Abu Lahab
-
Peace all,
The following link provide insights on the history of Abu Lahab and his wife, further explaining chapter 111 in question
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Lahab
More information can be found via google search.
-
Peace,
Thank you Jaxal for elaborating )
I find in this discusson a significant point, to understand the reading metaphorically or literally.
If the first case, every name reflected in it, names of the prophets, name of Muhammad, name of Abu Lahab have a meaning and none of them have to be taken as proper nouns.
I am not sure if those of you that take the metaphor approach, still take some parts as literal or if you think the two approaches are exclusive?
-
peace Elena,
That was Danish who posted the above by the way. wink
If the first case, every name reflected in it, names of the prophets, name of Muhammad, name of Abu Lahab have a meaning and none of them have to be taken as proper nouns.
As far as I'm aware, that is not true, but you'll have to ask someone more knowledgeable of Arabic on that one. What I'm saying is, there are proper nouns in 'the reading' and can be easily identified by the form/grammar.
I am not sure if those of you that take the metaphor approach, still take some parts as literal or if you think the two approaches are exclusive?
I do not consider the approaches exclusive.
Wakas
-
The stories in the Wikipedia smells like, sounds like and looks like a false story fabricated by the followers of hadith. It contains all the necessary stupid characteristics.
As for
"Muslims present that chapter as evidence for the divinity of the Quran, since Abu Lahab cound have ruined the Quran and Islam simply by profesing Islam outwardly, just like Abu Sufyan did."
This is so silly that whover can think like this has no more than two digit IQ.
If I write a book and condemn someone in the book for not joining my belief, that person can never disprove me, since it will be again me who will decide on his intention. This is one of the many examples of ridiculous miracles fabricated for the Quran.
Abu Lahab is not a proper name, it simply means the leader of opposition or provocation.
Peace,
Edip -
Peace Wakas, all
What I'm saying is, there are proper nouns in 'the reading' and can be easily identified by the form/grammar.
I think you refer here to the Ayman's say "The Arabic word that denotes "proper name" is "ism" (plural "asma'a"). yes?
If someone can bring forth any grammatical information which proves 'abu lahab' is a proper noun, then I will re-evaluate it.
I was trying to know something about this.
The conclusion seems to be that there is no such a rule and that the essential point is the context.
The steps have been
-to identify a common, indefinite noun it needs always a "vowel + n" ending
-to identify a definite noun absence of the construction "vowel`+ n " or adding of definite article or a genitive
-to differenciate a definite noun from a proper name ther is no rule, just based on context
-to check the Ayman's assertion "The Arabic word that denotes "proper name" is "ism" (plural "asma'a"). posted here http//www.free-minds.org/articles/gods_system/name.htm I found that "ism/asmaa' " denotes not only proper names but also proper noun, common noun, adjective and adverb, all considered "asmaa' " in Arabic.Probably the no rule + context conclusion explains the discrepancies.
-
Peace Edip,
The stories in the Wikipedia smells like, sounds like and looks like a false story fabricated by the followers of hadith. It contains all the necessary stupid characteristics.
As for
"Muslims present that chapter as evidence for the divinity of the Quran, since Abu Lahab cound have ruined the Quran and Islam simply by profesing Islam outwardly, just like Abu Sufyan did."
This is so silly that whover can think like this has no more than two digit IQ.
We are discussing names, not opionions of Wikipedia. The fact remains that this site and zillion others mention Abu Lahab by name and his character deployed/exposed, alongwith his wife and other family memebers, including Muhammad.
If I write a book and condemn someone in the book for not joining my belief, that person can never disprove me, since it will be again me who will decide on his intention. This is one of the many examples of ridiculous miracles fabricated for the Quran.
If you condemn 'someone', then that 'someone' must have a name, an identity, to be condemned of. Someone cannot be just everyone.
Abu Lahab is not a proper name, it simply means the leader of opposition or provocation.
I believe that Abu Lahab is/was a proper name whose meaning is ?father of flame?. Quite affective and significant roles he and his wife must have been demonstrated during Muhammad?s time, to have a small, yet a whole surah revealed of these ?special characters?. We learn from surah 111 to reflect upon such ?characters? and take heed by the very examples of evil behavior that these two once displayed. Many examples of proper names and their relevant stories have been revealed in the Quran. Perhaps all proper names carry their respective common meanings but not all common nouns are proper names.
Below are just a few quotes from various links
1 Undoubtedly one of the earliest Suras, and refers to the rejection of Muhammad's claim to the prophetic office by his uncle, Abu Lahab, at the instigation of his wife, Omm Djemil, who is said to have strewn the path of Muhammad on one occasion with thorns. The following six Suras, like the two first, have special reference to the difficulties which the Prophet met with the outset of his career, especially from the rich.
2 In allusion to the meaning of Abu Lahab, father of flame.
http//www.truthnet.org/islam/Quran/Rodwell/111/We do know that Abu Lahab was a relative of Muhammad who was making Muhammad's life miserable, trying to work against his message in many ways.
http//answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Prophecy/lahab.htmlThis is the only place in the Quran where a person from among the enemies of Islam has been condemned by name whereas in Makkah as well as in Madinah after the migration there were many people who were in no way less inimical to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings) than Abu Lahab. The question is what was the special trait of the character of this person which became the basis of this condemnation by name? To understand that it is necessary that one should understand the Arabian society of that time and the role that Abu Lahab played in it????
http//www.islam101.com/quran/maududi/i111.htm
http//www.ummah.net/what-is-islam/quran/intro/i111.htm
http//www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau111.htmlAbu Lahab, the uncle of the Prophet (s.a.w.) was his inveterate enemy.
http//www.fabonline.com/topics/articles/ISLAMzPEARLS7.htmTake care and GOD bless.
-
Abu Lahab is simply ?labeling? and ?name calling? someone who wouldn?t agree with the prophet?s newly found religion. His real name was Abdul Azi bin Abdul Matalib. I?m sure most of you?d know this!
The important point is not who he was or what title is used to describe him. In actual fact the 5 ayahs in surha 111 shows the weaknesses of Allah. When someone as closed as Abdul Azi criticizes his newly found religion, God cannot perish him instantly but sends divine revelations cursing him and his wife just like we human curse our children when they are naughty!
Name calling, labeling and cursing is not new to Quraan. See 6813 where once again God is introduced as someone who name calls those who wouldn?t agree with his Prophet!
6813 Violent (and cruel),- with all that, base-born,-
All that would make sense if it was claimed that these words came to us from a saint person who was a human being just like us. But every word in the Quraan is supposed to be coming to humanity from Allah/God! If that is the language of God, then I pray to the real God to save me from such bigotry and man-made revelations!
peace
-
Salaam ADIL,
The word in ayat 6813 is zaneem means base or notoriously mischievous or ignoble. Allah is here describing a particular mode of being in which we are told to not obey those who hinder good, overstep bounds, slander, defame, and are ignoble because of their wealth and sons . This is but a description of them, not needless name-calling, as is the case where people having a fit may call each other by mean names for insult, etc.
Joe
-
Salaam,
The whole surah is about a person called Abu Lahb and his wife. How he and his wife were disbelievers. And the punishment they will suffer.
If it be so, according to your vision, it still does not mean that this particular narration is not an exemplar of those who are not only brought down by their partners, but by their material successes.
Joe
-
SaLaM TheNabi
I dont doubt for 1 second that God is talking about all the disbelievers and their wives who also disbelieve. But this surah is about a man called Abu Lahb and his wife who were both disbelievers. God is using them as an example specifically.
-
Salaam ADIL,
The word in ayat 6813 is zaneem means base or notoriously mischievous or ignoble. Allah is here describing a particular mode of being in which we are told to not obey those who hinder good, overstep bounds, slander, defame, and are ignoble because of their wealth and sons . This is but a description of them, not needless name-calling, as is the case where people having a fit may call each other by mean names for insult, etc.
Joe
w'salaam TheNabi,
Zaneem mean base-born or someone who is born of unwed parents; illegitimate. I have read the Quraan in 3 languages and all gives similar meanings. Do you know in what context and to whom the remarks in 6813 is addressed to? This will give you an insight if you knew the whole story.
As for 1111-5, it clearly refer to Abu Lahab (Abdul Azi bin Matalib). We cannot deny this because the Islamic scholars and most Islamic sources unanimously agree on this fact. It seems as if some people want to tailor make Islam so it suits their mind frame in the 21st century! This is not how one should be seeking faith and the search for the true Almighty. These are man-made verses and associating them to God is disgrace in my opinion.
-
As for 1111-5, it clearly refer to Abu Lahab (Abdul Azi bin Matalib). We cannot deny this because the Islamic scholars and most Islamic sources unanimously agree on this fact. It seems as if some people want to tailor make Islam so it suits their mind frame in the 21st century! This is not how one should be seeking faith and the search for the true Almighty. These are man-made verses and associating them to God is disgrace in my opinion.
Not again...
He should hook up with Lotetree, unless they already are.
-
Salaam ADIL,
If you want to follow the doctrine of the scholars because you believe they are right then I've no qualm with your decision. The rusul adviced others to check/verify their announcements . The wisdom of the quran advices us to verify all things .
Joe
-
-
Salaam ADIL,
If you want to follow the doctrine of the scholars because you believe they are right then I've no qualm with your decision. The rusul adviced others to check/verify their announcements . The wisdom of the quran advices us to verify all things .
Joe
Dear TheNabi,
One can only go by the theological and historical accounts presently available to draw safe conclusions. Islam is not 10000 years old religion; it was born in clear daylights. If each person is to interpret these verses in accordance with his/her religiosity needs and presumptuous thoughts then sky is the limit. I can go on and claim that Einstein plagiarised his theory of relativity from the Quranic edicts and link certain ayah to the theory to back it up. If you give 1128-63, 1736 as your evidence, I?ll refer you to 4458 where it clearly states that these verses are written in simple language so the masses can understand it.
Quran-4458 Verily, We have made This Quran easy in the tongue, in order that they may give heed.
There is no need for Abu Lahab?s real name or lineage to the prophet to be stated in the Quraan because first, it was general knowledge and everyone knew his lineage to the prophet. Second, this sort of accounts would take pages to write and most likely such details were omitted when the Quraan was compiled and edited by the then literary figures. The only valid explanation is that he was coined and labeled as Abu Lahab because he was a huge threat to his prophecy. In my opinion we should look at the weak language of his God who only curses but cannot do anything to change Abu Lahab's mind, heart, etc.
Similarly take 3326-27 for example.
3326 And those of the People of the Book who aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts. (So that) some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners.
3327 And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.
It talks about the justification of the massacre of the Jews of Banu Qareza who wouldn?t agree with the prophet?s newly found religion, but it doesn?t necessarily give their names or location or other accounts. It simnply say that it was ok for them to be butchered becuase that was God's order! However, we look for historical evidence and other explanations such as the accounts given by Ibn Ishaq to draw conclusions
Ibn Ishaq describes what happens as follows
Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka
b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Kab what he thought would be done with them. He replied, 'Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!' This went on until the apostle made an end of them. Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe in which he had made holes about the size of the finger-tips in every part so that it should not be taken from him as spoil, with his hands bound to his neck by a rope. When he saw the apostle he said, 'By God, I do not blame myself for opposing you, but he who forsakes God will be forsaken.' Then he went to the men and said, 'God's command is right. A book and a decree, and massacre have been written against the Sons of Israel.' Then he sat down and his head was struck off.Peace
