Jump to content

wmehar2

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About wmehar2

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 09/24/1990

Profile Information

  • Location
    NY, USA
  • Religion
    Sufi - Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,930 profile views
  1. question again

    Ah the translation is misleading. Kallam which you interpret as spoke/speak actually means to give word, which is not the same as 4:164 where God says he gave word (kalluml to Moses with speech (takleemun) simultaneously. we know kalm in arabic roots means to give word but it does not mean dialogue specifically. takleeman is the ingredient. It seems we only can conclude from quran only Allah had a Dialogue with Adam and Musa.
  2. hello, actually not quite. we know "what is revealed" (46:9) only can mean what is revealed in Quran as quran explains God speaks in 3 ways, revelation, from behind a veil or revealed to a messenger to reveal to us. Messengers are angels or man. And The book(s) are only revealed , not spoken from behind a veil. And it was only Musa AS God spoke to/taught directly with words, and Adam AS, no other prophet in Quran. 46;9 Say: 'I am not an innovation among the Messengers, and I know not what shall be done with me or with you. I only follow what is revealed to me; I am only a clear warner.' 11:31 Will you not remember? I do not say to you, "I possess the treasuries of God"; I know not the Unseen; and I do not say, "I am an angel." Nor do I say to those your eyes despise, "God will not give them any good"; God knows best what is in their hearts. 'Surely in that case I should be among the evildoers From what I see so far, there isn't a "except by permission of God " clause here.
  3. Looked at it. Have no opinion. I lost myself into this once before; I've concluded the same as before, there's no evidence, *evidence *, that the Prophet was murdered nor died of natural causes unless the remains are exhumed (Astaghfirullah) and examined upon which we have a small chance depending on condition to make an autopsy that's meaningful or significant. Which will never happen in our lifetimes. Everything we say, including hadith are all speculation and are not admissible as evidence for the likelihood of conceiving them for political reasons. Even then there's not much we can do about it, as it's in the past. My opinions are that there was potentially room for foul play but i simply do not know nor beleive it so. Hadith supporting this conclusion introduce several contradictions to other hadith and even the Quran. Quran says Muhammad knows not what will happen to him, therefore all hadith about this incident from imams and prophet are null and inauthentic.
  4. Wasn't quite laughing at the idea, was laughing because it feels weird to be read to by a prerecorded device, I'd end up playing with some speed setting to make the audio sound funny. Unfortunately I don't beleive I have the capacity to drive and hear something like a story or even music. I drive with nothing playing (hyper focus issues). It's too distracting for me :/ I need to literally sit, with an allocated time slot, and read or hear a book.
  5. I do, but as @notmeput it, Life has hijacked my time. It seems I need to break through the technology bubble. Maybe I just need someone to read me a book xD. I used to read music too, not just listen, and then write some.
  6. I'm gonna sound lame but, I've not read a novel/book since I was in highschool. I've read poetry here, and there; and then mathematical/statistical books, historical books/encyclopedias..online. I used to love reading but... *shrug*
  7. question again

    You're correct. I was indeed reading this incorrectly. If Allah made good His promise , by His permission, and disobeyed, it's to Him. I was looking to see if Muhammad was called the Messenger here in which Case I would have agreed, but I've narrowed my vision. However, Surah al Hashr: 7 is misapplied and not relevant to your point. This is contextually during a battle/after, which we can't follow or reject what a Prophet SAW tells as, today how to apportion the spoils (orphans, family, et. etc.) Also, Allah Calls Muhammad SAW the Messenger, in this capacity, which means a direct agent. Muhammad isn't always the messenger to my point before, which makes sense because today, he is not here to relegate a spoils of war to us, which means he is not a messenger now for he is passed. He WAS a messenger, but is not always A Messenger (here you and I disagree here, until I find something that refers to Muhammad as a man to be obeyed). As for An Nisa:65, you may have a point here. I can't see if Allah is referring to the Prophet as a Prophet or a Messenger here BUT, my same point stands because in An Nisa - 64: And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah . And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful. Once again I can't make myself concede to your point because when Muhammad is acting as the Messenger, he must be obeyed. I need to find evidence from Quran that when Muhammad is not referred to as the messenger, he must be obeyed. Because every time Muhammad was referred to by name or "Prophet", it was the opposite, meaning humans had discretion and the obeying command was not applied. Technically, since Jibril is also a messenger, you can read this as the people coming to Muhammad, the messenger asking forgiveness, then Muhammad to Jibril, asking for forgiveness. Because look ----> "... if when they wronged themselves they had come to you(Muhammad), and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them ...."<------ Muhammad and messenger are in here concurrently, usually we would expect to see ".....they come to you (Muhammad) and asked forgiveness of Allah and he asked forgiveness for them" with he referring to Muhammad naturally. Not that I'm concluding that's how this SHOULD be read, but I'm searching for the definitive proof here for your argument/case. Surah Ahzab 36 (33:36) I would argue the same. Disobeying the Messenger insinuates disobeying the message the messenger brings. and the same for 3:31, because 3:32 : Say, "Obey Allah and the Messenger." But if they turn away - then indeed, Allah does not like the disbelievers. وَلَقَدْ صَدَقَكُمُ اللَّهُ وَعْدَهُ إِذْ تَحُسُّونَهُمْ بِإِذْنِهِ ۖ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا فَشِلْتُمْ وَتَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ وَعَصَيْتُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا أَرَاكُمْ مَا تُحِبُّونَ ۚ مِنْكُمْ مَنْ يُرِيدُ الدُّنْيَا وَمِنْكُمْ مَنْ يُرِيدُ الْآخِرَةَ ۚ ثُمَّ صَرَفَكُمْ عَنْهُمْ لِيَبْتَلِيَكُمْ ۖ وَلَقَدْ عَفَا عَنْكُمْ ۗ وَاللَّهُ ذُو فَضْلٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ [Shakir 3:152] And certainly Allah made good to you His promise when you slew them by His permission, until when you became weak-hearted and disputed about the affair and disobeyed after He had shown you that which you loved; of you were some who desired this world and of you were some who desired the hereafter; then He turned you away from them that He might try you; and He has certainly pardoned you, and Allah is Gracious to the believers. Disobeying Prophet means disobeying Allah. And that is the reason why Allah said وَلَقَدْ عَفَا عَنْكُمْ You should accept whatever the Messenger gives you and abandon whatever he tells you to abandon. Have taqwa of Allah... (Surat al-Hashr: 7) No, by your Lord, they are not believers until they make you their judge in the disputes that break out between them and then do not resist what you decide and submit themselves [to you] completely. (Surat an-Nisa`: 65) When Allah and His Messenger have decided something, no believing man or woman has a choice about [following or not following] it. Anyone who disobeys Allah and His Messenger is clearly misguided. (Surat al-Ahzab: 36) Say: "If you love Allah, then follow me and Allah will love you and forgive your sins." (Surah Al `Imran: 31) You are totally misinterpreting the verse. فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ وَشَاوِرْهُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ ۖ فَإِذَا عَزَمْتَ فَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ "Pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in affair; so when YOU have decided, then place YOUR trust in Allah" This portion of the verse is directly addressing the Prophet as you can see "pardon them and ask pardon from them & take counsel from them". And it is the Holy Prophet (pbuh) who were told "so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah". Here is tafseer (Agha Poya): As an individual the Holy Prophet was always inclined to mildness. He never first withdrew his hand out of another man's palm. He never struck any one in his life. He was the sweetest and most agreeable in conversation. Those who saw him were suddenly filled with reverence; those who came near him loved him. He was generous and considerate even to his enemies, both open and hidden. He was sent by Allah as the "mercy unto the worlds". His kind and generous attitude towards his erring companions does not mean that their actual low station in the spiritual realm can be raised to the level of the true faithfuls, because they remain in the category of those described in verse 16 of al Anfal, particularly when time and again they showed the same tendency of defection and renunciation demonstrated at Uhad. The Holy Prophet received the book and wisdom directly from Allah. He was the city of knowledge (and Ali its gate). He needed no advice from any body. "Take their counsel in the affairs" has been mentioned in this verse to educate the companions to reflect and use their intelligence, to understand the issues which confronted them in their lives so that by consulting each other they might arrive at a rational conclusion and follow the reasonable advice. Whatever be the counsel of the companions but the Holy Prophet has been asked to put his trust in Allah and act according to his own judgement. I think this is quite a stretch, in my opinion. Muhammad SAW could decide first, but he is told to decide after the counseling, then to put trust in God. Muhammad is not the sole determination of decision points until he seeks counsel, then he trusts in Allah. "needing no advice from anybody" is a misunderstanding, in my opinion, brother. I apologize I cannot see eye to eye here. The ultimate pinnacle of unyielding trust in someone is to trust them to make a decision/command an instruction without questioning it, in which case counseling in many instances ESPECIALY WAR, is just simply not an option, and the explanation then comes later. Therefore I cannot see the case Agha Poya is making. If the ultimate goal is to convey to human beings unquestioning obedience to Muhammad in all capacities, then counseling is redundant, also, speaking nicely/non-harshly to believers is also redundant and unnecessary. If Muhammad is accepted to be the authoritarian, why counsel, trust in Muhammad then? But even that is against the idea of trusting in Allah as mentioned directly in the verse. And still instinctively it makes the most intuitive sense as I explained earlier @Salsabeel. Though I understand what you're saying and where you are coming from, it is for me personally a stretch. We know from Quran "Obey" / 3tee'oo, that two or 1 obey's are not necessary. 8:20 O you who have believed, obey Allah and His Messenger and do not turn from him while you hear [his order]. There is no special distinction with 1 or 2 3tee'oo's or Obeys in the clause. You and I have no reconciled the meaning of Obey Allah and the messenger for me to understand Ulil Amr, because it is only once in the Qur'an you see Ulil Amr There are so many time in the Quran we see Obey Allah and the messenger, and just one time here where you see Ulil Amr/those in authority in terms of OBEY. There's 4:83, where you can refer to messenger and authority, but not quite obey. 4:91, Allah had to give authorization/authority to kill those who don't restrain their hands after seeking peace/&falling back into disbelief. Sultanan is the only other word used for authority, and Amr/Ulil happens no other place. For such a small emphasis on Ulil Amr when Allah places the most and only emphasis on Himself and obedience, there's little to no chance those in authority are the people I need to follow or else I'll become a loser on the last day. Using Qu'ran alone I can easily come to that conclusion. "if you should dispute in something, refer it Allah and the Messenger" it does NOT say "refer it to Allah and the Messenger and those in authority"<------, Because then It would be consistent with your argument and I would be inclined to take your position brother. Because those in authority have not the authority of Allah nor His messenger. QED @Khudi
  8. question again

    I'm acquainted with the story, hadith surrounding this, thank you for reacquainting it. These Qu'ran verses say quite the opposite of what you're saying. Something is amiss if you and I are reading it two opposite ways. No explicit way here does it say they disobeyed Allah, but it does say they disobeyed Muhammad SAW. Then He Described to them the distinction of the love of this world vs. hereafter, explained it as the test. Then pardoned them. Directly after in the sequential ayah, as consequence of the event, it says as you quoted: Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 159: فَبِمَا رَحْمَةٍ مِّنَ اللَّهِ لِنتَ لَهُمْ وَلَوْ كُنتَ فَظًّا غَلِيظَ الْقَلْبِ لَانفَضُّوا مِنْ حَوْلِكَ فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ وَشَاوِرْهُمْ فِي الْأَمْرِ فَإِذَا عَزَمْتَ فَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَوَكِّلِينَ Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hard hearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you; pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah; surely Allah loves those who trust. (English - Shakir) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But you aren't paying attention to this part here where Allah is also advising to Muhammad "...So by mercy from Allah, [O Muhammad], you were lenient with them. And if you had been rude [in speech] and harsh in heart, they would have disbanded from about you. So pardon them and ask forgiveness for them.." Allah explains to Muhammad that it was Allah's mercy that Muhammad showed niceness/leniency with these people, despite that they disobeyed because they would abandon the Prophet if he was harsh in speech/heart. Understandably Muhammad relies on these people, so he must pardon the people, and ask Allah for pardoning of them. Because though they disobeyed, they are believers and made a mistake. Then, ...."..and consult with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah; surely Allah loves those who trust." (or take counsel, either way you spin it to English) consult/take counsel with them in the affair, and when you (not You Muhammad alone, but you to us, the believers, and Muhammad this message is for us all), then trust Allah. Why would a messenger with absolute knowledge/authority need to counsel/consult with believers? And then ask WHEN they all decided, together, to put trust in Allah with a decision collectively they made/agreed upon? It wouldn't make literary sense if Allah commands us to counsel/consult with each other, then one person decides, but then goes back to plural ,.."Allah loves those who trust"? The most intuitive plain, instinctive message I'm getting is, don't be harsh in speech/heart with each other, consult, then trust in Allah with whatever the decided result is. The main point here would have been OBEY the messenger, don't disobey him, Allah would not have hesitated to say, Did I not command you to obey the messenger? if what you're describing is the case. Consider Salman e Farsi, he made a suggestion to the Prophet SAW that helped them greatly turn the tide, it was a consultation. For the Prophet did not have all the answers, right? This is a message to every human being who will put their trust in Allah. (like in 4:59, this directly applies) 4:59 O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result. Is the above not mean to place trust in Allah, when it says if you should believe in Allah/Last day? Is this not also referencing to all us believers? Definitely does.
  9. question again

    Yet another valid point! 2:31 and 2:32 and 2:33 directly imply Allah directly communicated/interacted with Adam AS in first person. Though I have not yet found that Allah revealed to Adam AS a book ,per se, which is intriguing. The verses I've alluded to before, it Seems 4:163-164- says revelation of written book(s) were provided on and after Prophet Nuh AS. Hadith aside, 2:253 proves Prophet's other than Musa AS were spoken too, however it does not mean Allah directly communicated with Muhammad SAW, at least other than what we've reviewed here, I'm going to try and search for supporting Quran verses of this. 2:252-253 if anything, Allah is revealing through Jibril to Muhammad that he is from the messengers, and describes to him that some of the messengers this -->"Those messengers, some of them We caused to exceed others. Among them were those to whom Allah spoke, and He raised some of them in degree. And We gave Jesus, the Son of Mary, clear proofs, and We supported him with the Pure Spirit. If Allah had willed, those [generations] succeeding them would not have fought each other after the clear proofs had come to them. But they differed, and some of them believed and some of them disbelieved. And if Allah had willed, they would not have fought each other, but Allah does what He intends." I think this is very interesting. Some messengers we caused to exceed, and from among those messengers Allah spoke and raised some in degree. My understanding? 1) some messengers exceeded, 2)the ones who exceeded He spoke 3) from some of the ones he spoke to, some were raised in degree (I'm thinking King Davud/AS or Sulieiman AS who were kings and that Allah directly taught per Quran, they had ranks higher than other prophet's in life that were not Kings/Sovereigns of people, Adam AS as he is the first/authority who angels bowed to) 4) It seems even with Jesus ibn Mariam AS and Muhammad SAW, the people differed/ fought each other. 28:7 Musa's AS mother was inspired/reveled by "we" according to the verse, no direct communication as you and I have already studied that there are 3 types, it seems an Angel sent revelation. As for Obey Allah and the Messenger, the commands are clear. Quran says Angels and men are messengers, Allah gives message to Jibril to give to Muhammad SAW which is obeyed by Muhammad, and Muhammad gives us the revelation/message which we should obey. Are you disagreeing with what I'm saying above?
  10. RadhiAllahu'anhu

    Its ok, no worries. Bid'ah as I understand from Hadith and how it was taught to me growing up in Sunni madhab. So im reapplying my understanding from those experiences here. innovations in religion has been purported as disgraceful and reprehensible in Hadith. They could further be categorized into types such are ok and others as evil. An example of a religious bidah could be, we must now pray towards the eiffel tower or we must (<- obligation clause note, ) use Qtips on our right ears before prayer; thinking that you must do something for religion or not do something which my have in fact no religious basis. (my interpretation) I hope that was concise/brief.
  11. RadhiAllahu'anhu

    I'm not sure :/ رضي الله عنه. means "May Allah be pleased with him?" Yet it just sounds like " Allah is pleased with him/them" Not quite a statement by itself, I suppose it depends on your intention. Sounds like a mini-dua. In my mind how can it ever be haram or bid ah? What person knowingly would say this to an individual they know (know, not assume, but know) God is not pleased with? How do we know? 58:22 You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they were their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their kindred. Those - He has decreed within their hearts faith and supported them with spirit from Him. And We will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide eternally. Allah is pleased with them (رضي الله عنهم), and they are pleased with Him - those are the party of Allah . Unquestionably, the party of Allah - they are the successful. 9:100 And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct - Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment. 98:8 Their reward with Allah will be gardens of perpetual residence beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever, Allah being pleased with them and they with Him. That is for whoever has feared his Lord. 5:119, 48:18 Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquillity upon them and rewarded them with an imminent conquest (it won't let me reduce font size :/) I uh... It seems Allah is pleased with those who do right. I used to say رضى الله عنه not knowing what it meant, I don't seem to use it as much now. It seems people use it from a cultural aspect and just learned it growing up in the madhab they were in. Either way, I don't think this is too big/serious of a topic to get in the weeds about/heated. Two people may disagree with who should رضى الله عنه be applied, I would think Allah would on the final day sort it out, if it was even meaningful.
  12. question again

    Yes, I understand 51 of al Ashura, it was referenced in my long essay, as well as the pasted content. However Quran says Allah only spoke to Musa AS, by which was through the veil. Musa AS was the only one given this type of communication. below is the entire pasted response: I apologize, I'll include the whole piece about the logic I was putting together below: I'll begin with a question, how does one Obey Allah, does one speak to him personally? If I'm not mistaken, we do agree that obeying Allah is to obey the message brought by the Messenger. 42:51-52 And it is not for any human being that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a partition or that He sends a messenger to reveal, by His permission, what He wills. Indeed, He is Most High and Wise. *Yukalima, is typically understood to mean communicate/speak, though in it's actual form, it means "give word" This is fundamentally different from actual talking/saying things with a voice. Note this distinction** Also note the ORDER these are in. ---From the above, we understand there are 3 ways for Allah to converse with humans. Revelation, from behind a veil/partition, or sends a messenger to reveal. --------- And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what is the Book or [what is] faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, [O Muhammad], you guide to a straight path - --How did Allah according to Quran "give words"/communicate to Muhammad? One thing that we know, from Qu'ran, is that Allah TALKED with Musa AS. -- 4:163-164 We have revealed to thee as We revealed to Noah, and the Prophets after him, and We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, Jesus and Job, Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and We gave to David Psalms, And (We sent) messengers We have mentioned to you before and messengers we have not mentioned to you; and to Musa, Allah addressed His Word, speaking (to him): --Allah communicated to Musa AS by speaking directly to him? Let's see.-- 20:11-12, 17-18 So when he came to it, a voice was uttered: O Musa: Surely I am your Lord, therefore put off your shoes; surely you are in the sacred valley, Tuwa, -Allah is speaking in first person. No angel is saying this to Musa.-- And what is this in your right hand, O Musa? He said: This is my staff: I recline on it and I beat the leaves with it to make them fall upon my sheep, and I have other uses for it. --Allah, is literally talking with Musa AS. In the first person. As you may be familiar with the passages, Musa AS is out in the wilderness, doing whatever it is he was doing. And Allah is having a Dialogue/conversation with Allah. Look at that! No one in between them, Allah and Musa AS. ** This is PRIOR to Musa AS receiving Revelation *** 6:91 And they do not assign to Allah the attributes due to Him when they say: Allah has not revealed anything to a mortal. Say: Who revealed the Book which Musa brought, a light and a guidance to men, which you make into scattered writings which you show while you conceal much? And you were taught what you did not know, (neither) you nor your fathers. Say: Allah then leave them sporting in their vain discourses. --Check 7:17 too, Here Allah uses the word "wa7ee" for reveal/ed. This tells us clearly, when Allah wants to send the Message, he "REVEALS", if he wants to have a conversation instead, He then has direct speech/talk/dialogue with voice. Which has naught to do with Revelation (which is why we don't see this conversation in the Torah one may argue). Musa AS has both received direct dialogue and revelation from Allah. This constitutes the 2nd method of communication from Allah back in 42:51, which is Allah may communicate from behind a veil. So back to the question, How did revelation/Quran come to Muhammad SAW? Was he ever in dialogue with Allah according to Qu'ran? Here we discover that angels are Messengers too!-- 22:75 Allah chooses messengers from among the angels and from among the men; surely Allah is Hearing, Seeing. 16:2 He sends down the angels with the inspiration by His commandment on whom He pleases of His servants, saying: Give the warning that there is no god but Me, therefore be careful (of your duty) to Me. --QUESTION, Should these angels who are sent down with revelation, be obeyed? Better yet, Would this apply when Allah says "OBEY Allah and OBEY THE MESSENGER?"-- 16:101-102 And when We exchange a verse in the place of another verse and God knows very well what He is sending down -- they say, 'Thou art a mere forger!' Nay, but the most of them have no knowledge. Say: 'The Holy Spirit sent it down from thy Lord in truth, and to confirm those who believe, and to be a guidance and good tidings to those who surrender.' --Should This Holy Spirit be Obeyed?? Would that mean Obeying Allah??-- 26:192-194 And most surely this is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds. The Faithful Spirit has descended with it, Upon your heart that you may be of the warners --Should the faithful Spirit be obeyed?? and does this mean Obeying Allah alone? Perhaps its Jabril (It is) This spirit is now a "Al Alameen, Spirit" A trustworthy or faithful spirit. Now it seems to me, it's all one obedience.-- Quran 2:92 Say: Whoever is the enemy of Jibreel-- for surely he revealed it to your heart by Allah's command, verifying that which is before it and guidance and good news for the believers. ---Jabril revealed it but by Allah's command; he did not act independently --- WHO should be obeyed?-- Quran 81:19-21 Most surely it is the Word of an honored messenger, (You're hearing SPEECH check Arabic word used here, Gods words , given to Jabril and speaking to Muhammad SAW) who is honored in the presence of the Lord of the Throne, One (to be) obeyed, and faithful in trust. 4:64 And We did not send any messenger but that he shouldbe obeyed by Allah's permission; and had they, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful. 4:80 Whoever obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys Allah, and whoever turns back, so We have not sent you as a keeper over them. --JABRIL WAS A MESSENGER, MUHAMMAD SAW OBEYED HIM. These entities are messengers/transmitters, like typing in an online messenger, or email. Send it, then forward it, obey and transmit. No Messenger is sent except they obeyed Allah. We KNOW Jibril revealed to Muhammad the message/book.
  13. question again

    On this we agree, (If you read further, you will see where the Prophet was then known to not be addressed in my response, though), The Quran already has examples of obey being used once, twice in the same context with no special/explicit difference. You bring up a very good point, one I have not considered before. Using Qu'ran alone, I could not give you the name of these 12 months, at least not now to my ability. However I'm not sure if knowing these months will or will not correct my religion necessarily. Qu'ran already tells us we should never fight someone unless they wage war with us or fight us, stipulating peace. We should not be the aggressor. 2:190 And fight in the way of God with those; who fight with you, but aggress not: God loves not the aggressors. 9:36-37 : The number of the months, with God, is twelve in the Book of God, the day that He created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred. That is the right religion. So wrong not each other during them. And fight the unbelievers totally even as they fight you totally and know that God is with the godfearing. The month postponed is an increase of unbelief whereby the unbelievers go astray; one year they make it profane, and hallow it another, to agree with the number that God has hallowed, and so profane what God has hallowed. Decked out fair to them are their evil deeds; and God guides not the people of the unbelievers. It seems even if I don't know which of the 4 are sacred, I'm not in bad shape... I'm not suppose to fight anyone unless they fight me anyway...? We can fight the unbelievers totally when they fight us (instigate, aggress us first) during these 4 months, but of course not begin hostilities with them. But honestly, I may not even be reading this correctly, still. It says do not wrong each other, during sacred months. Does wrong mean to fight? When it says don't wrong each other, does it mean each other as in among muslims/believers not just unbelievers and muslims, or is it speaking to all humans? So do not wrong which could mean steal, hurt, be unjust to anyone etc... Then again, we shouldn't be wronging anyone nor being unjust with them regardless what month it is, which conveys that perhaps especially these four months are particularly important of mention.. Could implicate a more severe punishment? Not sure. Perhaps these 4 months are part of 3:7, [It is He who sent down upon thee the Book, wherein are verses clear that are the Essence of the Book, and others ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts is swerving, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring dissension, and desiring its interpretation; and none knows its interpretation, save only God. And those firmly rooted in knowledge say, 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord'; yet none remembers, but men possessed of minds.] I do have a question back for you, do you think it's possible that 9:36 has verses ambiguous referred to in 3:7, and that those who kept changing the months are those who were trying to follow the ambiguous part of the Qu'ran @hoskot? Are the postponers the ones in 9:37 the same in 3:7? Perhaps the months were unspecified for a reason, that muslims just keep four months, or use four months and the test was that humans be consistent with them and not change them. (I'm being funny here) Or maybe Allah doesn't want to tell us the four months, to keep us on our toes to never wrong anyone, just in case it is one of the four months! (lol) I have a lot to think about here man. Great point; Thanks for this!
  14. question again

    Did I misunderstand? Did the way i understand 9:43 was actually what Aqa Mahdi was in your post?
  15. question again

    Could you help me understand the misunderstanding in my laymen/breakdown of the verses specifically? I seem to agree Allah is having Muhammad SAW tell the people he's a warner, in addition to the rest I noted. As for 9:43, I disagree with Aqa Mahdi Puya's explanation here. Because of what follows /precedes: 9:38 O believers, what is amiss with you, that when it is said to you, 'Go forth in the way of God,' you sink down heavily to the ground? Are you so content with this present life, rather than the world to come? Yet the enjoyment of this present life, compared with the world to come, is a little thing. Seem's directly Allah is talking to believers (does that include Muhammad too?, I don't have answer to that question yet) 9:39 If you go not forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement, and instead of you He will substitute another people; and you will not hurt Him anything, for God is powerful over everything. 9:40 If you do not help him, yet God has helped him already, when the unbelievers drove him forth the second of two, when the two were in the Cave, when he said to his companion, 'Sorrow not; surely God is with us.' Then God sent down on him His Shechina, and confirmed him with legions you did not see; and He made the word of the unbelievers the lowest; and God's word is the uppermost; God is All-mighty, All-wise. Now I have answer to that question, they're talking directly to believers other than Muhammad SAW. 9:41 Go forth, light and heavy! Struggle in God's way with your possessions and your selves; that is better for you, did you know. 9:42 Were it a gain near at hand, and an easy journey, they would have followed thee; but the distance was too far for them. Still they will swear by God, 'Had we been able, we would have gone out with you,' so destroying their souls; and God knows that they are truly liars. God is now talking to Muhammad, about them/believers following thee (Muhammad), there is no way I can see it any other way than that. NEVER anywhere in the Qu'ran does this silent juxtaposition transition to a companion/sahaba exist, it would have been explicit. 9:43 God pardon thee! Why gavest thou them leave, till it was clear to thee which of them spoke the truth, and thou knewest the liars? The tone is the same here, directly to Muhammad..., Allah asks why one person gives plural "THEM LEAVE", Why would a companion in the lifetime of the Prophet have this level of authority, especially when Shia's think of some of these companions as unworthy? [Quran 9:101] Among the Aarabs around you, there are hypocrites. Also, among the city dwellers, there are those who are accustomed to hypocrisy. You do not know them, but we know them. We will double the retribution for them, then they end up committed to a terrible retribution. " <-- It is quite possible that Muhammad did not know who the individuals who are hypocrites who stayed behind, it is in alignment with 9:43. 9:44 Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day would not ask permission of you to be excused from striving with their wealth and their lives. And Allah is Knowing of those who fear Him. ^^^ Why would Allah be talking about about companions such as Umar, Abu Bakr, Salman, etc. etc.? Why would they ask Sahaba leave and not Muhammad? I'm sorry @shiaman14, I cannot read it another way at this point.
×