God discourages use of nicnames (cant remember the ayat/sign off-hand), thus it is highly unlikely He uses a nicname ("abu lahab" as this was not the real name of the so-called prophet Muhammad's uncle.
This has been discussed before, please use the search function.
Also, the I believe the Arabic word used for rope means an entwined rope, which may be symbolic of the relationship between the fuel and the fire, as has been mentioned by others in this thread.
Wakas
-
Both of them were famous opponents and arch enemies of the Prophet (pbuh), even though to the best of my knowledge, Abu Lahab was the Prophet's uncle.
Peace ..
Which knowledge? are you Quran only believer? where is it written in quran that AbLahab was enemy of prophet(SAW)? Whe is it written that he had direct relation with prophet(SAW)? and where is it written that he was Prophet's Uncle?
VE
-
This is a very good TOOL, that if you dont understand the real context of the Surah/verse directly condemning and cursing a person,,, then just refer to the rest of Quran as generally telling what is wrong and write. Very interesting. )
All the subjective stories in Quran have been mentioned in detail as
Who was a subjected person.
What did he do
what he did not do
For what reason he was rewarded or cursed.Then how come this person AbuLahab is directly being cursed fromt the start of surah?
Anyway I think my arguments here are of no use. You people can do anything and give any rubbish logics to get rid of any historical and/or Ahadith knowledge. You people have changed the meaning of each and every verse of Quran just to justify that we dont need any additional knowledge. I assume if your motive is true then you must not have even learned any language from your parents and Allah would have revealed all the TRUTH on you directly,,,,because as you people think that Allah guides us directly if we want. I assume then Allah would have revealed the Holy text on each of you, because you would only be independant of the secondary knowledge if Allah had directly tought the language of Quran to you without any secondary source like your secondary knowledge, language and historical knowhow.
I hereby quit this discussion considering that I am not enough to answer a dozen people just alone myself.
VE
-
Peace,
Quote
All the subjective stories in Quran have been mentioned in detail as
Who was a subjected person.
What did he do
what he did not do
For what reason he was rewarded or cursed.So you agree with us, that all persons in the Quran mentioned, also why they're examples is mentioned fully detailed?
Quote
Then how come this person AbuLahab is directly being cursed fromt the start of surah?Maybe then to answer this question, is the fact that it is not a person from history, but a metaphor....
This logical and based on the examples of other verses throughout the Quran. So we change meanings? Maybe the tradition has done that? Ever thought of that?......
Plus, again you show, that you don't use your arguments on yourself. A couple of topics ago, you complained every time, you waisted so much time on writing an answer to somebody, and then the person would, as you say; just say that doesn't apply to me, as i don't follow hadith. You condemned this behaviour. Now every time you do it yourself. Pushing it away, with the exact same arguments as the persons you condemned of waisting your time on. Ignoring questions in responses to you, giving superficial answers or start calling names, OR WRITING QUICK REMARKS IN BIG LETTERS TO SHOW HOW GOOD YOU'RE IN BEING A PATIENT MUSLIM. It seems we waist our time on you...
Peace
-
Peace be upon you Caveman Doctor,
If taken a bit more literally, we see the mention of Fire/Hell/Blaze, and that the female is the carrier of logs. She will be carrying these logs as fuel for the aforementioned Fire/Hell/Blaze.<<<
Yes, I agree. I forgot to comment on the logs which are an obvious symbolism for fueling the fire. And again, on the psychological level, it is the verbal thoughts that bring for the VISION(imagination) that fuels the emotions. All one need to do is sit back and pay attention to what goes on in thier minds in the course of a day. In the oldest recorded religious philosophy, the imagination was called "Het Heru", and it is stated that the Imagination is that which stimulates RA. RA, which was incorrectly translated by Westerners as "sun God" really refers to the Life Force (Chi/kundalini/biokenetic energy/ etc.) So indeed this message is a confirmation of what came before it.
Taken in this vein, I think the verse shows how people's actions reinforce each other's. The male was one who, like Joe mentioned, let his wealth/property dictate his life; and what did the female do? Did she urge him against this mindset of taking his wealth as an ilah? No, to the contrary, she supported and reinforced his actions, she "carried the logs." She made his actions seem pleasing to him by approving and by taking part. To use a common English idiom, she added fuel to the fire.
I agree that this is what happens in life, but I dont follow the verse that literal because it would make the woman the antagonist like the biblical story of Eve "forcing" Adam to eat the apple. I disagree with blaming the woman literally, and thats what the story would mean if the God uses a literal woman for the example. Same way I dont take ALL MALE messengers as example that only men deliver God's Truth to mankind. A woman has a mouth and wisdom as well. Certianly there are men who fuel women and men who fuel other men.
Also, see 4125 as a cross-reference
"We assign to them companions who adorn everything they do in their eyes. Thus, they end up incurring the same fate as the previous communities of jinns and humans, who were also losers."Yes, humans have the compainions of the hidden thoughts and images which direct the emotions.
As for the rope around her neck, the context of the surah, as we have discussed, seems intimately tied to hands/wealth/property. We see another verse in the Qur'an that not only relates to hands/wealth/property but also ties that concept to the neck. The verse is 1729
"You shall not keep your hand stingily tied to your neck, nor shall you foolishly open it up, lest you end up blamed and sorry."
The surrounding verses make it clear that the verse is referring to miserly actions and greed. Perhaps the "rope of thorns" that goes around this person's neck, the neck of a person who took property/wealth as an ilah, represents the symbolic punishment the soul will receive. Just as the Qur'an mentions one's hand tied around the neck, thus cutting off circulation and keeping one's soul stagnant, the rope of thorns tied to the neck is its eternal counterpart. The rope of thorns will cut off circulation to the soul in the Hereafter, thereby preventing once again the soul-growth of the person for eternity. One may call this soul-stagnation "Hell."
Good observation in regards to verse 1729!
-
peace Ahmed,
Peace mate,
i don't really care whether they were real or not.
It is not a matter of caring of being real or not, it is matter of what hard core evidences they have to provide from the Quran that Abu lahab is nothing but a parable
There is only one indirect lesson from the story of Abu Lahab, it is simply
His wealth and what he earns will not avail him
-> There is no need to dedicate a whole surah for that obvious lesson that was told to us directly many times in the Quran, in fact I have a surprise for those who claim that Abu Lahab story is nothing but a parable to teach us the above and only lesson (1112) in the whole sura 111.
ALLAH GAVE US A LONG PARABLE SAYING THE EXACT SAME AND INDEED HE TOLD US ?HERE IS A PARABLE? IN ADVANCE
32 And set forth to them a parable of two men; for one of them We made two gardens of grape vines, and We surrounded them both with palms, and in the midst of them We made cornfields.
33 Both these gardens yielded their fruits, and failed not aught thereof, and We caused a river to gush forth in their midst,
34 And he possessed much wealth; so he said to his companion, while he disputed with him I have greater wealth than you, and am mightier in followers.
35 And he entered his garden while he was unjust to himself. He said I do not think that this will ever perish
36 And I do not think the hour will come, and even if I am returned to my Lord I will most certainly find a returning place better than this.
37 His companion said to him while disputing with him Do you disbelieve in Him Who created you from dust, then from a small seed, then He made you a perfect man?
38 But as for me, He, Allah, is my Lord, and I do not associate anyone with my Lord.
39 And wherefore did you not say when you entered your garden It is as Allah has pleased, there is no power save in Allah? If you consider me to be inferior to you in wealth and children,
40 Then maybe my Lord will give me what is better than your garden, and send on it a thunderbolt from heaven so that it shall become even ground without plant,
41 Or its waters should sink down into the ground so that you are unable to find it.
42 And his wealth was destroyed; so he began to wring his hands for what he had spent on it, while it lay, having fallen down upon its roofs, and he said Ah me! would that I had not associated anyone with my Lord.
43 And he had no host to help him besides Allah nor could he defend himself.
44 Here is protection only Allah's, the True One; He is best in (the giving of) reward and best in requiting.
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(3
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)-> What can I say?, hmmm, well the Quran keeps refuting the ones who are Quran ignorant, this makes great sense to me, let?s look again at what I just said in bold? the Quran keeps refuting the ones who are Quran ignorant?, now let me walk you through the parable then see if the allegation against sura 111 deserves a slam dunk.
-> Verse 32, clearly Allah is giving us a PARABLE ?And set forth to them a parable of two men?; see how clear Allah is?, a parable of two MEN, can you also see how the two men were anonymous in the parable?, one was rich and the other was not ?for one of them We made two gardens of grape vines, and We surrounded them both with palms, and in the midst of them We made cornfields.?
-> Verse 33, the rich man had a very comfy life?Both these gardens yielded their fruits, and failed not aught thereof, and We caused a river to gush forth in their midst,?, but did the rich man realize that the Rizq (Favours) he had was from Allah?, I don?t think so, it seems you can guess what the parable is all about before reading it complete with ease.
-> Verse 34, the rich man was really proud of his wealth and was showing it of ?And he possessed much wealth; so he said to his companion, while he disputed with him I have greater wealth than you, and am mightier in followers.
-> Verse35, the rich and unjust man thought that these favours will never perish ?And he entered his garden while he was unjust to himself. He said I do not think that this will ever perish?
-> Verse 36, the rich man was an unbeliever as the parable is put to us by Allah?And I do not think the hour will come, and even if I am returned to my Lord I will most certainly find a returning place better than this., I have to say to the rich man, dream on
-> Verse 37, the other man (the poor) said to the rich man ? His companion said to him while disputing with him Do you disbelieve in Him Who created you from dust, then from a small seed, then He made you a perfect man? ?, I guess he was trying to help the rich man to drop his arrogance and ego in order to follow the right path.
-> Verse 38, the parable also told us that the poor man declared his belief in Allah ?But as for me, He, Allah, is my Lord, and I do not associate anyone with my Lord.?
-> verse 39, he even advised the rich man in what to say when feeling the joy and pride due to his wealth?And wherefore did you not say when you entered your garden It is as Allah has pleased, there is no power save in Allah?, then he told him that despite he has less wealth than him? If you consider me to be inferior to you in wealth and children,?, that Allah?s reward to him may be far better than his
-> Verse 40, ?Then maybe my Lord will give me what is better than your garden,?, then he even CURSED the rich man and asked Allah to remove the wealth from him, exactly as Noah cursed his people? and send on it a thunderbolt from heaven so that it (the two gardens) shall become even ground without plant,?
-> Verse 41, the curse continued ?Or its waters should sink down into the ground so that you are unable to find it.?
-> Verse 42, and when his wealth was destroyed the rich realized his mistake? And his wealth was destroyed; so he began to wring his hands for what he had spent on it, while it lay, having fallen down upon its roofs, and he said Ah me! would that I had not associated anyone with my Lord. ?, he lost all the money he spent on his gardens as well.
-> Verses 43,44 and the final lesson of the parable ? And he had no host to help him besides Allah nor could he defend himself.?, ?Here is protection only Allah's, the True One; He is best in (the giving of) reward and best in requiting.?
To be continued....
-
Now we have a serious problem for those who promote that Abu Lahab was not a real man but a symbol, ?A Parable?, they need to consider the following questions
Why Allah didn?t say in sura 111,? Here is a parable? as He did in 1832?, would it be that it is a clear cut guess on their end to say that sura 111 is a parable and Allah clearly didn?t say that?
Why Allah called Abu Lahab with name Abu Lahab and in here the two men mentioned in the parable were anonymous?
There was no mention to the wives of the rich man and the poor man in the above parable which is almost identical to the alleged parable in sura 111, why is that?
In the above clear parable, it was clear that Allah told us that the anonymous rich man was UNBELIEVER, however in sura 111 there is absolutely nothing to suggest that Abu Lahab was an unbeliever neither a bad man in both 1111 and 111;2 , so why he was condemned in 1113?
In 1114 about his wife, I can?t see anything wrong regarding his wife carrying logs , what is wrong with that for her to be condemned in 1115, the end of the sura?
There is no question that they were real people who lived during the time of the prophet and for some rookies to come and suggest something else that contradict what is well established through the history, is nothing but saying things about Allah that is not true because Allah talked to us directly about those two in sura 111, this is exactly when they say that sura 111 is a metaphor while clearly we see in the Quran that Allah always tells us ?Here is a metaphor?, their fatal mistake ?saying that Allah means a parable with sura 111? is warned against in the Quran, let?s look at the following verses
74- Invent not similitudes for Allah for Allah knoweth, and ye know not.
75- Allah sets forth a parable (consider) a slave, the property of another, (who) has no power over anything, and one whom We have granted from Ourselves a goodly sustenance so he spends from it secretly and openly; are the two alike? (All) praise is due to Allah! Nay, most of them do not know.
76- And Allah sets forth a parable of two men; one of them is dumb, not able to do anything, and he is a burden to his master; wherever he sends him, he brings no good; can he be held equal with him who enjoins what is just, and he (himself) is on the right path?
(74)
(75)
(76)-> Clear from the 1674 that Allah is warning us from ? Invent not similitudes for Allah for Allah knoweth, and ye know not.?, this is clear that Allah is telling us not to invent parables and associated to Him, some may say that the warning is against making parables about Allah Himself, I say, sorry it can?t be because He already told us that THERE IS NOTHING LIKE HIM, and the warning in 1674 has to be against associating invented parables to Him, because in the very next verse 1675, He gave us a parable ? Allah sets forth a parable (consider) a slave??.?, and again in 1676 Allah sets forth another parable ? And Allah sets forth a parable of two men;???, see, how the slave and the two men in both parables were anonymous?, and how clearly Allah told us that ?Here is a parable? straight after warning us from inventing parables and associating it to Him?, this warning is for those who say sura 111 is a parable, their ego and arrogance made them so blind not to see those clear facts including that Allah never told us in advance that sura 111 is a parable, their logic regarding the matter of Abu Lahab, lacks merit, Quran understanding, and most importantly the common sense if the simple fact that sura 111 never suggested that Abu Lahab or his wife were bad humans is considered by them, well, what they also have to consider along with 1674-76, is 16105
Only they invent falsehood who believe not Allah's revelations, and (only) they are the liars.
(105)
Going by the Quranic lesson of verification, i would need clear proof of their existence to believe they were real.
- Allah never told us in sura 111 ?Here is a parable?
- There was no indication in sura 111 that Abu Lahab and his wife were bad people to be condemned.
- Comparing the alleged parable with the same parable in 1832-44, makes it very clear that sura 111 is not a parable.
But it really doesn't matter.
If it does not matter then the ones who started promoting this non sense should explain to us why it was important for them to promote it 1400 years after?, the old man said if it ain?t break don?t fix it, now how considering that Abu Lahab and his wife were real people can be considered a broken faith by the traditionists?
For the other millions who believe that Abu Lahab and his wife were real people, it matters because, those who promote this non sense are saying indirectly that those millions are dumb deaf and blind, which I agree it is a possibility but only if they can prove their case using the Quran, now those dumb millions whom I belong to them can easily slam dunk this alleged and non sensible claim using the Quran as I just did with the help of Allah.
here's why
If we take the surah to be just a story, then we might need to prove them real. If we take it to be a story with a purpose, a lesson or moral for us, then it doesn't matter.Bro, that put a smile on my face, but thanks for your go at it, based on your logic then we have to prove all other stories mentioned in the Quran are real, in addition we will need to prove that Allah is real because Allah is another story mentioned in the Quran, thanks for the insight bro I can?t prove that Allah is real though, I can only believe that He is real and I can only believe in what He tells me in the Quran that is 100% real. Even when it is a parable I have to believe 100% that it is a parable. And this is still considered real because the reality is to consider a clear cut parable as a parable.
Because that person in the story, whether real or not, is used as an example.
See, if it ain?t break, don?t fix it
That example, and what we learn from it, is what's important. Not whether the person really lived or not.
Well, you may have a word with the ones who came 1400 years after and say they were not real
Cheers
I feel if you take them as historical figures the teaching herein is not lost. I think it may be ignored if too much attention is held on the historical proof or biography of such people. Their mention in this context is meant to convey to the reader a particular idea or set of ideas.
JoePeace Joe
I guess you may also have a word with the ones who started this allegation that they were not real 1400 years after it was established, and please help me out in understanding the importance of it if I have to know that they were not real
Salam all
-
The matter is that they are stucked in their own trap. They dont have any means to explain who was AbuLahab and what did he do.
To find out what wrong he did, they refer to see the rest of Quran, This is rediculous.To further add, I would ask what is the meaning of the following verses
002.065
002.065 And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath We said to them "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."002.066
002.066 So We made it an example to their own time and to their posterity, and a lesson to those who fear Allah.Al-Qur'an, 002.065-066 (Al-Baqara )
Secondly explain following
Allah is saying that you already know. Which means Prophet had to rely on the historical knowledge, thats why he knew and thats why Allah is saying that you already know.I will start a new thread with a more strong question. So be ready with some real reason, and not Greek Philosophies to just try to justfy your thoughts in any case. Like it is said that in love and war everthing is allowed, So please don use Rubbish argumments, Please.................
VirtualEye.
-
VE The matter is that they are stucked in their own trap. They dont have any means to explain who was AbuLahab and what did he do.
To find out what wrong he did, they refer to see the rest of Quran, This is rediculous.Ridiculous to you, sure because you have rejected al-quraan. Al-quraan clearly calls itself 'ahsanal hadith kitaaban mutashabihan mathany' (the best news/narration , a book with similarities repeated'. Therefore, to understand al-quraan, one would do well to refer to other parts of it. Abu Lahab is simply in arabic as 'the father of the flame'. One doesn't need to refer to hadith/sunna/seera in order to get more detail of the man. Rather , one needs to appropriate his lesson. It's sad that sunnis treat al-quraan as if it was a book of history.
-
VE The matter is that they are stucked in their own trap. They dont have any means to explain who was AbuLahab and what did he do.
To find out what wrong he did, they refer to see the rest of Quran, This is rediculous.Ridiculous to you, sure because you have rejected al-quraan. Al-quraan clearly calls itself 'ahsanal hadith kitaaban mutashabihan mathany' (the best news/narration , a book with similarities repeated'. Therefore, to understand al-quraan, one would do well to refer to other parts of it. Abu Lahab is simply in arabic as 'the father of the flame'. One doesn't need to refer to hadith/sunna/seera in order to get more detail of the man. Rather , one needs to appropriate his lesson. It's sad that sunnis treat al-quraan as if it was a book of history.
Certainly one would refer to other parts of quran to understand over all. But with some starting point or clue....
Its not like that ,,,when you dont understand a single thing who was AbuLahab and what did he do....you just say read rest of Quran.For instance , If I write a book and I write an article "A", I explain something for some purpose, I have include some article for some reason, I will not say "Read the rest of book and this article is just extra without any reason. So you can read the rest of book to get expertise" ..................Certainly the read will ask me, then what the hell is this article doing in your book if it just refers to the rest of book.
To make you more comfortable... I ask
WHAT IS SPECIAL IN THAT SURAH IF WE HAVE TO JUST ASSUME THAT WE SHOULD JUST READ REST OF QURAN.???
ALLAH REVEALED ALL THE MESSAGE TELLING EACH AND EVERYTHING IN DIFFERNT WAYS,,,THEN HE INCLUDED AN EXTRA SURAH WHICH ITSELF HAS NOT MEANING???VirtualEye.
-
VE Certainly one would refer to other parts of quran to understand over all. But with some starting point or clue....
Good for you. You've done some thinking, masha Allah. The starting point in the clear Arabic language which al-quraan will filter through its internal process.
Its not like that ,,,when you dont understand a single thing who was AbuLahab and what did he do....you just say read rest of Quran.
All I need to know about Abu Lahab is in the clear Arabic language
- Abu Lahab is the father of flame.
- Allah tells a person of that personality to PERISH.
- His wife is be carrying the fuel. What does fuel to do a flame?
- Her own neck is tied to that act. Showing her own inability to change.
The lessons is in this chapter is immense. Why would I need to look into history to find some details which Allah didn't see fit to include? You need to ask yourself, did Allah's publisher ask him to shorten the book to meet printer demands! Obviously Al-quraan, if you believe it's from Allah, is purposeful in its inclusions AND in its exclusions.
WHAT IS SPECIAL IN THAT SURAH IF WE HAVE TO JUST ASSUME THAT WE SHOULD JUST READ REST OF QURAN.
ALLAH REVEALED ALL THE MESSAGE TELLING EACH AND EVERYTHING IN DIFFERNT WAYS,,,THEN HE INCLUDED AN EXTRA SURAH WHICH ITSELF HAS NOT MEANING???We have to keep reading al-quraan if we believe. This is because al-quraan's revelation upon us is continuous. I haven't witnessed a person like Abu Lahab in my life before but when I do, it will be clearer to me.
-
Please refer to this thread
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=5683.0
VE
-
Peace,
he, mr.silly arguments, where are your answers? You keep shouting we have silly arguments, but you keep rejecting to answer mine, i only see playing though guy....
-
Peace be upon you all,
Lets all race each other to good deeds and righteousness and be symbols of this message we are debating. Lets not fall into the trap of name calling thus giving support to others.
-
Yes, you are right..... sorry VE...peace
-
Peace VE
This is a very good TOOL, that if you dont understand the real context of the Surah/verse directly condemning and cursing a person,,, then just refer to the rest of Quran as generally telling what is wrong and write. Very interesting.
Yes, the Lord repeats the messages that one may grasp them. As far as your initial sincerity goes it seems that you have abondoned it to condemn.
Then how come this person AbuLahab is directly being cursed fromt the start of surah?
You asked that people give an explanation using the reading, but you are now seeking an explanation from historical sources outside the reading. Which is it that you are asking for? You seem to be frustrated when one is not bringing an outside source to explain this particular hadeeth and then when someone does cite some historical source you say why are you not using the reading. Are you playing games, or is this what you call sincerity on your part?
Anyway I think my arguments here are of no use.
Why argue when you have asked something of the people in all sincerity?
You have turned around and bit just about everyone on the ass who has given you some sort of anwer.
You people can do anything and give any rubbish logics to get rid of any historical and/or Ahadith knowledge.
You did not ask of this in your sincere opening declaration. Why are you worrying about this particular thing now?
You people have changed the meaning of each and every verse of Quran just to justify that we dont need any additional knowledge.
You people? Why generalize? I do not think the reading is the only fount of knowledge in this world.
I assume if your motive is true then you must not have even learned any language from your parents and Allah would have revealed all the TRUTH on you directly,,,,because as you people think that Allah guides us directly if we want.
You trying to insult people kills your proposed sincerity.
I hereby quit this discussion considering that I am not enough to answer a dozen people just alone myself.
You sought to recieve answers in your preliminary post and clearly you really sought to give them. So much for your sincerity VE.
Joe
