The Shahada
-
Peace Belal,
You've made this statement to Al Khidr
Why do you say Prophet Muhamad? Did you witness His Prophet Hood? As you know, calling someone a Prophet of God is a serious Claim, which can be only said when you Testify for it.
This is FALSE. You don't have to testify to someone's prophethood in order to call him a prophet. This is absurd! In calling him "Prophet Muhammad", he was acknowledging Muhammad's prophethood, not testifying to it. None of us were present when Muhammad (or any of the other prophets) received their prophethood and scriptures. Not you, not me, not any of us... You have still failed to show a passage in the Qur'an where the BELIEVERS testify to the prophethood of the deceased prophets, and you have still failed to show ONE VERSE in the Qur'an that proclaims your shirk shahaada (i.e. "Ash-hadu an ilaaha ila Allah wa' ash-hadu ana Muhammad ar-rasuwlu Allah"). Why can't you meet this simple challenge, brother? And if your shahaada is not in the Qur'an, then where did you get it from? )
You are asking people (new comer to Islam) to accept the Quran as a divine Message, but at the same time you are refusing to Testify that the Person who wrote it is a Prophet! why would they believe you?
This is another example of your arrogance and ignorance, brother. How can you ask a "new comer to Islam" to accept the Qur'an as a divine message, yet you get your shahaada from the hadith and sunna writings? -\ Plus, since you claim to believe in taking religious guidance from the Qur'an Alone, you are implying the the shahaada only needs to be made regarding Muhammad, since he delivered the Qur'an. So, again, this is illustrating your rejection of Allah's message, and you are making distinctions between the messengers, which the book clearly warns against. You are preaching idolatry. If you want us to accept your shirk shahaada as the "true shahaada", then show us this testimony in the Qur'an. Then, we will be forced to accept the truth and submit. Until then, though, you are spreading falsehood and hearsay...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace MTR,
The passage in 3340 does not say, or even imply, that Muhammad didn't have any children. It says he wasn't the father of "ahadin min rijaalikum"/any of your males. This means that he didn't have any SONS; he may have still had daughters, and according to the sectarian hadiths, he did have daughters, not sons. In Semitic culture, if a prophet had a son, the son succeeded his father in prophethood. The statement that Muhammad had no sons is a prelude to the statement that he is the final prophet, meaning he had no sons to succeed him in prophethood.
Peace,
Ahmad
Assalaam Alaikum @Ahmad
Ma / , negation (i.e. He is NOT, He was NOT), denotes the beginning of a verbal sentence, Allah is supporting this statement and the Messengers of Allah (i.e. Angels & Humans) are conveying the statement.
Kana / (hollow verb, perfect verb, past tense, Verbal Form I = Declarative and a statement of fact) meaning ?To be?.
Ma / Kana / means 'He is NOT, He was NOT'
Muhammadun / in the Quran is NOT a 'proper name', closer to a verbal noun, which may be semantically plural but grammatically singular in reference. (i.e. humans (plural) can embody the character traits of the 'Muhammadun' as a SINGLE individual)
Ahadin / means 'no children, no lineage, not from any human being'
rijaalikum / does NOT mean 'males', its in the plural form, 'kum / ', which denotes male and female human beings
@Ahmad, We know historically, that the Messenger of Allah, the Arab of 1425 years ago, the Muhammed in human form and history, was BORN 'Ahmed Ibn Abdullah Muttalib'. He did NOT 'embody' the character and personality of the 'Muhammadun' until later in his life.
May I suggest you read and study Sura Al-Kahf 18
-
Wa Alaykum Assalaam MTR,
rijaalikum / does NOT mean 'males', its in the plural form, 'kum / ', which denotes male and female human beings
I disagree with this part, brother. We have already discussed this before, and the Arabic word "rijaal" is a pluralized form of "rajul"/man, referring specifically to males, not generally as human beings. If it was referring to human beings (general), it would use the term "basharaan"/human beings, which is not gender specific. Also, if the Qur'an said that Muhammad was not the father of anyone "mina bashariya"/from mankind, this would apply something completely different. Instead, it specifically says "ahadin min rijaalikum", using the word for a male ("rajul"... And the word "kum" refers specifically to possession (i.e. "YOUR males". So, the literal translation says
Muhammad is not the father of any of your men/males...
We know historically, that the Messenger of Allah, the Arab of 1425 years ago, the Muhammed in human form and history, was BORN 'Ahmed Ibn Abdullah Muttalib'. He did NOT 'embody' the character and personality of the 'Muhammadun' until later in his life.
May I suggest you read and study Sura Al-Kahf 18
Ummm... -\ How do we know this? The Qur'an doesn't say this; this is the story promoted in the hadith and sunna writings. We don't know if these are truths or fabrications. Chapter 18 ("Sura Al-Kahf" doesn't say anything like this at all. There's no evidence to support his name being "Ahmad Ibn Abdullah Muttalib"; these are all rumors (i.e. hadiths), and they are not included in the Qur'an. So, where did you get this information from?
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Wa Alaykum Assalaam MTR,
I disagree with this part, brother. We have already discussed this before, and the Arabic word "rijaal" is a pluralized form of "rajul"/man, referring specifically to males, not generally as human beings. If it was referring to human beings (general), it would use the term "basharaan"/human beings, which is not gender specific. Also, if the Qur'an said that Muhammad was not the father of anyone "mina bashariya"/from mankind, this would apply something completely different. Instead, it specifically says "ahadin min rijaalikum", using the word for a male ("rajul"... And the word "kum" refers specifically to possession (i.e. "YOUR males". So, the literal translation says
Assalaam Alaikum @Ahmad
You cant re-write the Quran, in ENGLISH to support that which you don't understand or know.
Can you show the grammatical reference (Sarf) that supports your statement
"And the word "kum" refers specifically to possession (i.e. "YOUR males""
Clue 'kum / denotes number & gender, what is the gender of the word ?
-
Peace all --
Who is AAalayhi?
3356 That truly God and His angels bless and compliment on the prophet. O you who believe, pray and call for God's blessing on him and great greetings.
3144 And Muhammad is not except a messenger, had passed from before him...
-
Peace MTR,
You cant re-write the Quran, in ENGLISH to support that which you don't understand or know.
Are you serious? I'm supporting what I don't know? Do you even understand Arabic language? Most of your understandings are COMPLETELY OFF, especially if you're implying that the addition of "kum" is a reference to number and gender. You should seriously stick to translations...
Can you show the grammatical reference (Sarf) that supports your statement
"And the word "kum" refers specifically to possession (i.e. "YOUR males""
I'm not using a grammatical reference; I'm going from what I know. The addition of "kum" refers to possession of something, and it means "YOUR". There are plenty of examples of this throughout the Qur'an and otherwise. For example, as a basic term that you also use, can you translate the phrase "assalaamu alayKUM"?
O you people, worship "rabbakum"/YOUR LORD, who created you and those before you. Perhaps you may become righteous. (221)
In most cases throughout the Qur'an, ending a word with "kum" denotes ownership or possession, usually meaning "YOUR". This case ("rijaalikum" is no different, and it means "your men/males". The word "kum" itself doesn't have anything to do with number or gender.
What is the gender of the word ?
It is referring to MALES because of the word "rijaal". Adding "kum" doesn't make the gender disappear. What reference are you using? Please provide some proofs of your claims. We already had a discussion on this matter. The word "rijaal" itself means men or males. By adding "kum" onto it, it becomes "rijaalikum", or YOUR MALES.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Assalaam Alaikum @Ahmad....
The word in Sura Al-Ahzab is
'Ra-jaa-lee-kum' NOT 'rijaal'
= Men & Women (Feminine Irregular PLURAL)
is a masculine plural pronoun, when used refers to ALL referents, male and female!
= Man (singular, masculine)
The gender of an irregular plural noun will not always match the gender of its singular. Classically, all irregular plurals were considered and treated as singular feminine nouns, no matter what the gender of the referents were.
/ Muhammed is NOT from ANY human being, male or female
-
Peace Siki,
You guys waste your energies by, "reading and replying" to MTR posts, why ?
I see what you mean... rotfl
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace MTR,
The word in Sura Al-Ahzab is
'Ra-jaa-lee-kum' NOT 'rijaal'
= Men & Women (Feminine Irregular PLURAL)
= Man
is a masculine plural pronoun, when used refers to ALL referents, male and female!
The gender of an irregular plural noun will not always match the gender of its singular. Classically, all irregular plurals were considered and treated as singular feminine nouns, no matter what the gender of the referents were.
/ Muhammed is NOT from ANY human being, male or female
You can't be serious, brother... -\ Can you understand Arabic language, or are you using an Arabic dictionary or something? With what you're saying, there's NO WAY you understand Arabic... nope You're wrong. But I know, based on previous occurrances, you'll never admit that you're wrong, no matter how much I prove the reasonable and logical conclusion to you... So, I'll just stop trying to show you the truth. I suggest you look it up, and possibly take a class in Arabic and Qur'anic speech and grammar if you wish to learn more...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Keep taking notes....
-
Assalaam Alaikum
Sura Al-Ahzab is a Verbal Sentence, that begins with
Ma Negative Verb = NOT, governs and denotes ALL tenses of the Verb + Subject + Object
Ma kana / means He is NOT- He was NOT- He will NOT
As Accusative + Predicate
Ma kana / means 'He cannot be
-
I found this in regards to the Shahadah in the notes section for Chapter 3, "The City of the Prophet" of "No god but God" by Reza Aslan.
"I am convinced that the shahadah was originally addressed not to God, but to Muhammad, because a great many of those who had proclaimed the shahadah (and thereby joined the Ummah) while Muhammad was alive considered their oaths to be annulled with the prophet's death (according to tribal custom, the bay'ah never survived the death of the tribe's shaykh). As we shall see in Chapter 5, the annulment of the bay'ah eventually led to the Riddah Wars."
-
"No God but God" is a story, loosely based on fact.
The Traditional "shahadah" can be refuted in several ways
-
The earliest "Islamic" coins make no mention of prophet Muhammad, i.e. only contain the first part.
-
The term "muslim" is used prior to prophet Muhammad, as stated in The Quran itself, thus to be "muslim" is not related to Muhammad.
-
It is nowhere to be found in The Quran in a conversion/reversion narrative, nor as a whole.
It seems to have come about to differentiate monotheist followers of Quran, as opposed to other monotheists, in the later formative period. After prophet Muhammad's death, when in-fighting became significant, the question "what constitutes a believer?" quickly became important, whilst at first, it was fluid, it became solidified. This is perhaps inevitable.
-
-
Assalaam Alaikum
Sura Al-Ahzab is a Verbal Sentence, that begins with
Ma Negative Verb = NOT, governs and denotes ALL tenses of the Verb + Subject + Object
Ma kana / means He is NOT- He was NOT- He will NOT
As Accusative + Predicate
Ma kana / means 'He cannot be
It is a negative particle.
is one of a group of Verbs which are termed as , deficient verbs. It modifies the nominal sentence, retaining the subject in nominative case and rendering the predicate in accusative case. And their name respectively changes as and of which is a Perfect verb; third person; singular; masculine.
-
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Coins/
It's also discussed in this book
http//www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Believers-At-Origins-Islam/dp/0674050975/It's possible the first part of the traditional shahadah is not explicitly on the coin, but references only to Allah instead etc. I'd have to re-read the book.
-
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Coins/
It's also discussed in this book
http//www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Believers-At-Origins-Islam/dp/0674050975/It's possible the first part of the traditional shahadah is not explicitly on the coin, but references only to Allah instead etc. I'd have to re-read the book.
I find it interesting that these coins have faces on them which is something that is considered Haram in Sunnism. There didn't seem to be a problem with it then.
-
Wakas
The Traditional "shahadah" can be refuted in several ways
- The earliest "Islamic" coins make no mention of prophet Muhammad, i.e. only contain the first part.
MAny of the Prophet's letters were stamped with the words ?Muhammad Rasul-ullah" (Muhammad the Messenger of Allah). Three of the Prophet?s letters have been preserved. I had posted the images of these letters at the thread
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13583.465and was astonished to find out that the images were removed, only one remains.
