Why to guive proof from Koran if this isn't the book of God?

Bilal76

Peace all,

Some people think that the kitab called "KORAN" by traditionnal's muslims is not the truth reveled to Muhammed. They thinks that the qu'an of the kitab is the reading of the universals law. I respect their reflection but i have different questions for them

1 - Why Do you use Koran to guive proofs that "qu'an of kitab" means reading of universal laws?

2 - Do you think that eat meat of pig is permissed to eat?

3- Do you think that there are a number of prohibition (list) or that it depend of the personnality and the vision of each person?

4- Who are the prophets and messangers?

5- Why do you mention the name of ibrahim, moussa, Mohammed, etc if you can't prouve their exitence by the kitab (universal laws)?

the goal of this questions is the enrichment of our knowledge.

thanks for participation

Peace

phoenix1

peace

i don't really know if i would be one of the people you're addressing but i think i can answer your questions.

I think that the quran is Guidance based on universal laws. I know that because that's what the quran is. That's what you find out when you read it.
No.
I think there are certain things prohibited.
I don't know.
Because even if they aren't real, they are 'characters' in God's stories and each have their own importance.

That's what i think right now.

Leyla

Sal?m Bilal

I belong to the people who think that there is enough evidence to see that at many places the qur'?nic term "al kit?b" clearly refers to the universal decrees of All?h.
I also believe that in this context the term al qur'?n (directly translated as "the reading") would be the reading of these laws, since this is the logical relationship of the terms kit?b and qur'?n.

However, it is a miunderstanding that this means that the qur'?n is not the book of All?h to be followed or that this point of view leads to some kind of relativism.
The qur'?n has (besides qur'?n) also other attributes within the ayats.
One is al-furq?n, differentiation between truth and falsehood.
It is also is called adh-dhikr, meaning both rememberance and reminder.
It is also called haqq, truth.

Al-Kit?b was according to the qur'?n given to all messengers, thus it is always the same.
However, we may assume that still al-kit?b given to M?sa was not the arabic entity that we hold in our hands these days and call al qur'?n.
Al-Kit?b is eternal and always the same to all.
Al-qur'?n is the revealed way to read these eternal laws. This reading is however, as a revelation, not humanly subjective but divinely objective.
It is truth and it clearly differentiates the truth from falsehood.

So, it is not contradictory at all to use the qur'?n to prove that al-kit?b are the unchanging universal decrees of All?h because al qur`?n is still the divinely authored reading of these laws and thus , to me and within my personal experiences, the best and only furq?n to be followed.

I don?t eat pig. Personally I think that this is what the qur'?n has to say on the issue and that it is also medically reasonable. I keep my general consumation of mass produced meat on very low anyhow, since modern meat industry is clearly not what the qur'?n calls tayyib.

Yes, I think there are enough things clearly shown as wrong and thus prohibited to believers in the qur'?n and that this is not a personal or relative issue.
Our own opinions may be relative, conditioned by our own culture, experiences, education etc., but the qur'?n is not.
To give you a complete list would be too much work for an online thread.
Actually, I don?t need to collect a list. All?h has already collected all of them within his reading.

Muhammad, Ibrahim, Is?, M?sa can be proven and constantly prove themselves as real within the universal laws.
Their reality is observable within our own daily experiences.
Unlike the historical Muhammad, M?sa etc, of whom we only have weak historical transmissions and contradictory accounts (still I am quite sure that they existed!).

peace,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace all,

Some people think that the kitab called "KORAN" by traditionnal's muslims is not the truth reveled to Muhammed. They thinks that the qu'an of the kitab is the reading of the universals law. I respect their reflection but i have different questions for them

1 - Why Do you use Koran to guive proofs that "qu'an of kitab" means reading of universal laws?

2 - Do you think that eat meat of pig is permissed to eat?

3- Do you think that there are a number of prohibition (list) or that it depend of the personnality and the vision of each person?

4- Who are the prophets and messangers?

5- Why do you mention the name of ibrahim, moussa, Mohammed, etc if you can't prouve their exitence by the kitab (universal laws)?

the goal of this questions is the enrichment of our knowledge.

thanks for participation

Peace

Very good questions bro

now let's see a few good replys

nothing yet so far but some confusion regarding Al Kitab and Al Quran, lol

peace bro

Leyla

Peace Ahmed

You think we have confusion over the meanings of al kit?b and al qur'?n?

Then please explain the following if al kit?b is not the universal decree but the qur'?n itself

Why is the qur'?n in 10/37 described as taSd?q alladh? bayna yadayhi wa tafS?l al-kit?bi l? rayba f?hi min rabbi-l-'alam?n???
This clearly shows that qur'?n is not al kit?b itself but rather it is tafS?l of al kit?b used as a cognate to tasd?q of what is bayna yadayhi (which does not mean previous?, as in previous books?, as some claim).

Also see that in 12/111 explains this further, also refering to the tafS?l and the taSd?q but using instead of al kit?b the term kulli shey'in.

Does al kit?b in 6/38 better suit the universal decree or the qur'?n??
Why does someone who has ilm from al kit?b powers of manipulating apparent reality when al kit?b is al qur'?n and not the universal decrees?? (read 27/40)

I respect your personal opinion, but to me the qur'?n points to something else.

peace again,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace Bilal76,

Good questions.

In my undersanding, it is simply a matter of fact that Reality/Nature/Life teaches and disciplines every humankind of whatever gender, race, size, color, domain, environment, circumstance, etc., etc., when a child?s upbringing is brought up right from birth as he/she grows to admonishing experiences and facing real challenges of Reality/Nature/Life presented, laid out and witnessed first hand in their own paths and ways of lives as called for.

With that said, all that is mentioned in the Quran are the reflections/thoughts/experiences/events of Reality/Nature/Life as seen and understood by a wise matured philosophical man who delivered the message to the people of his time (including Jews and Christians), enlightening the very past, present and future of his own vision from time to time as events unfolded. These historical messages were then later appropriated, collated and revamped in a book form named Quran by the very scribes of his time to be read, studied, understood and reflected upon for future generations to take heed.

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

You think we have confusion over the meanings of al kit?b and al qur'?n?

Peace Leyla

I?m not sure who do you mean by ?We??, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Then please explain the following if al kit?b is not the universal decree but the qur'?n itself

Why is the qur'?n in 10/37 described as taSd?q alladh? bayna yadayhi wa tafS?l al-kit?bi l? rayba f?hi min rabbi-l-'alam?n???

Well, we need first to think what is ? between Allah hands??, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

This clearly shows that qur'?n is not al kit?b itself but rather it is tafS?l of al kit?b used as a cognate to tasd?q of what is bayna yadayhi (which does not mean previous?, as in previous books?, as some claim).

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

Also see that in 12/111 explains this further, also refering to the tafS?l and the taSd?q but using instead of al kit?b the term kulli shey'in.

Again, it is talking about the Quran and its stories of the past and whatever the Quran says is Tasdiq to what is between Allah hands, what that thing is? I don?t know because the Quran in 12111 didn?t say what it is, also the Tafsil in the verse means Allah will explain the Quran to the believers

Does al kit?b in 6/38 better suit the universal decree or the qur'?n??

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

It will be silly for Allah to tell us that He has a book up there that manages the universal laws while we only need to pay attentions and believe in another book called The Quran, I guess Allah may have a liberary of Books up there, but we only need to care about one book of them called the Quran, and that is what we will be held accountable against not against the Books He has up there

Why does someone who has ilm from al kit?b powers of manipulating apparent reality when al kit?b is al qur'?n and not the universal decrees?? (read 27/40)

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

I respect your personal opinion, but to me the qur'?n points to something else.

Likewise

peace again,

Peace

Leyla

Peace Ahmed

we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands,

No, actually I do not think that.
Where did I say so?
You misunderstood my point here.

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

Sorry, I think you are wrong. Read the whole verse.
Al kit?b here is not al qur'?n.
The verse clearly says that al qur'?n is tafS?l al kit?b, not that al qur'?n is al kit?b.
At least not when you let the pure words stand as they are and don?t add any assumption.

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

I perfectly agree with you here. However, although the qur'?n is kit?bun (a book) it is not al kit?b (the one book).

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

Yes, right. But here it is not kit?bun, it is not any book. It is clearly al kit?b, the book. There can only be one!
And you are right, this one al kit?b is not al qur'?n. Exactly my point.
And since All?h never confuses words and has the most specific language of all al kit?b will always mean al kit?b in al qur'?n.
The one and only al kit?b.

peace again,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands,

No, actually I do not think that.
Where did I say so?
You misunderstood my point here.

Peace Leyla

ok no worries

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran ?The Kitab? was definite to happen by Him

Sorry, I think you are wrong. Read the whole verse.
Al kit?b here is not al qur'?n.
The verse clearly says that al qur'?n is tafS?l al kit?b, not that al qur'?n is al kit?b.

the verse cearly says "Tafsil Al Kitab La Raib Fihi", ie. the explanation of the Kitab la raib fihi, it never said the Quran is the Tafsil of another Kitab

At least not when you let the pure words stand as they are and don?t add any assumption.

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

wrong 100%, the Quran is only the guidance put in a book that we need follow to pass this test, it looks like a book to me and it was called a book numerous times in the Quran

I perfectly agree with you here. However, although the qur'?n is kit?bun (a book) it is not al kit?b (the one book).

I agree with you that it is not the one book Allah authored, but I mean it is the only law that we will be held accountable to by Allah

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

how many Allah have?, humans can only speculate, I won't

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

Yes, right. But here it is not kit?bun, it is not any book. It is clearly al kit?b, the book. There can only be one!

as I said, Al Kitab does not mean The one book, it only mean the book and can be one out of many

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

And you are right, this one al kit?b is not al qur'?n. Exactly my point.
And since All?h never confuses words

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

and has the most specific language of all al kit?b will always mean al kit?b in al qur'?n.

of ourse it means The Book, but again, which one?, you will not be able to come with an answer other than specualtuions and conjectures

The one and only al kit?b.

which one?

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

peace again,

Leyla

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Ahmed

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Can you please elaborate on this

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

Thanks,
Tay

Leyla

Peace Ahmed

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

The la raib fihi does not change my point at all.
Sorry, I don?t see that.
The whole verse speaks about hadha-l-qur'?nu. Every statement here is about it, including the description as tafS?l al kit?b la raib fihi.

Again, please let the words stand as they are.

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

Yes, but a specific one. That?s why I added 'one'. Only to stress that.
It is a specific one, not any of an uncertain number.

Let me ask you
If I would say 'al bayt' would you say that I am talking about any house or about a specific house that I have in my mind ??????

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

Sorry, that?s too much human assumption for my taste. )
I can not deduce this knowledge of yours from any verse of the qur'?n.

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

By the way the verse talks about al kit?b, not about al qur'?n.
And it even stresses my point.
Why?
Because it mentions umm ul kit?b.
And what do we know about umm ul kit?b?
E.g. 43/3-44
tells us that umm ul kit?b is directly with All?h and also that al qur'?n is within umm ul k?t?b.
So, umm ul kit?b is not a part of al qur'?n (as your reading of 3/7 would say) but instead al qur'?n is within umm ul kit?b.
So, al kit?b in 3/7 can not be al qur'?n.

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Really? Are you talking about verses about some book (kit?b) or a specific book, the book (al kit?b).
Please show me a verse that clearly says that al kit?b refers to any earthly book without ambiguity. I would be thankful for that.

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Because I already greeted you with peace in the beginning. So, this 'peace' was a second 'peace'. I said 'peace' a second time, I said it again.

And again peace,

Leyla

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed

also the verse never said that Al Quran is the Tafsil of Al Kitab, this is a clear cut mistake, the verse said "Tafsil Al Kitab La raib Fihi", i.e. the explanation of the Kitab is La raib fihi

The la raib fihi does not change my point at all.
Sorry, I don?t see that.
The whole verse speaks about hadha-l-qur'?nu. Every statement here is about it, including the description as tafS?l al kit?b la raib fihi.
Again, please let the words stand as they are.

Peace Leyla

The arabic words stand clear as light, the verse never said that the Quran is a tafsil to anything in this verse, the verse said that Tafsil Al Kitab is going to happen 100%, that is what it was said and the same sentnce was repeated zillions of times in the Quran.

Not going to buy your wrong explanation, sorry

Al Kitab does not mean the one book, there was no mention of any one book in the Quran

Al Kitab means The Book

Yes, but a specific one. That?s why I added 'one'. Only to stress that.
It is a specific one, not any of an uncertain number.

Then it makes no sense as the verse says that the explanantin of that book is La Raiba fihi, so I'm sot really sure why Allah wants to explain something to us that we don't have neither we will be held accountable against it?, it must mean the Quran 100%

Let me ask you
If I would say 'al bayt' would you say that I am talking about any house or about a specific house that I have in my mind ??????

Logically speaking it means any house, unless you say My house, Allah never said my book in the verse

if that book has a name like the Quran then we will know which book it is referred to but because it is only referred to as The book without a name , it can be any book out of many that Allah have

Sorry, that?s too much human assumption for my taste. )
I can not deduce this knowledge of yours from any verse of the qur'?n.

what I said will make sense to my child

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

By the way the verse talks about al kit?b, not about al qur'?n.
And it even stresses my point.
Why?

the Quran was also referred to as kitab in many locations, therefore this verse is mutashabihat and no one will ever know what book in this verse except Allah, I will just take it as the Quran because it was said as such about the Quran in many locations

Because it mentions umm ul kit?b.
And what do we know about umm ul kit?b?

I only need to know about one book named Al Quran, you want to speculate about the books Allah may have, go for it, i'm out of this unreasonable discussion

E.g. 43/3-44
tells us that umm ul kit?b is directly with All?h and also that al qur'?n is within umm ul k?t?b.

Nice try, the Umaa Al Kitab mentioned in this verse in another Kitab Allah has , that is why it says "indana"

But what is funny that you want to link this Umma Al Kkitab here with the one in 37, very funny indeed, it only shows your lack of Arabic, may Allah help you

So, umm ul kit?b is not a part of al qur'?n (as your reading of 3/7 would say) but instead al qur'?n is within umm ul kit?b.
So, al kit?b in 3/7 can not be al qur'?n.

Umma Al kitab is nothing but a metaphor that means the mother of the book, and in every context this metaphor will express different meaning

In 37 it mean those muhkamat verses are the mother of the book, i.e. the foundation of the book

Try harder please

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Really? Are you talking about verses about some book (kit?b) or a specific book, the book (al kit?b).
Please show me a verse that clearly says that al kit?b refers to any earthly book without ambiguity. I would be thankful for that.

I'm talking about all verses with the word Kitab or Al Kitab is mentioned

I will show you verses that Al Kitab was referring to the Quran explicitly more than once

Peace, but I'm not sure why the word "again"?

Because I already greeted you with peace in the beginning. So, this 'peace' was a second 'peace'. I said 'peace' a second time, I said it again.

And again peace,

Leyla

ok excuse my ignorcane

Regards

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

Can you please elaborate on this

Sorry, Allah delibertly confuses some verses from the Quran as a test for the believers and the unbelievers as per 37

Thanks,
Tay

Hello Taj

I will mate after I have my midday nap as I just put my son to sleep and must take the chance to have a bit of sleep

give me 3 hours mate

Salam

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Hello Taj

I can tell you need your nap D
But you've had your last warning! Next time you call me "Taj", I'm calling you "Afifah", deal?

Looking forward to your reply.

Peace,
Tay <----spelled T - a - y

unknownuser

Hello Tay

Sorry mate for the mix up with Taj again, Can you please give me the benefit of the doubt because the key ?Y? is diagonally next to the key ?J??, just kiddin bro

Verse 37 is very important verse in the Quran, without it, many would have found some unexplainable confusion in the Quran, exactly like the Bible, but the Bible does not have a verse like 37 indeed. It seems the Author of the Quran was fully aware of all possibilities to include a verse like 37 in the Quran, let me walk you through it bit by bit bro

?He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say ?We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?

(7)

-> ? ?, ? He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book?, ?The Quran? is referred to as ?Al Kitab?, i.e. Al Kitab in verse 37 means 100% ?Al Quran?, i.e. Al Quran was sent down to Mohammad by Allah.

-> ? ?, ? In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book?, another clear sentence, Allah is saying to Mohammad and anyone who will read the Quran for that matter, in this book there is verses basics or fundamental of established meaning, 37 must be one of those as we will see while walking through it, some thought that 37 is a Mutashabihat verse, I even thought the same previously, but I quickly managed to understand that 37 can?t be Mutashabihat, because it is actually telling us the fact that there is Mutashabihat verses and why they were included in the Quran. Humans may expect that a book of guidance should be as clear as it can gets, which I agree, however let?s not forget that the Quran is also used to test everyone, i.e. it is a guidance (Muhkamat) and a test (Mutashabihat) at the same time, this is an awesome planning by the Al Mighty Allah, we read, in the Quran there will be Muhkamat verses, we didn?t read that All the Quran will be Muhkamat verses, those Muhkamat verses were also described as Umma Al Kitab, i.e. the foundation of the book, therefore the context suggest to the believers that the Muhkamat are the ones that they should care about, what about the rest of the Quran then?

-> ? ?, ? others are allegorical?, here is the rest of the Quran, the other portion of the Quran verses are Mutashabihat, i.e. allegorical, i.e. hard to understand, i.e. confusing, this is not a coincidence, it is part of the plan as Allah has just told us that He included those allegorical verses in the Quran, now it is about time to ask why He did that?, we don?t need to look any where, we only need to continue reading the verse.

-> ? ?, ? But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its meanings,?, the mighty plan objective is revealed, these deliberately inserted allegorical verses are there to expose those in whose hearts is perversity (believers or not, it applies to both), because those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, There is a very important hint in here, those seeking discord, in which community they are seeking that discord?, it has to be the believers community, therefore we have a double test in hand, a test for the unbelievers to see if they will seek discord by speculating the different meanings of those Mutashabihat verses, and another test for the believers to expose who will follow that discord, it can also be considered a test to the unbelievers who don?t search for the meanings of these verses neither seek discord between the believers, it will be a test for them exactly like the believers to see if they will follow that discord or not. This is awesome planning, it may sound not fair at the first glance, but if we consider the following, I guess it has to be fair

In this life, this is how a tester creates a test, he/she includes in the test a bit of tricky questions, he/she never tell us what sort of tricks they will include though, and yet the process is fair and square to all, in the case of this life test, The Tester ?Allah? has told us in advance what the trick is ?37?, THIS IS FAIRNESS AT ITS MAX, WHAT IS STRICKING IS, MANY STILL LISTEN TO THAT DISCORD THEN FOLLOW IT AS WE SEE ON THIS WEB SITE AND MANY OTHER WEB SITES

-> ? ?, ? but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah?, here is the denial that NO ONE WILL KNOW THE MEANING EXCEPT ALLAH, some people who try to twist the meaning of this crystal clear verse by saying there is a ?Waw? after ?Allah? which means ?And?, i.e. what will follow the Waw should share the action with Allah, the action here is knowing the meaning of those Mutashabihat verses, this is 100% wrong as I will prove ?LOGICALLY SPEAKING? later, but we must take note that this bit also started with a Waw, this does not mean it is sharing what was before it, this is clear from the context before it, the Waw was translated ?But? however ?Waw? means ?And?, it is also common knowledge to start a new sentence with a Waw, EXACTLY AS THIS SENTENCE AND THE ONE AFFTER IT AND THE ONE AFTER THE ONE AFTER IT as we will see next.

-> ? ?, ? And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say ?We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord??, here is a new sentence started with a Waw, and clearly means that the ones with knowledge will believe in both Muhkamat and Mutashabihat verses as BOTH FROM OUR GOD, WHY THEY SAY THAT, IF THEY MANAGED TO UNDERSTAND THE TRUE MEANINGS OF THESE MUTSHABIHAT VERSES?, the Mutashabihat should be Muhkamat for them, yet they referred to them as BOTH, see, this is the logical refute to those who claim the people with knowledge will also crack these Mutashabihat verses and know its true meanings, I guess they are mixed up in what ?Rasikhoon fi Alilm? means, I think they might be thinking that it is science, but quite the contrary the Ilm in the verse means ?knowing Allah?, nothing more as science doesn?t fit in the description of the people with knowledge, because we can see an illiterate human who knows Allah better than many educated ones.

-> ? ?, ? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?, this bit started again with a Waw, as an indication of a new sentence, and it can be understood as being part of what the people with knowledge said or just another message from Allah, this mix up can?t make the verse Mutashabihat as in either cases ?Allah or Al Rasikhoon fi Alilm? who is saying it, the message is clear that ? and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.?

Clear from the above that Allah deliberately inserted Mutashabihat verses to test all of us, some will try to search for its meanings seeking discord or just for the sake of searching for its meaning as if they are smart, others may listen to that discord and flaw their beli ve but the true subnitters in Allah will just take it for granted as from Allah without searching into its Mutashabihat meanings

Peace be with you

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

Thanks for your thoughful reply.
I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points
1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.
2- If I accept your understanding that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand. And even though the Qur'an states that we should verify information, Allah authored ayat that should be accepted blindly.

It doesn't quite fit, bro.

Peace,
Tay

mquran

Ahmed Im not sure who do you mean by We?, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Many kitabs mentioned? Like what ? Al-quraan mentions itself as 'kitaab' and mentions 'al-kitaab'. That's it.

Well, we need first to think what is between Allah hands?, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

So you think the 'hi' as Allah ? What's your reason for thinking so?

Now the word Kitab in the verse is actually referring to the Quran, i.e. Allah is telling us the explanation of the Quran The Kitab was definite to happen by Him

All the arabic in the world won't help if you don't have a basic grasp of logic. How can al-quraan BE al-kitaab if al-quraan is TAFSEELUL kitaab?

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

So in al-quraan, you have National Geographic as well? Why don't you read 6/38 and see the context.

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

You don't care about the lesson Allah gave you? Oh , I forgot, you think it's history. Allah sent us a 'hudan linnaas' but only for historians and arguing with Christians. Well done.

By the way, its not kitaab in 27/40, its AL-KITAAB. The individual had knowledge of AL-KITAAB.

I can show you from the Quran that The Kitab word is referring to many other books

Just as you can show us how you arrived as your salaat conclusion, no doubt. When you 'have time'.

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book, The Quran is referred to as Al Kitab, i.e. Al Kitab in verse 37 means 100% Al Quran, i.e. Al Quran was sent down to Mohammad by Allah.

Funnily, here it means 'al-kitaab' whereas it could mean 'many books'. This is proof of how a non-quranic understanding will be full of contraditions.

Here's a passage to get you going

That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to ABRAHAM (to use) against his people We raise whom We will, degree after degree for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.We gave him ISAAC and JACOB all (three) guided and before him, We guided NOAH, and among his progeny, DAVID, SOLOMON, JOB, JOSEPH, MOSES, and AARON thus do We reward those who do good. And ZAKARIYA and JOHN, and JESUS and Elias all in the ranks of the righteousAnd ISMAIL and ELISHA, and JONAS, and LOT and to all We gave favour above the nations and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren We chose them, and we guided them to a straight way.This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them . This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These were the men to whom We gave AL-KITAAB., and authority, and prophethood if these (their descendants) reject them, Behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who reject them not.

All these guys are mentioned and Allah says He gave them AL-KITAAB. Not many kitaabs. Did you miss this 500% in your 20 years of reading al-quraan, Ahmed?

unknownuser

Peace Ahmed,

Thanks for your thoughful reply.
I agree with most of your analysis, except 2 points

Peace Tay

1- This ayah cannot be an indicator that parts of the Qur'an are confusing, as that would contradict the many ayat that explain how the Qur'an is clearly explained, easy to understand, etc.

it does not contradict any, because all the Muhkamat are fully detailed and are the ones that we should uphold confidently, the other Mutashabihat "confusing ones", we are only required to believe in it as from Allah

The fact of the matter that 37 is telling us about the Mutshabihat verses and its objective, makes the Mutshabihat clear to us that was put there for a purpose and this means very muhkam to me

2- If I accept your understanding that the waw does not connect "no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah" to "And those who are firmly grounded", then this will contradict 1736, which tells us to veify information, to not accept anything blindly.

it does because you also have the wrong undersding for 1736, that wrong understanding is promoted here by a few ignorants of the Arabic language

1737, clearly sayd "DON'T Argue (stand/stop) in matters where you lack knowledge beacuse we are responsible for all our senses and we must give account in how we deployed our senses

no contradiction whatsoever

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand.

it is not me who said that, it is the clear and muhkam arabic verse 37

And even though the Qur'an states that we should verify information, Allah authored ayat that should be accepted blindly.

yep, and just for argument sake and assuming that 1736 meaning is the wrong one as you understand it, then when I try to verify the mushabihat verses and find out that it has many meanings beyond doubts then I have to follow 37 and not to chase which one is the right meaning out of many "I assumed that all different meanings logically fit"

It doesn't quite fit, bro.

your understanding to 1736 is the one that doesn't quite fit, I can elaborate on that if you wish

Peace,
Tay

Peace

unknownuser

Ahmed I?m not sure who do you mean by ?We??, my statement was a general statement regarding those making a fuss of the Kitab and the Quran while the matter is clear in the Quran. Which is also a Kitab, some like to call it the reading though LOL, there are many Kitabs mentioned in the Quran other than the Quran, so what?, we are only accountable to the Quran

Many kitabs mentioned? Like what ? Al-quraan mentions itself as 'kitaab' and mentions 'al-kitaab'. That's it.

try to search for the word Kitab and Al Kitab and you will see than many books were mentioned

Well, we need first to think what is ? between Allah hands??, we should think not as the Quran in 1037 never mentioned what that thing is, you assumed it is another book in His hands, and I will only take it as a reasonable assumption but not a definite case

So you think the 'hi' as Allah ? What's your reason for thinking so?

what a dumb question, firstly you assumen that I'm thinking then you are asking me why I'm thinking this way? lol

your question is invalid body

All the arabic in the world won't help if you don't have a basic grasp of logic. How can al-quraan BE al-kitaab if al-quraan is TAFSEELUL kitaab?

Haha what a laugh

Al Quran is tafsil Al Kitab, where you got this from first? can you direct to me to a verse?

well, I believe it means the Quran and as you say that Allah is telling us the fact that He left nothing that we need to know to pass this test.

So in al-quraan, you have National Geographic as well?

Haha, another dumb comment

why don't you walk us through it instead opf just putting the verse number, I'm sure you do that to avoide being exposed that your understanding to most Quran verses are flawed

please do and walk us through the Quran verses to enlighten us

Yeh, that kitab in the verse is not the Quran, it can also mean any other book that this Ifrit managed to study and know secrets from it, regardless of that, I really careless what kitab is it, but I know it is not the Quran for sure and this is what matters to me

You don't care about the lesson Allah gave you?

and what lesson that is?, the Quran is full of lessons, you are one hell of a confuser, I guess you are the one that was born without logic in the head

Oh , I forgot, you think it's history.

sure many things in the Quran are history

Allah sent us a 'hudan linnaas' but only for historians and arguing with Christians. Well done.

I can see very well following that Huda, lol

By the way, its not kitaab in 27/40, its AL-KITAAB. The individual had knowledge of AL-KITAAB.

I donlt acceot you sneaky short comments on any Quran verse, you must bring the verse here and walk me through it if you want me to dicuss the Quran with ya, other than that any Quran comment by you will be ignored

Just as you can show us how you arrived as your salaat conclusion, no doubt. When you 'have time'.

first of all, I don't know why you don't get it, I need not to show anything to anyone, I onnly liase with the ones I respect and to answer their questions, all the rest of humans in the world will be ignored, very simple rule in my Book

Funnily, here it means 'al-kitaab' whereas it could mean 'many books'. This is proof of how a non-quranic understanding will be full of contraditions.

you suffer from a very law IQ Mister Q, I concuded this already, Al Kitab was mentioned numerous times in the Quran and it referred to many other books, but I will only prove that to the others whom are identified in my book to liase civily with but only iof they raise the Question with me

Here's a passage to get you going

That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to ABRAHAM (to use) against his people We raise whom We will, degree after degree for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge.We gave him ISAAC and JACOB all (three) guided and before him, We guided NOAH, and among his progeny, DAVID, SOLOMON, JOB, JOSEPH, MOSES, and AARON thus do We reward those who do good. And ZAKARIYA and JOHN, and JESUS and Elias all in the ranks of the righteousAnd ISMAIL and ELISHA, and JONAS, and LOT and to all We gave favour above the nations and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren We chose them, and we guided them to a straight way.This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them . This is the guidance of God He giveth that guidance to whom He pleaseth, of His worshippers. If they were to join other gods with Him, all that they did would be vain for them. These were the men to whom We gave AL-KITAAB., and authority, and prophethood if these (their descendants) reject them, Behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who reject them not.

All these guys are mentioned and Allah says He gave them AL-KITAAB. Not many kitaabs. Did you miss this 500% in your 20 years of reading al-quraan, Ahmed?

Haha, what an ignorance, it was mentioned singualr as a single book for each, NOT the same book for all, you are so funny

peace

Tay

Peace Ahmed,

You stated

it does not contradict any, because all the Muhkamat are fully detailed and are the ones that we should uphold confidently, the other Mutashabihat "confusing ones", we are only required to believe in it as from Allah

I'm sorry, but this makes zero sense bro. To believe in something that you call "confusing" as part of Allah's guidance does not serve it's purpose as guidance. How, exactly, would you be guided by something which you don't understand?

1737, clearly sayd "DON'T Argue (stand/stop) in matters where you lack knowledge beacuse we are responsible for all our senses and we must give account in how we deployed our senses

I didn't get that from 1737. Perhaps you meant 1736? If that's the case, then please break down the translation for us, as it seems you stand alone in your understanding...

Transliteration Wala taqfu ma laysa laka bihi AAilmun inna alssamAAa waalbasara waalfu-ada kullu ola-ika kana AAanhu mas-oolan
Literal And do not follow the tracks/accuse of evil deeds what knowledge is not for you with it (you have no knowledge of)
Free-Minds And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of
Rashad Khalifa You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself
Yusuf Ali And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge
Shakir And follow not that of which you have not the knowledge;
Pickthal (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.
Arberry And pursue not that thou hast no knowledge of
Hilali/Khan And follow not (O man i.e., say not, or do not or witness not, etc.) that of which you have no knowledge
Malik You shall not follow anyone blindly in those matters of which you have no knowledge.
QXP And you shall not follow blindly any information of which you have no direct knowledge.
Palmer And do not pursue that of which thou hast no knowledge
Rodwell And follow not that of which thou hast no knowledge

Now, that would really be confusing. In effect, what you're saying is that even though the Qur'an tells us it is clear and easy to understand, Allah authored ayat that are impossible to understand.

it is not me who said that, it is the clear and muhkam arabic verse 37

No, bro, it is YOUR understanding of the verse, which, in this case, is not consistent with the rest of the Qur'an.

yep, and just for argument sake and assuming that 1736 meaning is the wrong one as you understand it, then when I try to verify the mushabihat verses and find out that it has many meanings beyond doubts then I have to follow 37 and not to chase which one is the right meaning out of many "I assumed that all different meanings logically fit"

See, the problem with this argument is that you assume every ayah must have only ONE meaning, and that if it has more than one meaning, then it is somehow invalid. This is your subjective view, and you are surely entitled to it. But realize that it is not universal. Your view is not perfect, nor is your judgement infallible.

An ayah having more than one meaning, in my opinion, only further amplifies the potency of the words and their author. Who else but Allah can author ayat that have multiple truths attached to many words?

your understanding to 1736 is the one that doesn't quite fit, I can elaborate on that if you wish

Please do, as it's not just my understanding but that of every single Qur'an translator.

Peace,
Tay