Quran alone against history

noshirk

First
we take the Qur'an as a rarity , exclusivity and unity, and the only authentic word from God. We consider simultaneously all other writings as partially falsified and so 'untrustworthy'. We question all the 'religious' history, as we know it, and conclude that this history was falsified by evil forces.

Second
We recognize the Qur'an as the final revelation of God's revelations in a cycle, which complement other writings , which partially are still present ,and correct them as needed. ( i.e. Murder, Prayer, veil, stoning, sacrificial rites). We recognize the 'religious' history, but we are aware that they may be erroneous thoughts in it.

Salaam mirjamnur

Concerning this question, i a m, with no doubts, an extremist of the first category.

Take other sources than Quran as religious sources is simply Shirk for me.
45-6 clearly says that we haven't to follow oyher hadiths that god's Ayat.

Taking other books that quran is the same as saying that Quran is uncomplete and that we have to take writers of other books as others Rabb, at least partially.
if we admits that other books are partially "legals" then who is who will decide wich part is true and wich part is false ? We will then follow our own fantasy and not follow god only. Followwing his own fantasy is also shirk and kofr.

I simply don't follow the same religion of those who says they are muslims and follows other books that quran, partially or totally, and i dont follow the same religion that those who decide by their own what to add and not to add to Quran to complete their religion, even if they call themselves quranists.

i have a simple question for persons of category 2
How, in the judgement day, will you justify yours choices concerning the religious addings when you know that arguments like "they pleased me" or "i have put faith in their writers" are not receivable ?

sorry to be hard but is is sincerely my opinion.
Islam is same root as sallama/tasallama which means give/receive. Unique rabb(educator) is unique source allowed for receiving unique religion of unique God.

Peace

mirjamnur

Salaam Mirjamnur,

I thought you were talking about "between his hands"

IF "between his hands" refers to the "YOU" THEN it should be something like this
He sent down to YOU AlKitaab with the truth, authenticating what is between YOUR hands; and He sent down AlTtawrata and AlInjeela.
Besides this, please recheck the ayaat I gave you about Isa.
546 And We sent in their footsteps Jesus, son of Mary, authenticating what is between his hand of the Torah. And We gave him the Gospel, in it is a guidance and a light, and authenticating what is between his hand of the Torah, and a guidance and a lesson for the righteous.

InshaAllah you see the difference between 546 and 33.
In 33 there is no "between his hand of the Torah".

I have studied the Ayats. It means either between HIS HANDS OR
BETWEEN THE HANDS OF HIM (RELATED TO THE AL KITAB)
Then we have two possibilities for the aleika

it either it speaks to Muhammad / the last prophet, and then means the Aya
He sent down to YOU AlKitaab with the truth, authenticating what is between his hands or the hands from it, and He sent down AlTtawrata and AlInjeela.
But can't mean the Enjeel or the Torah, because, they are mentioned in the second part of the aya- then what ist this 'Between his hands'?
Can't mean also the unfinished written Quran because the pronom 'hu' not 'your... hmm what then??

Second it speaks to us all and just want to say that the Qur'an confirms everything in front of him, which is still available. Or confirms the Suhufs from Muhammad which he write down??
Please help

And in 3.3 i stumbled op the form nazzala and after anzalna in the word for word translation, they are translated the same way... what is the real difference? that the process from 'nazzal' in first form not yet finish and in the second= anzalna finish??

InshaAllah if you forget about arabic grammar then it will be clear for you who "YOU" is.

I conclude that you want to say that the you refers every reader of the Quran. And because there is no common grammaticl shape for this case, Allah has selected the male form, right? but it is permissible to forget the grammar if we know very well, that the source from the Quran is God?? He didn't send down a perfect Quran? ...

I recommend to read the story of Musa (or any other person in The Quran), and how he is called when he is called.

The stories are either in the past or tells as direct speech, which is clearly marked.

And I recommend to read all the verses about Meryem, please take a very close look how the words are used for her, no grammar book or grammar rule can explain it to you.
here i can't follow you. Thanks for clarification

Don't say that nope
InshaAllah you and me and a lot of people from this forum will be of those who will be brought near pr inshaAllah

Salaam,
Bender

Salam

mirjamnur

[Salam noshirk

Salam

Salaam mirjamnur

Concerning this question, i a m, with no doubts, an extremist of the first category.

Take other sources than Quran as religious sources is simply Shirk for me.
45-6 clearly says that we haven't to follow oyher hadiths that god's Ayat.

yes i know that. but what you make with the quotet aya 3.3 as example??

Taking other books that quran is the same as saying that Quran is uncomplete and that we have to take writers of other books as others Rabb, at least partially.

i'm not agree. Allah by himselfs speaks from his word before - it's the same RABB not another. If i study the Torah oder the Enjell- wathever Enjeel means- i don't make Shirk- i know who is my rabb- HE IS THE SAME

if we admits that other books are partially "legals" then who is who will decide wich part is true and wich part is false ? We will then follow our own fantasy and not follow god only. Followwing his own fantasy is also shirk and kofr.

I'm agree with you in one point when we take the law from any other written book and don't care about the Quran- (if we let Ahadith to replace the Quran or Quranic statements or laws and the same for the bible ) then we don't follow Gods orders.

I simply don't follow the same religion of those who says they are muslims and follows other books that quran, partially or totally, and i dont follow the same religion that those who decide by their own what to add and not to add to Quran to complete their religion, even if they call themselves quranists.
handshake

i have a simple question for persons of category 2
How, in the judgement day, will you justify yours choices concerning the religious addings when you know that arguments like "they pleased me" or "i have put faith in their writers" are not receivable ?

from where you get, that a person from category 2 adds something to the Quran?? or from where you get the conclusion that anybody from category 2 makes this for 'please the others???"

sorry to be hard but is is sincerely my opinion.
Islam is same root as sallama/tasallama which means give/receive. Unique rabb(educator) is unique source allowed for receiving unique religion of unique God.
handshake

Peace

peace too )

Man_of_Faith

Peace noshirk,

You mean interpret the Quran through wishful thinking, adding or removing religious elements? Then I am with you! It seems you meant that, but you sounded so angry it tainted your words.

May God let you have Peace

Bender

I have studied the Ayats. It means either between HIS HANDS OR
BETWEEN THE HANDS OF HIM (RELATED TO THE AL KITAB)
Then we have two possibilities for the aleika

it either it speaks to Muhammad / the last prophet, and then means the Aya
He sent down to YOU AlKitaab with the truth, authenticating what is between his hands or the hands from it, and He sent down AlTtawrata and AlInjeela.
But can't mean the Enjeel or the Torah, because, they are mentioned in the second part of the aya- then what ist this 'Between his hands'?
Can't mean also the unfinished written Quran because the pronom 'hu' not 'your... hmm what then??

Salaam Mirjamnur,

Red There is a 3rd possibility

Lets begin from the beginning, FM translation

31 ALM.
32 God, there is no god except He, the Living, the Sustainer.
33 He sent down to you the Book with the truth, authenticating what is between his hands; and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

I devided the ayaat in 3 parts.
To who is ?He? referring in the green part?
I think to The One mentioned in 32. I believe you agree with me on this.

As you can see, there is no change in perspective in the Red part.
So, as per my current understanding, IF there is no change in perspective THEN it?s still referring to same as before.
Thus per my current understanding ?His? in the red part refers also to The One mentioned in 32.
Furthermore you can also notice that there is still no change in perspective in the blue part, so the ?He? in the blue part is also referring to The One mentioned in 32.

So as per my current knowledge and understanding it reads like this
Allah sent down The Book with truth, authenticating what is between His hands (thus between ?The Hands of Allah?) and Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

InshaAllah it?s now a bit clearer for you.
The Book authenticates what is between ?The Hands? of Allah.
If you find this difficult to grasp, then please take a look at 671.

InshaAllah I will be back to you later on the rest.

Salaam,
Bender

Zulf

Sorry for uselessly intruding here, but I find this interesting.
This 33, is it the same verse that one so often thinks says that the quran confirms other scriptures... or is that some other verse?

mirjamnur

Salaam Mirjamnur,

Red There is a 3rd possibility

Lets begin from the beginning, FM translation

31 ALM.
32 God, there is no god except He, the Living, the Sustainer.
33 He sent down to you the Book with the truth, authenticating what is between his hands; and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

I devided the ayaat in 3 parts.
To who is ?He? referring in the green part?
I think to The One mentioned in 32. I believe you agree with me on this.

As you can see, there is no change in perspective in the Red part.
So, as per my current understanding, IF there is no change in perspective THEN it?s still referring to same as before.
Thus per my current understanding ?His? in the red part refers also to The One mentioned in 32.
Furthermore you can also notice that there is still no change in perspective in the blue part, so the ?He? in the blue part is also referring to The One mentioned in 32.

So as per my current knowledge and understanding it reads like this
Allah sent down The Book with truth, authenticating what is between His hands (thus between ?The Hands of Allah?) and Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

InshaAllah it?s now a bit clearer for you.
The Book authenticates what is between ?The Hands? of Allah.
If you find this difficult to grasp, then please take a look at 671.

InshaAllah I will be back to you later on the rest.

Salaam,
Bender

Salam Bender
hey ! thank you for brake the wall...! no, i find it so easy to grasp and it is the logic and simple answer!! group peace
and i wait the rest

mirjamnur

Salaam Mirjamnur,

Red There is a 3rd possibility

Lets begin from the beginning, FM translation

31 ALM.
32 God, there is no god except He, the Living, the Sustainer.
33 He sent down to you the Book with the truth, authenticating what is between his hands; and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

I devided the ayaat in 3 parts.
To who is ?He? referring in the green part?
I think to The One mentioned in 32. I believe you agree with me on this.

As you can see, there is no change in perspective in the Red part.
So, as per my current understanding, IF there is no change in perspective THEN it?s still referring to same as before.
Thus per my current understanding ?His? in the red part refers also to The One mentioned in 32.
Furthermore you can also notice that there is still no change in perspective in the blue part, so the ?He? in the blue part is also referring to The One mentioned in 32.

So as per my current knowledge and understanding it reads like this
Allah sent down The Book with truth, authenticating what is between His hands (thus between ?The Hands of Allah?) and Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

InshaAllah it?s now a bit clearer for you.
The Book authenticates what is between ?The Hands? of Allah.
If you find this difficult to grasp, then please take a look at 671.

InshaAllah I will be back to you later on the rest.

Salaam,
Bender

but wait now i have my old problem again with al kitab. i always think that al kitab is the 'complete' book by Allah - by this understanding the Aya should be like that 3.3 "he send you al Quran with the truth...." , or??

noshirk

Salaam

Salaam mirjamnur

Concerning this question, i a m, with no doubts, an extremist of the first category.

Take other sources than Quran as religious sources is simply Shirk for me.
45-6 clearly says that we haven't to follow oyher hadiths that god's Ayat.

yes i know that. but what you make with the quotet aya 3.3 as example??

Injeel and torah are extracted from Ommo el kitab from wich quran is extracted. However they have been changed by humans. Original torah and original Injeel (i remind that i don't think that jesus is issa) are at ame level as Quran. On the other side, we have to never forgot that science and naturel phenomenons are also considered as ayats bu quran.

Taking other books that quran is the same as saying that Quran is uncomplete and that we have to take writers of other books as others Rabb, at least partially.

i'm not agree. Allah by himselfs speaks from his word before - it's the same RABB not another. If i study the Torah oder the Enjell- wathever Enjeel means- i don't make Shirk- i know who is my rabb- HE IS THE SAME
studying Injeel and torah is not shirk. I think even that it is quite obligatory to understand quran. Quran corrects torah and injeel.

if we admits that other books are partially "legals" then who is who will decide wich part is true and wich part is false ? We will then follow our own fantasy and not follow god only. Followwing his own fantasy is also shirk and kofr.

I'm agree with you in one point when we take the law from any other written book and don't care about the Quran- (if we let Ahadith to replace the Quran or Quranic statements or laws and the same for the bible ) then we don't follow Gods orders.

I simply don't follow the same religion of those who says they are muslims and follows other books that quran, partially or totally, and i dont follow the same religion that those who decide by their own what to add and not to add to Quran to complete their religion, even if they call themselves quranists.
handshake

i have a simple question for persons of category 2
How, in the judgement day, will you justify yours choices concerning the religious addings when you know that arguments like "they pleased me" or "i have put faith in their writers" are not receivable ?

from where you get, that a person from category 2 adds something to the Quran?? or from where you get the conclusion that anybody from category 2 makes this for 'please the others???"

i never said that category 2 is adding something to quran. They are adding something to religion wich is not coming from God and they are saying that is part of religion of God.
i also never said that category 2 is triyng to please others but i am saying that are adding what please to themselves. Doing so, they are following their own wishes and that is kofr. Please read these verses 7-176,18-28,20-16,25-43,28-50,30-29;45-23 to understand what i mean.

sorry to be hard but is is sincerely my opinion.
Islam is same root as sallama/tasallama which means give/receive. Unique rabb(educator) is unique source allowed for receiving unique religion of unique God.
handshake

Peace

I wished i could express more complex ideas in the english langage.
there is good article in french here http//nawaat.org/portail/2012/12/05/ibadat-el-chouyoukhs-6-anges-jinns-demons-et-satan/

i will try here to resume main of what it is said

rouh (same root as wind), chayt (bad odor), and nafs are kind of air movement. Rouh and chayt are external air movement while nafs is internal.
Nafs means breathe and is biological like bachar (skin) and adam (sauce, blood)

Rouh is the good "odor" that link us to god.
Chayt is bad "odor" that take away from god

Jinn = human Imagination. Ancestor of Jinns is Ibliss. Ibliss is no more present with us (wich means that satan never existed in earth). Descent of Ibliss is living in our mind.
Insan and nissa are from same root that nas'y wich mean to forgot (his god)

Jinn and Human are dual entity. It is a couple (zawj). This relation is dual to man/woman couple. Mar'ou (human) and mar'aton(women) are same root as ra'a (to see). Mar'aton (women) and Miraa't (mirror) are written quite same in arabic.

When Jinn follows 100% rouh (the spiritual link with only God), Jinn become malaika.
When Jinn follows 100% own imagination or imagination of others, the Jinn becomes a Chaytan.
In this world, our own Jinn is a mix of rouh and chayt and have to chose between Rouh and Chayt.

Communauty of Jinns is simply what we call culture, that is the community of all human imaginations. We know that this community exists but we don't see it and we know that they see us.
Jinns live in the biological prison of humans body who remind them permanently that they are only creatures. Ibliss is from balassa wich means from wich we desperate and means also jailed (word police from word ibliss ?).

Jenna (paradise) and jinn are same root. Jenna is the spiritual garden where goods jinns (who become thus malaika) are liberated form their human body prison. Bad Jinns (thus chayatins) encounter aa'dhab wich means isolation/separation from god and go to jehennem (black hole?) where they are destroyed/dissoluted.
The tree from wich adam have eaten is the tree of lies about God. It is the tree of lies from wich majority of humans are eating until today. It is the tree of zaqqoum whose fruits are like heads of chayatins and whose roots are in jehennem. That tree is growing more are more by contributions of all humans generations.

The original sin of Jinns seems to have already rejected God in an ancient life before the earth creation..
Earth and humans were only created to test jinns who have promised to follow only words of god.

I am very frustrated because that article is very difficult for me to traduce in english.
When i read such articles, based only on linguitics and quran, i say to myself that it is a big waste of time to try to find god instruction's in the garbage books of putrid hadiths. Only a chaytan can hope such a thing.

There is there also a fantastic traduction of story of salomon and queen of Saba in wich there is absolutely no fantastic phenomenon. For example ants is badly traduced and means liars. There is no trone in the history and no palace.

Peace

Bender

Second it speaks to us all and just want to say that the Qur'an confirms everything in front of him, which is still available. Or confirms the Suhufs from Muhammad which he write down??
Please help

Salaam Mirjamnur,

I saw that you got a ! so no need to explain more )

And in 3.3 i stumbled op the form nazzala and after anzalna in the word for word translation, they are translated the same way... what is the real difference? that the process from 'nazzal' in first form not yet finish and in the second= anzalna finish??

Sorry, I did not study this before so I have at the moment no idea what the difference is.

I conclude that you want to say that the you refers every reader of the Quran. And because there is no common grammaticl shape for this case, Allah has selected the male form, right?

I do not think this is the male form. InshaAllah in the near future I will try to explain this, need some time to confirm every detail for myself.

but it is permissible to forget the grammar if we know very well, that the source from the Quran is God?? He didn't send down a perfect Quran? ...

depends what grammar you are talking about. If you mean The Quranic grammar then I agree with you, if you mean the school grammar then I strongly disagree.

The stories are either in the past or tells as direct speech, which is clearly marked.

Yes, but you have to look when they are adressed. It?s always very clear who or whom the target is, so that there will be no misunderstanding. Please take a look at 233 and further, or 2011 and further, or beginning of chapter 19 etc etc etc. You know exactly who is speaking and to who.

So who is then the target of 33 ? If it?s Mohammed then for sure there had to be somewhere Mohammed mentioned, just in the same way as the examples given above.

here i can't follow you. Thanks for clarification

Take a look at this verse
3335 Inna almuslimeena waalmuslimati waalmumineena waalmuminati waalqaniteena waalqanitati waalssadiqeena waalssadiqati waalssabireena waalssabirati waalkhashiAAeena waalkhashiAAati waalmutasaddiqeena waalmutasaddiqati waalssaimeena waalssaimati waalhafitheena furoojahum waalhafithati waalththakireena Allaha katheeran waalththakirati aAAadda Allahu lahum maghfiratan waajran AAatheeman

Now take a look at this verse
6612 Wamaryama ibnata AAimrana allatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna feehi min roohina wasaddaqat bikalimati rabbiha wakutubihi wakanat mina alqaniteena

Is meryem a man? If not then why feehi? And why alqaniteena instead of alqanitati like in 3335?

Salaam,
Bender

Bender

Salam Bender
hey ! thank you for brake the wall...! no, i find it so easy to grasp and it is the logic and simple answer!! group peace
and i wait the rest

Salaam again,

O don't worry, when Allah showed this to me I was also for some time confused
if you can read the arabic characters, I recommend to always check the ayaat in arabic, even if you don't understand arabic, it really helps a lot.

Bender

but wait now i have my old problem again with al kitab. i always think that al kitab is the 'complete' book by Allah - by this understanding the Aya should be like that 3.3 "he send you al Quran with the truth...." , or??

Salaam for the 3rd time

1037 gives the link between AlQuran and AlKitaab.
1037

btw note that in here also "between His hands" is used.

If you don't understand 1037 then just let it rest till it becomes clear for you.

btw. I am not sure if that is what you were asking.

Salaam,
bender

Bender

Sorry for uselessly intruding here, but I find this interesting.
This 33, is it the same verse that one so often thinks says that the quran confirms other scriptures... or is that some other verse?

Salaam Zulf,

yes this is one of them but there are many more, like 297 -- 1037 -- 548 etc

Salaam,
Bender

mirjamnur