=[ Difference between Al-Kitaab and Al-Quraan ]=

unknownuser

PEACE MMKHAN,

Thank you for the possible correction. As I said to Idol, I am having less difficulty with his analysis of Al-Kitab, but am not yet fully convinced.

Here in 22 zthalika does not mean "This" but it means "That"

I tend to agree. In The Dictionary of the Holy Quran, page 186, Omar, on dhalika, writes

"DHALIKA, is primarily used in the sense of "That", but it is also used in the sense of "This" indicating the high rank and dignity of the thing to which it refers".

Hans Wehr's, Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, is also consistent with Omar.

So, you are convinced that in 22, dhalika, cannot mean "This", but only "That, is this your position?

A.L.M, that is the Scripture in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. 22

I did not understand your interpretation of 22, perhaps you could rephrase it, thanks.

Regarding KATABA, both Omar, page 478 and Wehr, pages 812-813, define the term as to write note record Writing Scripture message Law Knowledge reverted to a Prophet Teachings.

Now, my difficulty is this, are you and Kyle positing that, Al-Kitab, given the above definitions, only refers to the Universal Laws of the Creation, and not at all to Al-Quran?

Also, the ayat as you interpreted it--Laws of the Creation, leaves doubt about Al-Quran, likewise, being without doubt, meaning, the emphasis is on "Dhalika/That Kitab"--the "Laws of the Creation", suggesting, one can really have faith that "IT--Laws of Creation", is doubt free. Do you see what I'm saying here?

Also, are not the so-called "verses" of Al-Quran referred to as Ayats? If so, the the ayats in both the Creation and Al-Quran are without doubt/infallible, hence, why cannot Kitab, also, be referring to Al-Quran/

Looking forward witn anticipation to your reply.

Wakas

peace Zlatan,

so you believe you could go to work your ass naked and with a few leafs(leaves) covering your genitalia?
and your wife in bikini?

Please consider each point carefully.
I said covering of the genitals + modesty. Modesty is subjective and relative to oneself and the society they live in. That is why, in my opinion, there is a degree of flexibility in 'the reading' on such matters. IF, according to you and the type of work you do and society you live in - it is considered modest to wear a few leaves with your ass naked, or a female to wear a bikini to work, then so be it BUT I highly doubt this would be the case!

Tell me, which verses exactly lead you to believe that only genitals should be covered (in man)?

Please remember, I added " + modesty".

If you think of hafizoo furooj(2430) i believe you might be well incorrect....i think its obvious that that command reffer to promiscuity( to preserve oneself from it) and not to dress code....

Please cross reference the usage of the root, its plural/singular usage and check the classical Arabic definitions of the root. Here is its usage within 'the reading'

Fa-Ra-Jiim

779

2191, 235, 2430, 2431, 3335, 506, 6612, 7029

After having done that, do you still think your understanding of 2430 is correct?
In any case, this is not the only sign(s) I am using to form an opinion on this issue.

p.s. would you also be kind to tell me do you believe we could be guided without the scripture?

Yes, the scripture is not necessary. The God has given us an internal compass .

does each man should recieve the scripture during his sojourn on the earth?

I do not understand your question.

Wakas

mmkhan

PEACE MMKHAN,

Peace be upon you brother Priest,

Thank you for the possible correction. As I said to Idol, I am having less difficulty with his analysis of Al-Kitab, but am not yet fully convinced.

Here in 22 zthalika does not mean "This" but it means "That"

I tend to agree. In The Dictionary of the Holy Quran, page 186, Omar, on dhalika, writes

"DHALIKA, is primarily used in the sense of "That", but it is also used in the sense of "This" indicating the high rank and dignity of the thing to which it refers".

Hans Wehr's, Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, is also consistent with Omar.

So, you are convinced that in 22, dhalika, cannot mean "This", but only "That, is this your position?

Yes brother I am convinced that in 22 dhalika is only mean "That" not "This". Because I believe that Al-Quraan got its own standard and pattern (as I said in my previous posts). We need to check the usage of each word that how it has been used in Al-Quraan itself. That is only way we may get the correct meaning of each word.

If you refer to dictionaries they are fully based on spoken Arabic language. That means Saudi's spoken language is different from Misr's and others. Almost all Arabic speaking countries got their own word and usages. Dictionaries today are fully based on these usages. So, that may not be helpful to understand the exact meaning of words used in Al-Quraan.

The easy way to understand the correct meanings of the words used in Al-Quraan is to see the usage of same word in other places. Do you find any verse using "dhalika" in "This" sense? We may not able to check each and every word in such way because some of the words used only once in Al-Quraan. May Allah increase our knowledge to understand them correctly and help us finding the truth.

A.L.M, that is the Scripture in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. 22

I did not understand your interpretation of 22, perhaps you could rephrase it, thanks.

That is used for something which is not near. So, the usage of dhalika in 22 means That is the Book (which is not near or which is far) in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. (it will be far until we become the righteous / muttaqee. Because that Book got the guidance only for muttaqee / righteous). In a broad sense I understand this. I might be wrong here.

Regarding KATABA, both Omar, page 478 and Wehr, pages 812-813, define the term as to write note record Writing Scripture message Law Knowledge reverted to a Prophet Teachings.

Now, my difficulty is this, are you and Kyle positing that, Al-Kitab, given the above definitions, only refers to the Universal Laws of the Creation, and not at all to Al-Quran?

Did I say that it is only refering to the universal laws of the creation?

Also, the ayat as you interpreted it--Laws of the Creation, leaves doubt about Al-Quran, likewise, being without doubt, meaning, the emphasis is on "Dhalika/That Kitab"--the "Laws of the Creation", suggesting, one can really have faith that "IT--Laws of Creation", is doubt free. Do you see what I'm saying here?

Did I?

Also, are not the so-called "verses" of Al-Quran referred to as Ayats? If so, the the ayats in both the Creation and Al-Quran are without doubt/infallible, hence, why cannot Kitab, also, be referring to Al-Quran/

Looking forward witn anticipation to your reply.

Indeed so called verses of Al-Quraan surely referred to as Ayats. Because Allah says "We will show them Our signs/verses/ayats (aayaatina) in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things? 4153

Al-Kitaab cannot be the same as Al-Quraan because

Al-Kitaab is the guidance of righteous 22
Al-Quraan is the guidance for mankind 1185

Al-Kitaab got explainations for everything 1689
Al-Quraan does not

Al-Kitaab got every thing mentioned in it. Nothing left 638
Al-Quraan does not

Al-Quraan gives details of Al-Kitaab 1037
Al-Kitaab don't

Al-Kitaab has been given to all Prophets 689
Al-Quraan does not

I hope it may of some help.

Regards,

MMKhan

unknownuser

PEACE, MMKHAN,

Yes brother I am convinced that in 22 dhalika is only mean "That" not "This". Because I believe that Al-Quraan got its own standard and pattern (as I said in my previous posts). We need to check the usage of each word that how it has been used in Al-Quraan itself. That is only way we may get the correct meaning of each word
.

No, problem.

If you refer to dictionaries they are fully based on spoken Arabic language. That means Saudi's spoken language is different from Misr's and others. Almost all Arabic speaking countries got their own word and usages. Dictionaries today are fully based on these usages. So, that may not be helpful to understand the exact meaning of words used in Al-Quraan.

I have some problems with this, but that is for another time.

The easy way to understand the correct meanings of the words used in Al-Quraan is to see the usage of same word in other places. Do you find any verse using "dhalika" in "This" sense? We may not able to check each and every word in such way because some of the words used only once in Al-Quraan. May Allah increase our knowledge to understand them correctly and help us finding the truth.

Yes, I agree, however, the term still needs to be defined.

That is used for something which is not near. So, the usage of dhalika in 22 means That is the Book (which is not near or which is far) in which there is no doubt, a guide for the righteous. (it will be far until we become the righteous / muttaqee. Because that Book got the guidance only for muttaqee / righteous). In a broad sense I understand this. I might be wrong here.

I agree, you are only conjecturing here.

PRIEST, wrote

Regarding KATABA, both Omar, page 478 and Wehr, pages 812-813, define the term as to write note recordWriting Scripturemessage
Law Knowledge reverted to a Prophet Teachings.

Now, my difficulty is this, are you and Kyle positing that, Al-Kitab, given the above definitions, only refers to the Universal Laws of the Creation, and not at all to Al-Quran?

Did I say that it is only refering to the universal laws of the creation?

I didn't say you did, I am asking you a question, please elaborate, thanks.

PRIEST, wrote

Also, the ayat as you interpreted it--Laws of the Creation, leaves doubt about Al-Quran, likewise, being without doubt, meaning, the emphasis is on "Dhalika/That Kitab"--the "Laws of the Creation", suggesting, one can really have faith that "IT--Laws of Creation", is doubt free. Do you see what I'm saying here?

Did I?

Once again, I didn't say you did, I am asking you a question, please elaborate, thanks.

Indeed so called verses of Al-Quraan surely referred to as Ayats. Because Allah says "We will show them Our signs/verses/ayats (aayaatina) in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things? 4153

Al-Kitaab cannot be the same as Al-Quraan because

Is Al-Quran contained within Al-Kitab or is it separate and distinct from Al-Kitab?
If it is a separate, is it, unto itself, a complete/perfect book?
Is there any doubt in Al-Quran?
Relative to/specific to --guidance,

GUIDANCE the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .),

is every explanation/full details regarding it , found in Al-Quran?

Al-Kitaab is the guidance of righteous 22
Al-Quraan is the guidance for mankind 1185. Al-Kitaab got explainations for everything 1689 Al-Quraan does not

Well, aren't the righteous apart of mankind? Are you saying that, once someone becomes "righteous", Al-Quran is no longer for them??

Please don't respond with "Did I say that" or "Did I", unless you elaborate, thanks.

Looking forward to your reply.

shuaib

salam idol

still wondering about your answer... what word in that verse did you interpret as book??

unknownuser

Peace Be upon you Shuiab,

Quote
"... who try to write The Universal Laws(Al Kitaab) down into a book "

According to your interpretation, there is a word in that verse that means book. What is it?

Which Verse?

The only word I would translate as "book" is "kitaab", but when refering to THE God's "Book" we are talking about the universal laws, just as we can talk about hands and faces yet when we speak of the God's "hands" and "face", we realize the higher understanding.

shuaib

salam idol

Which Verse?

i swear, sometimes i walk away from this forum with a headache. I was trying to be subtle but apparently the effect was completely lost on you.

To jog your memory, I quoted verse 279 and asked for your interpretation. You said

The verse says that Woe/Regret is upon those who try to write The Universal Laws(Al Kitaab) down into a book and claim some type of holiness for that writing saying it is from the God. The God did not write any books, all Creation is The God's Book.

To which I said, obviously it appears that you are translating a particular word in that verse as book. What is it..

But apparently since being precise is not in your nature, and subtlety is entirely lost on you... let me elaborate.

In that verse, the world al-kitaab occurs ONLY once. Yet in that same verse you give one word 2 simulatenous meanings "The universal laws" and "a book." It'd be one thing if the word al-kitaab occurred twice in the verse.. but in this case it occurred just once!

It's obvious you didn't spend more than a couple seconds thinking up an "interpretation" to that verse... it's also obvious you did not translate from the original Arabic.

And finally, it's obvious from 267 that AL-KITAAB was the term for this false book of God. This is just yet another example of how al-kitaab does not mean universal laws.

The meaning of "universal laws" is derived not from the Arabic and not from any verse in the Quran. It is an entirely artificial meaning that you are forcing into the word to satisfy your preconceived notions of the world.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Shuaib,

Quote
Which Verse?

i swear, sometimes i walk away from this forum with a headache. I was trying to be subtle but apparently the effect was completely lost on you.

Sorry, next time I will just guess at which verse you were referring to. If this forum gives you headaches than it would be insanity to keep comiung back. We should always strive for a peaceful state of mind.

To jog your memory, I quoted verse 279 and asked for your interpretation. You said

Quote
The verse says that Woe/Regret is upon those who try to write The Universal Laws(Al Kitaab) down into a book and claim some type of holiness for that writing saying it is from the God. The God did not write any books, all Creation is The God's Book.

To which I said, obviously it appears that you are translating a particular word in that verse as book. What is it..

But apparently since being precise is not in your nature, and subtlety is entirely lost on you... let me elaborate.

In that verse, the world al-kitaab occurs ONLY once. Yet in that same verse you give one word 2 simulatenous meanings "The universal laws" and "a book." It'd be one thing if the word al-kitaab occurred twice in the verse.. but in this case it occurred just once!

It's obvious you didn't spend more than a couple seconds thinking up an "interpretation" to that verse... it's also obvious you did not translate from the original Arabic.

And finally, it's obvious from 267 that AL-KITAAB was the term for this false book of God. This is just yet another example of how al-kitaab does not mean universal laws.

Here is what I am saying. The God has universal laws, they are INSPIRED to men so they may "AWAKEN" to true life. The rest are "walking dead". The Universal LAws are not a BOOK, they are the cause and effect of the CREATED UNIVERSE. Now, what the verse was saying is that some people try to write the UNIVERSAL LAWS with thier own hands. Please note that I have only used one "kitaab" here, since you could not understand what I was saying before. That which is written with the HANDS would be a physical book. There is NO PHYSICAL BOOK written by the God, only MEN write physical books. These physical books written by men who are INSPIRED BY THE GOD do indeed guide us to the UNIVERSAL LAWS(cause and effect), but they are not written by the God.

The meaning of "universal laws" is derived not from the Arabic and not from any verse in the Quran. It is an entirely artificial meaning that you are forcing into the word to satisfy your preconceived notions of the world.

You are welcome to your opinion, there is no compulsion from me brother. I hope you find the guidance to help you maintain your state of peace and not get emotional headaches.

shuaib

salams idol,

actually, what i'm trying to tell you is that your interpretation of 279 is mere philosophization on the english translation.it has nothing to do with the actual arabic of that verse. your response about writing with hands and physical books shows more of the same... philosophy upon philosophy, without bothering to check if your interpretation actually agrees with the Arabic verse.

allow me to demonstrate. since the meaning of al-kitaab is in question here, let's translate the other parts and look at the verse again.

Woe to those who write AL-KITAAB-A with their own hands and then claim
it is from Allah.

It is clear from this verse that AL-KITAAB-A is the object of the verb write, of which the subject is ALLATHEENA (those). It is therefore absolutely obvious, that al-kitaaba is referring to none other than the false writings... if it referred to uniersal lawsd, that would mean allatheena wrote the universal laws!! which obviously is false.

there is NO mention of another al-kitaab FROM WHICH they are writing or PRETENDING to write about. It does not say yaktuboona al-kitaaba min al-kitaabi or anything like that.

so again, making random philosophies based on english trans and then philosophizing on the philosophies without EVER bothering to confirm with the true arabic is just irresponsible.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Shuaib,

The verse should be translated as follows

(279) So grief/distress/woe to those who write The Book with their hands then they say "This from at The God." To buy with it a small price, so grief/distress/woe to them from what their hands wrote , and grief/distress/woe to them from what they gather/acquire.

Brother , what I am saying is that Al Kitaab is used to speak about the God's Universal Laws, the cause and effect written upon the creation. But what I understand the verse to say is that when someone writes a book expounding on Truths, they must leave it at that, not go on and try to assign authorship to the God, because then you are limiting the God to 114 chapters. The God's Message is the message of truth, any statement of truth is the God's Message. Any statement that does not contradict the cause and effect of live is the God's word. So when we hear something read to us, we must search for contradiction to ascertain if it is from the God or not, and what the God has to write cannot be held in a human book.

So YES, a human can write the Book with thier hands, if you don't thinik so then why do you trust the reading(quran) so much? It was written by a man as well, pious scribes. But we cannot say it is the God's. Even if the trees were pens and oceans inkthe Words of the God would not run out. This reading is a guide to the God's Book(Kitaab).

A mathematics book is Universal LAw, but we don't say it is from the GOd.

Lastly, you understand the "al kitaab" to be false books, but it is not plural, so how can it be talking about the many different books? Universal LAW reduces to "Be and it Becomes", so no need for Plural. everything is ONENESS. The God's BOOK is wriitten from the Horizons to within our Spirits.

shuaib

salam idol,

about the plural, i meant it as a generality but yes obviously in that particular verse, it is in the singular.

someone writes a book expounding on Truths, they must leave it at that, not go on and try to assign authorship to the God

God's Message is the message of truth, any statement of truth is the God's Message.

So when we hear something read to us, we must search for contradiction to ascertain if it is from the God or not

My first question is, don't you see the contradiction in the above statements you made? On the one hand you are interpreting the verse to say DO NOT attribute al-kitaab written by their hands to Allah, on the other hand you are saying anything we hear that is truth IS FROM Allah.

Second question, that verse is not saying that those people wrote A book. It says they write AL-KITAAB.

Third question,

they must leave it at that, not go on and try to assign authorship to the God, because then you are limiting the God to 114 chapters.

Dont you believe that God authored the Quran? If not God then whose words are they?

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Shuiab,

My first question is, don't you see the contradiction in the above statements you made? On the one hand you are interpreting the verse to say DO NOT attribute al-kitaab written by their hands to Allah, on the other hand you are saying anything we hear that is truth IS FROM Allah.

There is no contradiction in those statements. Yes, anything that is truthful is from the God, but it is not described as "Al Kitaab", it would be described as the God's reading(quran). The God's Book (al Kitaab) is everything in the universe, created from The God's "Word".

Second question, that verse is not saying that those people wrote A book. It says they write AL-KITAAB.

Yes, it says they wrote Universal Law with thier own hands, The Book. I never said anything different so this is not a point needed to be corrected.

Dont you believe that God authored the Quran? If not God then whose words are they?

I believe pious scribes WROTE this reading(quran) with thier hands, the initial message was intuited by a person who transcended to the level of Prophethood. The error was in claiming the God as the author, thus limiting the God's Words. The Gods words never run out, this reading ends at chapter 114. It is a guide, written by man, if it is true and does not contradict, then it is from the God , but not authored by the God.

Are not ALL THINGS from the God?

Let me ask you a question, the verse says do not write the Book with your hands, if you think it is talking about the "Quran" , then was it okay in that case to write it with human hands?

shuaib

salams idol,

The God's Book (al Kitaab) is everything in the universe, created from The God's "Word".

Yes, it says they wrote Universal Law with thier own hands, The Book. I never said anything different so this is not a point needed to be corrected.

Dont you see the contradiction in the above... you SIMULATANEOUSLY are taking the word AL-KITAAB to mean both the book that they wrote with their hands, as WELL as everything in the universe.

Tell me, did those people write with their hands everything in the universe and then say it was from God? Or did they write a book??

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Are not ALL THINGS from the God?

You're being a bit silly here... all things are due to God because he created everything... he ALSO created the people who corrupted the Bible and distorted the torah and introduced the hadith.

As THESE things FROM God? In a way yes... but they are falsehoods. Falsehoods created by people created by Allah who gave them free-will.

I believe pious scribes WROTE this reading(quran) with thier hands, the initial message was intuited by a person who transcended to the level of Prophethood. The error was in claiming the God as the author, thus limiting the God's Words. The Gods words never run out, this reading ends at chapter 114. It is a guide, written by man, if it is true and does not contradict, then it is from the God , but not authored by the God.

If this is your belief, then we have nothing more to talk about.

If I dictate a letter to my secretary.. who is the author? If someone copies a book, does the author change?

1037 This Qur'an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah..

unknownuser

PEACE, IDOL,

I believe pious scribes WROTE this reading(quran) with thier hands, the initial message was intuited by a person who transcended to the level of Prophethood. The error was in claiming the God as the author, thus limiting the God's Words. The Gods words never run out, this reading ends at chapter 114. It is a guide, written by man, if it is true and does not contradict, then it is from the God , but not authored by the God.

"If it doesn't contradict"?? Have you or anyone else found one?

1037 This Qur'an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah.

Main Entry PRODUCE to cause to have existence or to happen BRING ABOUT b to give being, form, or shape to.

Main Entry AUTHOR one that originates or creates source.

Given the above ayat and definitions, on what grounds do you maintain that Allah, is not the author of Al-Quran??

With each succeeding post, you are more and more casting doubt on the inviolability of Allah's Quran , thus, sacrificing it/forsaking it, for your, and I can only describe it as...dubious and slick interpetations.. Come back to common sense.

This goes for you too, Shuaib.

Looking forward to your reply

shuaib

This goes for you too, Shuaib.

haha

)

unknownuser

PEACE, IDOL,

The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab, you have agreed is fully detailed, yes? The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab, is comprised of Ayats , agreed? The Creation, as a whole, as well as all of its individual parts, are also Ayats. Al-Quran, "the Reading" , likewise, is comprised of Ayats. The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab is comprised of fully detailed Ayats, and, is a fully detailed Book in and of itself, as well as, all of its constituent parts. Now, given that Al-Quran is a part of the Book of Alllah/Al-Kitab/part of the Creation, then, as with IT, Al-Quran must also be...fully detailed.

Peace.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Shuiab and PB,

Shuiab, yes i simultaneously take Kitaab to mean BOOK AND Universal Laws when refering to the God's Book. Just like I take the arabic word for "FACE" to be a literal face and also CHARACTER when refering to the God's face. Likewise I take the arabic word for HAND as a literal hand and also "control/power".

PB

The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab, you have agreed is fully detailed, yes?

Yes, the signs from the horizons to within our Spirits/Minds is fully detailed, we have to be patient and receptive to have them revealed to you.

The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab, is comprised of Ayats , agreed?

Yes, all the signs form the horizons to within our Spirits/Minds comprises the God's Book (Al Kitaab)

The Creation, as a whole, as well as all of its individual parts, are also Ayats.

Not "also", this is what we have been talking about from the beginning, the whole of creation.

Al-Quran, "the Reading" ,

This reading, the 114 chapters, informs us to read the signs from the horizons to within our Spirits/Minds, yes.

likewise, is comprised of Ayats.

Yes, but the verses are not ayats, it is the guidance within that is the "sign", which POINTS, as signs do, to the Universal Laws comprising creation(Al Kitaab)

The Book of Allah/Al-Kitab is comprised of fully detailed Ayats, and, is a fully detailed Book in and of itself, as well as, all of its constituent parts.

You are saying that the signs from the Horizons to within our Spirits/Minds is fully detailed, I agree. I do not agree that its PARTS are also fully detailed. The part can NEVER compare to the WHOLE(God). Thats like comparing a drop of water to the ocean.

Now, given that Al-Quran is a part of the Book of Alllah/Al-Kitab/part of the Creation, then, as with IT, Al-Quran must also be...fully detailed.

No. You mustn't compare the part to the WHOLE(God).

shuaib

salams idol,

Shuiab, yes i simultaneously take Kitaab to mean BOOK AND Universal Laws when refering to the God's Book. Just like I take the arabic word for "FACE" to be a literal face and also CHARACTER when refering to the God's face. Likewise I take the arabic word for HAND as a literal hand and also "control/power".

The key word is SIMULTANEOUS bro. Take for example

He burned with hatred.

BURNED... it can mean LITERALLY something burning, or expressing an overflowing emotion... the one word can mean 2 things.

But in the ONE sentence, it can ONLY mean one thing... either literal burning, or figurative.. not BOTH at the SAME TIME..

The same way, al-kitaab, if you want to translate it as UNIVERSAL LAWS, then do so.. if you want to translate it as book, do so. But you CANNOT do that in the SAME sentence with ONE WORD.

ESPECIALLY in your example since you are not only taking 2 simulataneous meanings but using the word twice! (from al-kitab into another al-kitab).

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Shuiab,

Lets try this, lets say that I took a piece of paper and wrote the 13th amendment to the US constitution on it, have I not written the LAW(of man) with my own hands?

shuaib

idol,

that's not what you're doing with the verse though. let me explain another way.

i wrote al-kitab.

Either this can mean i wrote the universal laws, or i wrote a physical book. it CANNOT mean i wrote the universal laws down into a book, UNLESS i say "i wrote al-kitaab into al-kitaab".