Linguistic riddle solved, for those who want to learn
-
To solve this you have to consider that you use the right Arabic grammar.
Peace Bro, please guide me to the right Arabic grammar. The Arabic grammar that is written by speakers of the language and not the one that someone conceives out of the blue. I am learning, willing to unlearn and re-learn.
Regards,
-
My dear bkanwar2, noshirk and man of faith ,
can you stop people the way they think..??never,in my opinion ,to understand the word, "allah" we have to go back when there was no Mohammad,no quran,but the word "allah" was there,etymology for this word cannot be done now, using quran or grammar .
Mohammad's father's name was Abdallah,Allah was the name of God of moon,now if you want to know more about Allah,read islamic history wriiten by Turk scholars,because they were to order putting a cresent on each of the towers (minars) at kaba in Macca,you still see them, and you also see them at minarets at tomb of Mohammad in the city of Madina in Saudi Arabia.
Turk were first to put cresent on islamic flags,tombs,domes minarets.only they can tell u the correct answer to this mystery,and they can also answer,why Allah chose to name himself as Allah, when He knew that this word is already in use for moon God as his partner..??this is a big question?only Turk scholars have the answer,read their history books,history of islam booksor talk to one of them via email,they were first to introduce domes,minarets cresent etc.I know some of the answer,but I am just a no body so who will listen to me.go search via google.thanks -
My dear bkanwar2, noshirk and man of faith ,
can you stop people the way they think..??never,in my opinion ,to understand the word, "allah" we have to go back when there was no Mohammad,no quran,but the word "allah" was there,etymology for this word cannot be done now, using quran or grammar .
Mohammad's father's name was Abdallah,Allah was the name of God of moon,now if you want to know more about Allah,read islamic history wriiten by Turk scholars,because they were to order putting a cresent on each of the towers (minars) at kaba in Macca,you still see them, and you also see them at minarets at tomb of Mohammad in the city of Madina in Saudi Arabia.
Turk were first to put cresent on islamic flags,tombs,domes minarets.only they can tell u the correct answer to this mystery,and they can also answer,why Allah chose to name himself as Allah, when He knew that this word is already in use for moon God as his partner..??this is a big question?only Turk scholars have the answer,read their history books,history of islam booksor talk to one of them via email,they were first to introduce domes,minarets cresent etc.I know some of the answer,but I am just a no body so who will listen to me.go search via google.thanksUnfortunately can not trust any history. If Mohammad's father name was really Abdallah and this so called one word Allah was know to people at the time how come all linguistics struggle to explain it's spelling and construct?
Regards,
-
My dear bkanwar2,thanks for your reply to my post about the word Allah,I hope noshirk and man of faith will soon let me know their views to my post.
for bkanwar2,please open google,write ,"Allah,the God of moon" and you will see pictures of old objects still preserved.This is a strong hint why cresent moon a appears at Macca and Madina and many more mosques around the world.if you come across any puzzle pl do let me know,thanks -
with all due respect, for all your literary knowledge.
...your completely ignorant...
Who is ? The God, The One. He is obviously The God. He is obviously the only one. you cant take a word out of context of the Quran. last time you were trying to argue against the meaning of innama, when it clearly means 'only' in that morphology.
God help us all
-
My dear bkanwar2, noshirk and man of faith ,
can you stop people the way they think..??never,in my opinion ,to understand the word, "allah" we have to go back when there was no Mohammad,no quran,but the word "allah" was there,etymology for this word cannot be done now, using quran or grammar .
Mohammad's father's name was Abdallah,Allah was the name of God of moon,now if you want to know more about Allah,read islamic history wriiten by Turk scholars,because they were to order putting a cresent on each of the towers (minars) at kaba in Macca,you still see them, and you also see them at minarets at tomb of Mohammad in the city of Madina in Saudi Arabia.
Turk were first to put cresent on islamic flags,tombs,domes minarets.only they can tell u the correct answer to this mystery,and they can also answer,why Allah chose to name himself as Allah, when He knew that this word is already in use for moon God as his partner..??this is a big question?only Turk scholars have the answer,read their history books,history of islam booksor talk to one of them via email,they were first to introduce domes,minarets cresent etc.I know some of the answer,but I am just a no body so who will listen to me.go search via google.thanksHello brother,
The word allah is not a personal address for God. Rabb is.
In case gods had names, e.g. allat or allah then this was due to ignorance. It may also be so that they actually were called for example "Allat" because it means 'the Being' (the "who is" object) with object marker and they say female.
Nevertheless, allah is not used even once to refer specifically to God as a phenomenon in Quran per word alone; it does not mean more than "who is like".
If you like the word for God then you are looking for Rabb, which is descriptive for the role God has.
Every word in Arabic refers back to God, even salam, grammatically.
Be safe
Amenuel -
Dear all, it has been almost 5 years, since I originally wrote the following. It has been sent to lot of friends. Also has been posted on several website. I personally, periodically revisit it, in order to determine, if I have made a mistake in understanding. I revisited again and have corrected spelling Arabic word ?illah?. Also added an equation to highlight the point of contention.
However, I have realized that it could be expanded and elaborated further for better understanding of concepts discussed. Somehow, I can?t make it work to highlight in red, Allah's middle portion, in email from word document.
All critiques are welcome,
Regards
We are lead through, with a careful linguistic analysis, to a conclusion that the word from Al-Qu'ran is not the proper noun (name) of our Rabb. It actually stands for allathe = who, La = not and finally, illah. This would mean ?One who is not illah?.
If one were to incorporate the real meanings of the word ?illah? into the translation; this word which actually is a sentence would mean ?One who is not at all, a deity for adoration or worship (God)?.
This sounds so radically different. Who am I to say this? What are my credentials?
Why should we trust this non-sense?
These are all defensive of held belief, so valid and legitimate questions.
Let us instead of worrying about the credentials of the informer of this information; just explore the language of the Qur'an that is presented from the Qur'an itself.
First of all let us analyze what traditionalists interpret this word to be?
And why they are wrong?
Traditionally, the word is thought to be a combination of a definite article Al = in English ?The? and illah , meaning ?God? but in reality ?a deity for adoration and worship?.
Although, in actuality this "Al" here is a contraction of the word and legitimately could be written as "Al" . Can we trust this assertion despite clear references from the Lexicon of Lane 1 and Grammar of William Wright 2.
Let us turn to Qur'an itself for more evidence. In Arabic script as well in the Qur'an, where a preposition ?Lee? is added in to a word beginning with a definite article ?Al? . Alif is dropped and so Lam of the definite article ?Al? joins with ?Lam? of preposition. Let us illustrate this point with some word examples from Qur'an itself.
- 21 Alif of ?Al? gone, lam is present and preposition ?Lee? added.
2.. 47 and 432, is the word same concept.
However, for the word when the same preposition is added. We find that the ?Lam? of the supposed definite article ?Al? also disappears. However, following the examples above it should have been written as (in reality one cannot type this so called word using an Arabic type writer).
Example, 12 and 115 more places 222, 298 and on and on, in total 116 occurrences.
Whereas, allathi being a different word its whole contraction disappears. This also proves that this word by no means is a proper name as there is no definite article "Al". As if there would have been an "Al", it should look like this in script and not
Furthermore, although both Lane and Wright cite the contraction of as . Can we find an example in the current translation of Quran for such a contraction? Of course, we can, not one time, but multiple times.677
Yousuf Ali When he saw the moon rising in splendor, he said "This is my Lord." But when the moon set, He said "unless my Lord guides me, I shall surely be among those who go astray."
799
Yousuf Ali Did they then feel secure against the plan of Allah?- but no one can feel secure from the Plan of Allah, except those (doomed) to ruin!
Other examples are at 62 different places, 526, 25, 567. Any place word is used, it is at most places translated in meaning of "allathi".
Let us, continue to analyses this word further. In the middle there is "alif" like mark (highlighted in red) with a Shadda mark and another alif above. . In newer, print version the "alif" above Shadda is taken a fatha shape instead of 'alif" like in this example as well. The ?alif? above Shadda, is called a ?dagger alif? and is written over many other words instead being included in these words in the text of Quran. Since here it is written over Shadda, implying there are two ?alifs?.
Shadda has several uses in script. We will only discuss the relevant ones here. One use is to indicate the doubling of a consonant. It is also used to indicate such a doubling only to facilitate pronunciation in the ?Sun letters of the Arabic alphabets?. This would be an apparently plausible defensive case for the traditionalist.
Let us analysis why it is wrong? If it were to be correctly understood, then there would be no reason to keep this Shadda in place once the ?Al?, if it were really ?Al? of definite article. As in the phrase is gone , as in the example above of . However, we find in the Qur'an that this is not the case. Hence, this Shadda is not due to ?Al? of a definite article coming before the word to make it a proper noun, but contraction of allathi. Although, even if it were to be the case, as illah has already ?alif? at the start which is not considered a ?Sun letter?. Hence no Shadda would be have been added as cited above.
Let us, further show in Arabic script, how this concept could be explained? First, all three words are written separately, then allathi written as contracted and finally first to ?lams? and subsequent ?alif? combined, due use of Shadda, to make Allah.
=
Let us do a consonant count, of words on left side of equation see if it matches with word on right side of equation.
Right side, Alif 1 + Lam 2 + Lam 3 + Alif 4 + Alif 5 + Lam 6 + Alif + Ha 7. There are total of 7 consonants on right side.
Left side, Alif 1 + Lam 2 + (in the middle due to Shadda there should be 4 consonants, two below two ?dager Alifs above it. If one were to pay attention to red consonants in right side of equation. Two lams 3 +6 are below Shadda and two Alifs 4+5 are written above Shadda), Alif 6 and Ha 7 are written together at the end to form
This clearly, further shows that the persistence of this Shadda is due, not to the Shadda of ?Al?; but in reality it indicates a real doubling of the consonants.
This means inescapably, that one was to follow the order of pronunciation of, this word. It actually is a sequence of words, a phrase, not just a word. Allathe (written as a contraction in script as "Al", La and illah. This would further imply that the middle Shadda is suggesting ?two lams? and two alifs?.
Hence, if translated word for word, this word or more accurately sentence would mean ?One who is not at all, a deity for adoration and worship?.
- Lexicon of Arabic Language; Edward W Lane; 1968, Vol. 1, page 74.
- A Grammar of the Arabic Language; William Wright. Revised 3RD Edition, Dover Edition 2005 Vol. 1 page 269 D.
-
Myu Dear bkanwar2,noshirk and man of faith,
Most people on thisa forum dont like to talk anything about history,but read the quran , it is more than 70% history, Allah says go around the earth,see the remains of old people,learn lessons,etc.Allah says in quran,at more than about 5 or 6 places,that people around Mohammad knew the word Allah,see sura 29, ayat No.63 ( they will reply "Allah",also see sura 13 ayt No.16 and there are more verses in quran which prove that word, "Allah" was know to people before quran or Mahammad.
wikipedia also says a lot about first appearance of word Allah,red this,
Pre-Islamic Christians, Jews and the monotheistic Arabs called Hanifs used the name Allah and the terms 'Bismillah', 'in the name of Allah' to refer to their supreme deity in Arabic stone inscriptions centuries before Islam.Some archaeological excavation quests have led to the discovery of ancient pre-Islamic inscriptions and tombs made by Arabic-speaking Christians in the ruins of a church at Umm el-Jimal in Northern Jordan, which contained references to Allah as the proper name of God, and some of the graves contained names such as "Abd Allah" which means "the servant/slave of Allah".
The name Allah can be found countless times in the reports and the lists of names of Christian martyrs in South Arabia, as reported by antique Syriac documents of the names of those martyrs from the era of the Himyarite and Aksumite kingdoms.
In pre-Islamic Gospels, the name used for God was "Allah", as evidenced by some discovered Arabic versions of the New Testament written by Arab Christians during the pre-Islamic era in Northern and Southern Arabia.
Also see Quran sura 29 ayat No.61 "they said Allah
If you don't mind,let me give you a logic, suppose A say 2+2 are 5, but B says no no 2+2 are 4, well in such condition,B who says 4 should not give any proof about 4, but instead ask A to prove that how is that 2+2 are 5,now when A gives a proof B should counter it, and not just keep saying that 2+2 are 4 ,
All three of you command respect,so try considering above logic,other wise there is no way you can change people as what and how they think,regrds,thanks -
Myu Dear bkanwar2,noshirk and man of faith,
Most people on thisa forum dont like to talk anything about history,but read the quran , it is more than 70% history, Allah says go around the earth,see the remains of old people,learn lessons,etc.Allah says in quran,at more than about 5 or 6 places,that people around Mohammad knew the word Allah,see sura 29, ayat No.63 ( they will reply "Allah",also see sura 13 ayt No.16 and there are more verses in quran which prove that word, "Allah" was know to people before quran or Mahammad.
wikipedia also says a lot about first appearance of word Allah,red this,
Pre-Islamic Christians, Jews and the monotheistic Arabs called Hanifs used the name Allah and the terms 'Bismillah', 'in the name of Allah' to refer to their supreme deity in Arabic stone inscriptions centuries before Islam.Some archaeological excavation quests have led to the discovery of ancient pre-Islamic inscriptions and tombs made by Arabic-speaking Christians in the ruins of a church at Umm el-Jimal in Northern Jordan, which contained references to Allah as the proper name of God, and some of the graves contained names such as "Abd Allah" which means "the servant/slave of Allah".
The name Allah can be found countless times in the reports and the lists of names of Christian martyrs in South Arabia, as reported by antique Syriac documents of the names of those martyrs from the era of the Himyarite and Aksumite kingdoms.
In pre-Islamic Gospels, the name used for God was "Allah", as evidenced by some discovered Arabic versions of the New Testament written by Arab Christians during the pre-Islamic era in Northern and Southern Arabia.
Also see Quran sura 29 ayat No.61 "they said Allah
If you don't mind,let me give you a logic, suppose A say 2+2 are 5, but B says no no 2+2 are 4, well in such condition,B who says 4 should not give any proof about 4, but instead ask A to prove that how is that 2+2 are 5,now when A gives a proof B should counter it, and not just keep saying that 2+2 are 4 ,
All three of you command respect,so try considering above logic,other wise there is no way you can change people as what and how they think,regrds,thanksDear Bro, you have this book called Quran in your hands. Just spare some time out of your otherwise busy life to understand its language and via language the book itself. Believe me this is the correct way of understanding not only this book but every book. You wouldn't need crutches of history etc.
The word used in pre-Islamic times was "illah" not "Allah". There is a difference of just only one consonant in writing between these two words in English. However, please pay attention to analysis, there are 3 extra consonants in Allah in Arabic spellings.
It was "illah" that means crescent moon god, serpent etc. Which is now represented by crescents on all Muslim Mosque. So yes Muslims are still worshiping same pre-Islamic god.
Quran denied not only this "illah" or moon god, but all other gods altogether.
Regards,
-
My Dear bkanwar2,noshirk,and man-of-faith,I like all three of you,I am ur fan and try to learn from ur posts in this forum.below is copy paste from bkanwar2.
The word used in pre-Islamic times was "illah" not "Allah". There is a difference of just only one consonant in writing between these two words in English. However, please pay attention to analysis, there are 3 extra consonants in Allah in Arabic spellings.
It was "illah" that means crescent moon god, serpent etc. Which is now represented by crescents on all Muslim Mosque. So yes Muslims are still worshiping same pre-Islamic god.
I value ur opinions and findings,but would also like you to share it to me.Well it was Illah and not Allah,I don't reject this,but would like from you to post a picture from older writtings or from some stone or tomb stone or just any thing else where I ca n see the word Illah as used before islam.or quote from wikipe- or encyclo-britinican,or quran orother down loaded book from sky.
I would also like to draw the attention of Mr. noshirk and Mr. man-of -faith too.I would appreciate to have their views a well ,which will help and guide me.
and mr bkanwar2 alsolet me know when was the word,"Mohammad" appeared as prophet of islam,as I know from Islamic awareness it appeared much later after the Death of Mohammad,what's ur take..?? thank you all the three. -
Hello marighaq,
In my world Quran was never interpreted by man from the day of compilation. The story around Muhammad is just a fabrication. They hijacked the scripture and had a person called Muhammad they referred to and the height of the "Islamic Golden Age, as it is called, is due to mass-rallying by the sectarian authority who had a massive influence on the general public.
The word Elohim/Elah was first used a very long time ago and has become misconceived. The whole nature about God circulates around the expression "I am who am I". People often translate "...for God is with me" and these people meant it very literally. When a person becomes spiritually strong, then the God phenomenon is manifest in him/her and he/she is united with/(in) "Allah" (which means Who Is Like). The God (alehi) of Abraham implies to his share of that unity.
The "personal" address of God in Arabic/Semitic language(s) is Rabb which people miss due to their misconception concerning allah.
If the allah word has been used within Paganism to symbolize gods that is their fabrication and does not have anything to do with the allah of the Abrahamic creed. Like I wrote, Elah is a word that has been used a very long time and is thousands of years old and simultaneously there has been the invention of gods bearing that word too. In fact, no offense towards people who believe so, Allah of Quran is an invention too based on a faulty interpretation; it is no god in that regard. The God phenomenon in Quran is called Rabb. And elah/allah is not proper nouns or even nouns either. If they were objects it would have ended with the letters (te) or (teh - a contraction of and , used to mark singular/uncounted object). Allat, in Arabic Paganism, is a clear god object based on grammar.
Be safe
Amenuel -
I am making few corrections in this write up based upon my discussion with an inquisitive soul. He kept asking me repeated questions. This led me to re-look my write up again. Now with increased understanding of the language. I have spotted few issues that I overlooked previously.
Main point of correction is word ?illah? or in Arabic script . This component of Allah can?t be as if it was the case this would add one more ?Alif? to spelling and hence making the linguistic analysis flawed. The word here is a verb from same three letter root. This means ?He worshiped or adored?.
Now let us substitute this word and its meanings in rest of the write up.
We are lead through, with a careful linguistic analysis, to a conclusion that the word from Al-Qu'ran is not the proper noun (name) of our Rabb. It actually stands for allathe = he who, La = not and finally, . This would mean ?He who doesn?t do Alah?.
If one were to incorporate the real meanings of the word ?alah? into the translation; this word which actually is a sentence would mean ?He who doesn?t at all worship or adore?.
This sounds so radically different. Who am I to say this? What are my credentials?
Why should we trust this non-sense?
These are all defensive of held belief, so valid and legitimate questions.
Let us instead of worrying about the credentials of the informer of this information; just explore the language of the Qur'an that is presented from the Qur'an itself.
First of all let us analyze what traditionalists interpret this word to be?
And why they are wrong?
Traditionally, the word is thought to be a combination of a definite article Al = in English ?The? and illah , meaning ?God? but in reality ?a deity for adoration and worship?.
Although, in actuality this "Al" here is a contraction of the word and legitimately could be written as "Al" . Can we trust this assertion despite clear references from the Lexicon of Lane 1 and Grammar of William Wright 2.
Let us turn to Qur'an itself for more evidence. In Arabic script as well in the Qur'an, where a preposition ?Lee? is added in to a word beginning with a definite article ?Al? . Alif is dropped and so Lam of the definite article ?Al? joins with ?Lam? of preposition. Let us illustrate this point with some word examples from Qur'an itself.
- 21 Alif of ?Al? gone, lam is present and preposition ?Lee? added.
2.. 47 and 432, is the word same concept.
However, for the word when the same preposition is added. We find that the ?Lam? of the supposed definite article ?Al? also disappears. However, following the examples above it should have been written as (in reality one cannot type this so called word using an Arabic type writer).
Example, 12 and 115 more places 222, 298 and on and on, in total 116 occurrences.
Whereas, allathi being a different word its whole contraction disappears. This also proves that this word by no means is a proper name as there is no definite article "Al". As if there would have been an "Al", it should look like this in script and not
Furthermore, although both Lane and Wright cite the contraction of as . Can we find an example in the current translation of Quran for such a contraction? Of course, we can, not one time, but multiple times.677
Yousuf Ali When he saw the moon rising in splendor, he said "This is my Lord." But when the moon set, He said "unless my Lord guides me, I shall surely be among those who go astray."
799
Yousuf Ali Did they then feel secure against the plan of Allah?- but no one can feel secure from the Plan of Allah, except those (doomed) to ruin!
Other examples are at 62 different places, 526, 25, 567. Any place word is used, it is at most places translated in meaning of "allathi".
Let us, continue to analyses this word further. In the middle there is "alif" like mark (highlighted in red) with a Shadda mark and another alif above . In newer, print version the "alif" above Shadda is taken a fatha shape instead of 'alif" like in this example as well. The ?alif? above Shadda, is called a ?dagger alif? and is written over many other words instead being included in these words in the text of Quran. Since here it is written over Shadda, implying there are two ?alifs?.
Shadda has several uses in script. We will only discuss the relevant ones here. One use is to indicate the doubling of a consonant. It is also used to indicate such a doubling only to facilitate pronunciation in the ?Sun letters of the Arabic alphabets?. This would be an apparently plausible defensive case for the traditionalist.
Let us analysis why it is wrong? If it were to be correctly understood, then there would be no reason to keep this Shadda in place once the ?Al?, if it were really ?Al? of definite article. As in the phrase is gone , as in the example above of . However, we find in the Qur'an that this is not the case. Hence, this Shadda is not due to ?Al? of a definite article coming before the word to make it a proper noun, but contraction of allathi. Although, even if it were to be the case, as illah has already ?alif? at the start which is not considered a ?Sun letter?. Hence no Shadda would be have been added as cited above.
Let us, further show in Arabic script, how this concept could be explained? First, all three words are written separately, then allathi written as contracted and finally two sequential, Alifs 4+5 can be combined and written as one. However, these combined alifs are written above Shadda. This make two remaining ?Lams? 3+6 sequential and hence could be combined and are written as one below Shadda, to make apparently one looking word Allah.
= Let us do a consonant count, of words on left side of equation see if it matches with word on right side of equation.
Right side, Alif 1 + Lam 2 + Lam 3 + Alif 4 + Alif 5 + Lam 6 + Ha 7. There are total of 7 consonants on right side.
Left side, Alif 1 + Lam 2 + (in the middle due to Shadda there should be 4 consonants, two below two ?dager Alifs above it). If one were to pay attention to red consonants in right side of equation. Two lams 3 +6 are below Shadda and two Alifs 4+5 are written above Shadda), 7 Ha is written at the end combined with two ?Lam? combined together in the middle and below Shadda, to formThis clearly, further shows that the persistence of this Shadda is due, not to the Shadda of ?Al?; but in reality it indicates a real doubling of the consonants.
This means inescapably, that one was to follow the order of pronunciation of, this word. It actually is a sequence of words, a phrase, not just a word. Allathe (written as a contraction in script as "Al", La and alah. This would further imply that the middle Shadda is suggesting ?two lams? and two alifs?.
Hence, if translated word for word, this word or more accurately sentence would mean ?He who doesn?t at all worship or adore?.
- Lexicon of Arabic Language; Edward W Lane; 1968, Vol. 1, page 74.
- A Grammar of the Arabic Language; William Wright. Revised 3RD Edition, Dover Edition 2005 Vol. 1 page 269 D.
-
Dear all, with Quran's understanding lost overtime as well maligned to support a created religion. Troubled minds from linguistic based translation keep tying to fit concepts into existing flawed translation. Of course, it can't work. Then they point out verses after verses where the individual concepts don't seem to work. Someone wanted to know how changed linguistic understanding of Allah, would fit in verse 5922?
My objective is not to uphold my ego or pride, rather it is to get to the facts and truth based upon language of Quran.
Just sharing understanding verse 5922's translation.
5922
He who doesn?t worship is he who fears flight of his reason and intellect due to joy of worship. Besides, he is well versed about that which is hidden from senses, as well, the information that can be witnessed. It is the ultimate lasting reward.
-
Next verse
5923
He who doesn?t worship is he who fears flight of his reason and intellect due to joy of worship; besides, he is the sovereign far removed from all imperfections, secure and safe staying away from evils at all times, the one who renders mankind secure from his wrongdoings, the mighty restorer of imperfection to perfection, the majestic. Far removed is he who doesn?t worship from that they associate with him.
-
Next verse
5923
He who doesn?t worship is he who fears flight of his reason and intellect due to joy of worship; besides, he is the sovereign far removed from all imperfections, secure and safe staying away from evils at all times, the one who renders mankind secure from his wrongdoings, the mighty restorer of imperfection to perfection, the majestic. Far removed is he who doesn?t worship from that they associate with him.
I think 'He who doesn't worship' is more appropriately translated to 'he who doesn't require worship/adoration'.
So Allah is not a God. A God is created by humans. As per the Quran, anything or anyone can become a God - as long as a human worships and adores. Once worship and adoration is absent, a God cease to exist just like the roman gods or any ancient gods.
Allah is our creator thus our master or Rabb. Allah does not require us to worship or adoration for Him to exist. Allah does not have a name, as He was never created, the 99 names are names created by Allah as his attributes which were taught to Adam and humans. The names were taught for humans to carry out the task of being the world's appointed manager. Unfortunately for humans, we are hasty, short term is our goal and thus majority fails the test that Allah has set for us. We use the 99 names everyday, but never to the potential that it should be used for, thus we get hardship in this world.
Peace.
-
Since Allah is not the name of Rabb. Rather it means "He who doesn't worship". Therefore, so called names of Allah or attributes wouldn't have anyhing to do with Rabb. These are supposed to be attribute of one who is first willing to be the one who is not worshiper.
Are their any takers of real concepts of Quran and willing to adopt these attributes as non-worshipers or all are happy in their state of being worshipers of imaginary gods?
-
It is correct that Rabb is the "name" of God. Allah is the image of Being.
Linguistically the word Allah cannot be a name either because you can grammatically not put AL in front of a proper noun without separating the AL from the name. You will never find the name of a person in Quran with the AL prefix directly attributed to it.
Like I have written before, the word Allah is also a form of the root to AL, it is AL L and the third-person pronoun heh. It is a very special form of of Aleh which is AL and third-person singular that means 'is who' while allah means 'is who is'.
Be well
Amenuel -
I would like to address a few points.
-
It is extremely anomalous to orthographically adjoin to a verb. This type of adjoining doesn't occur once in the Quran, and I have never seen it written as such in Classical Arabic. Thus, the proposal of the contiguous merger of three words (a pronoun, a particle, and a verb) in contravenes orthographic principles.
-
In the reading of af via 'im, which I assume you are using, an initial Hamza is not elided like it is in other readings (as in Warsh or Qln), therefore, entertaining your theory as true, should correctly be pronounced, and written, as , you simply cannot elide the medial Hamza belonging to the verb. Thus, the proposal of a Hamza-initialled verb existing in contravenes enunciatory principles.
-
To suggest that cannot be a noun derived from and which both, over time, mutated to become for ease of pronunciation is in my estimation far-fetched. Thus, the proposal of and not being precursors to the word whilst proposing a three-worded phrasal precursor for an orthographic compound contravenes etymological principles.
-
It goes without saying that is fully inflected in Classical Arabic, whereas the perfect tense verb in Arabic is indeclinable and is fixed with a Fata in the singular masculine third person ( ), as such, entertaining your theory as true, we should not see in the Quran the word being inflected with anything other than a Fata. Thus, the proposal of a perfect tense verb terminating contravenes the most basic syntactical principles.
In my view, to propose a theory on a subject and endorse it with the greatest fervour, whilst demonstrating a blatant disregard for the most basic rules governing the subject, is a shocking testament to the reckless audacity of the .
Finally, it never fails to bewilder me as to why people find the need to reinvent the meanings of the plainest words. Is it an attempt at reinvention? Is it a forceful impression of one's desires upon the word of God? Or is it simply a headline-grabbing stunt? Whatever the reason, there really is no need for it.
-
-
Since Allah is not the name of Rabb. Rather it means "He who doesn't worship". Therefore, so called names of Allah or attributes wouldn't have anyhing to do with Rabb. These are supposed to be attribute of one who is first willing to be the one who is not worshiper.
Are their any takers of real concepts of Quran and willing to adopt these attributes as non-worshipers or all are happy in their state of being worshipers of imaginary gods?
red Allah means "He who goes to church and makes after that pancakes"