Blog Home Member's Area  AastanaBlog: AASTANA.COM 

Join AASTANABLOG
Share your Quranic thoughts, research and knowledge with other's.
It's free, easy and only takes a minute.
Sign up Now

TRANSLATION OF QURAN
BY DR. QAMAR ZAMAN
Translation Status
آیات
سورۃ
نمبر
1-7 الفَاتِحَة -1
1-286 البَقَرَة -2
1-200 آل عِمرَان -3
1-176 النِّسَاء -4
1-120 المَائدة -5
1-165 الاٴنعَام -6
1-206 الاٴعرَاف -7
1-75 الاٴنفَال -8
1-129 التّوبَة -9
1-109 یُونس -10
1-123 هُود -11
1-111 یُوسُف -12
1-43 الرّعد -13
1-52 إبراهیم -14
1-99 الحِجر -15
1-128 النّحل -16
1-111 بنیٓ اسرآئیل / الإسرَاء -17
1-110 الکهف -18
1-98 مَریَم -19
1-135 طٰه -20
1-112 الاٴنبیَاء -21
1-78 الحَجّ -22
1-118 المؤمنون -23
1-64 النُّور -24
1-77 الفُرقان -25
1-227 الشُّعَرَاء -26
1-93 النَّمل -27
1-88 القَصَص -28
1-69 العَنکبوت -29
1-60 الرُّوم -30
1-34 لقمَان -31
1-30 السَّجدَة -32
1-73 الاٴحزَاب -33
1-54 سَبَإ -34
1-45 فَاطِر -35
1-83 یسٓ -36
1-182 الصَّافات -37
1-88 صٓ -38
1-75 الزُّمَر -39
1-85 المؤمن / غَافر -40
1-54 حٰمٓ السجدة / فُصّلَت -41
1-54 القَمَر -54
Read Now


»«
BOOKS
HADITH KEY NAM PE DHOKA KIYOUN?
Add Your QuestionView More QuestionsEmail this DiscussionPrinter Friendly View
Salam o Rehmat  
Dear Brothers and Dr Sahab  
Please share your views about Hazrat Maryam(R) .and explanation of ayat 4/34.  
waseemameer@engineer.com  
Waseem
Add Your Comments  Question by: WASEEMAMEER On 14 May 2011
Comments by: Mubashir Syed On 15 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Waseem Ameer, please find links were above two topics were discussed on the blog.  
 
For Views on Maryam :  
http://aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=1042  
 
For views on 4/34 :  
http://aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=713  
 
Thanks,  
Mubashir Syed.

Comments by: moazzam On 15 May 2011
Dear Waseem Ameer ! MARYAM WAS NOT THE WOMAN, RATHER, THE IDARAH (INSTITUTION)  
Please ponder in to the following verses to comprehend the Quranic term MARYAM.  
"To know the sense of SHARQIYA see the verse39/69.  
The root letter is REEM (ra,ya,meem) which mean departed one (who left the place).  
The second portion of the verse 19/16 and the first part of verse 19/17 itself elaborate the sense of MARYAM..  
In verse 19/28 the word UMMUKI and ABOKI does not means father and mother this verse need to be elaborated in the context of the subject.  
In verse 19/34 the terminology Iابْنُ مَرْيَمَ (BN-E-MARYAM) means the SON of the said community MARYAM,(like son of the nation) "  
LET US GO IN DETAILS.  
See the verse 3/33إِنَّ اللّهَ اصْطَفَى آدَمَ وَنُوحًا وَآلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ  
AADAM = not a single man rather the mankind (when became in his full consciousness)  
NOOH = not a man rather an attribute.  
AL-E-IBRAHIM = the followers of IBRAMEMIC IDEOLOGY.  
AL-E-IMRAN = followers of civics sense.  
Verse 3/35  
إِذْ قَالَتِ امْرَأَةُ عِمْرَانَ رَبِّ إِنِّي نَذَرْتُ لَكَ مَا فِي بَطْنِي  
مُحَرَّرًا فَتَقَبَّلْ مِنِّي إِنَّكَ أَنتَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ.  
IMRAATA IMRAN = a group among the society who follows the civic sense.  
The verse 3/35 shows that the said group seems much keen to produce the dedicated JAMAAT to lead the society in the cause of Allah.  
Read the verse 3/36  
فَلَمَّا وَضَعَتْهَا قَالَتْ رَبِّ إِنِّي وَضَعْتُهَا أُنثَى وَاللّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا وَضَعَتْ وَلَيْسَ الذَّكَرُ كَالْأُنثَى وَإِنِّي سَمَّيْتُهَا مَرْيَمَ وِإِنِّي أُعِيذُهَا بِكَ وَذُرِّيَّتَهَا مِنَ الشَّيْطَانِ الرَّجِيمِ  
The verse shows that the said group could not produced any single person with the quality to lead his nation rather produced a JAMAAT OF MUTTAQEEN.Which was converted in an “IDARAH” (Like couching/training centre) somewhere at separated place, that was far from the general public(makanan sharqiyah)  
The verse 3/37  
فَتَقَبَّلَهَا رَبُّهَا بِقَبُولٍ حَسَنٍ وَأَنبَتَهَا نَبَاتًا حَسَنًا وَكَفَّلَهَا زَكَرِيَّا  
Shows that the “IDARA” was supervised by the prophet ZAKARIA himself.  
 
Verses 3/38—42 indicates that prophet ZAKARIA was also very much keen to see a leader /imam/Nabi trained by this IDARA(maryam).  
See the verse 4/171 إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَى مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ  
Here it is realized that EISA was the IBN-E-MARYAM /RASOOL ALLAH trained WITH THE DIVINED IDEOLOGY which was handed over to MARYAM(the IDARAH) to train him for holly cause.  
Go to the verse 5/110 the term WALIDATIKA has been used, it means the IDARA who produced you (Eisa) see the details as under.  
The basic root letters of the word وضعت are و ض ع  
The meanings of وضع are to coin ,to fabricate , to create , to invent , to compose ,position , site , attitude ,figure , shape ,plan , intention , proceeding , way of acting e.t.c. but one meaning of this root letter is to give birth .  
Most of the meanings give sense of creation.  
وضعت means she created , she invented ,she composed.  
Now see the verse 5/116 وَإِذْ قَالَ اللّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَـهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ  
here the word UMM is used which mean the IDARA who composed/ fabricated.  
Now come at verse 23/50 وَجَعَلْنَا ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَأُمَّهُ آيَةً وَآوَيْنَاهُمَا إِلَى رَبْوَةٍ ذَاتِ قَرَارٍ وَمَعِينٍ  
The verse indicates that the IDARAH and EISA both had been at some protected safe place(makanan sharqiyah)  
See the verse 66/12  
وَمَرْيَمَ ابْنَتَ عِمْرَانَ الَّتِي أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِنَا وَصَدَّقَتْ بِكَلِمَاتِ رَبِّهَا وَكُتُبِهِ وَكَانَتْ مِنَ الْقَانِتِينَ  
Here the IDARA established by the group of people(who has been observing the civic sense), over came its short comings (purified them self from all evils) in an excellent way. So Allah bestowed upon it his bounties described in the above verse.  
 
1:- See the commonalities between Imraata Imran and Imraata Zakaria .  
Imraata = nation  
Imran = civics  
For views on 4/34 :  
http://aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?QID=713  
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 15 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Moazzam Bhai,  
 
Although I feel agreeable with the overall theme of your translation in the above post, yet I spot a considerable anomaly in your interpretations. I am sure you will be so kind as to justify it with rationale.  
 
Why NOAH is not a NAME?  
Why Maryam is not a NAME?  
Why Imran is not a NAME?  
 
If these are not NAMES of persons, whey then:-  
 
Zakariya is a NAME?  
Why ISSA is a NAME?  
Why IBRAHIM is a NAME?  
 
I think we must have a constantly consistent and cohesive policy for translation with regard to historic names.  
 
Moreover,  
 
Why a 'COMMUNITY HAVING CIVIC SENSE' (Aal-e-Imran) was given Fazeelat over the WORLDS?  
What is the proof of that FAZEELAT?  
Why Quran says something that can't be proved?  
Was there no other community in the world having 'CIVIC SENSE' ?  
Did 'Civic Sense' ("IMRAN") alone entitle a community to 'FAZEELAT OVER THE WORLDS?  
HOW?  
 
Sorry to have taken you to task. But to be honest with you, THE NEW TENDENCY OF TURNING the proper names into their literal meanings is constantly making things difficult for people of average understanding like me to fully comprehend the Quranic episodes and the lessons these episodes unfold. Believe me, great confusion is arising out of it, please! We must adopt a specific policy before long.  
 
Best regards.

Comments by: bob On 16 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear brother Aurangzeb  
 
I don’t want to divert the discussion but could not help myself when I saw your question. Please pardon me, but I was muddled when you said: -  
 
“Why Quran says something that cannot pray proved?”  
 
I think this question has been asked before when we were discussing whether or not the Quran describe “life after death” Is it not judicious that this question is answered by you so it is clear what the Quran talks about? Does or does it not talks about something which can’t be proven (included life after death)?

Comments by: aurangzaib On 16 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Bob,  
 
With your brilliance, I was hopeful you would note this question.  
 
I ask this question particularly because Brother Moazzam shares the view that Quran does not say something that cannot be proved.  
 
However, this question is in the perspective of this life and this world. Its parameters don't stretch to the realm of Aakhirat, viz. life after death, viz. a much higher level of consciousness, where I maintain that Quran gives just hints, no explanations. And the question of its proof does not arise. This question, at least, must be substantiated by historic events, or on ground realities.  
 
Let us see what Brother Moazzam has to say about it. Essentially, this question relates to the anomaly in translation of proper names that I have seriously pointed out. Not abt. the subject of hereafter that we have discussed in detail last few days.  
 
Thanks.

Comments by: moazzam On 16 May 2011
Dear Brother Aurangzaib ,All Aastana members ! As we know the Alkitab is beyond time and space, which provides eternal guidance for each era.  
Quran al arabiyun mubeen doesn’t mean the book written in ARABIB SECRIPT, rather the self explanatory easy to understand. The language not matter it might be in Chinese or English.  
This ALKITAB (alrooh) , we don’t know how and where the conscious man received it firs time, but we have in our hand as it is (in Arabic text)  
The creature (Allah) have arranged /set the eternal examples with the definite characters(attributes) to seek the guidance from this divine message .For example as given under. The mankind have to see(find out) the said characters in their time ERA.  
NOOH :- A man how calls in a repeated way with anxiety and whole heartedly.  
IBRAHIM:- It is driven from “ABRAHA” means who talk with arguments and evidences.  
ISMAIL:- It is derived from “ ASMAA” .A man with a good repute in a society( Ismail with the same weight of mekail)  
ISHAQ:- Sahaq is the quality of a person who convince the opponent by repeatedly arguing (Ashaq al Qalb means a soft hearted man) SAHAQ to grinde.  
YAAQOOB:- A good successor (jan nashin), Al aqoob means who follow the foot steps.  
YOUSUF:- tawassaf al baerah( a camel with a new hair grown after dropping old ones) Or apparent a fine material after pealing it out.A MAN UP LFTED (DEVELOPED) FROM THE DOWN TRODDEN TO THE ELIET STATUS.  
MUSA:- A man who routs out the false hoods from the society (erazor is called musa because it remove the hairs out of skin).  
MASIEH:- To know the sense of this attribute plz see the MASHA in the verse, where, "Wamsaho be ruoosikum wa Arjulokum" has been elaborated by Dr. Qamarzaman in Haqeeqat –e-salat.  
MOHAMMAD:- Praise worthy (a man with the good qualities) WITH SIFAAT AL HAMIDAH  
ZAKARIYA = A wide visionary man who always remember the Allah;s message intensively.  
FIRAON:- See the RAAN, RAON(a man having a quality to move fast at a height), Raoonah (an anger stooped with short temper ,wrathful)  
THE ETERNAL QURANIC TERMINOLOGIES  
LOH E MAHFOOZ = the univers (kitabun maknoon)  
YAHOOD: - The root is HOOD (HA, WA, DAL), HADU, MAHWIDU.  
Meaning is Singer, stage artist the aim of their life is just to enjoy and create enjoyment activities in this world.  
NASARAA: - The people who prefers to live easy way of life and do not produce any resistance to adopt new style/ fashion (they mold them self according to the current situations)  
SAABI: - The people having their aim & goal of life just to avail their posh living (like elites).  
 
MAJOOS: - The root is “JAAS” (jeem,alif,seen) the word “JASOOS, TAJASSAS, are also derived from this root.  
Meaning is the research oriented people their aim is just to explore new things and theories in their societies.  
MASIEH: - This is the attribute of a man who speaks politely, logically and fluently (while presenting arguments to convince the people), therefore Prophet EISA also called MASIEH due to this attribute see verses 4/171,4/157/3/45. A man who travel place to place therefore called Masieh as well.  
UZAIR: - A leader-like man having the quality to manage the majority of people around him  
ABNAA ULLAH: - The people who deserve domination in society (to rule the people)  
AHL-E-KITAB = the people holding divine message in their hands.  
BANI ISRAIL = the people having written divine scripture in their hands.  
UMM = the most prominent members of the society see the verses42/7, 28/59, 16/92  
1) UMM-E-MUSA = The group of people who wanted to produce a LEADER(MOSES) TO ROOT OUT THE EVILS  
2) أَرْضِعِيهِ = Feed him like nursery feeding to develop (course of training)  
 
3) يُذَبِّحُ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ وَيَسْتَحْيِي نِسَاءَهُمْ = the suppression (with humiliation) of ABNA AL QAOM whereas encouragement to the weaker persons of Bani Israil.  
4) TAABOOT = A brave person who knows tactics of war. To be more clear see the verses 2/246-248.  
5) UKHT-E-MOSES = the group having the same ideology (co sharer in thoughts, to know the sense see the verses 44/46-47.  
6) AHL-E-MADYAN = AHL-E-BAIT= followers of Deen see the verse37/53,56/86.  
7) الْيَمِّ(YAMM) = facing the bitter consequences of confrontations in society(Circumstances of the cruel environment of the society) = وَفَتَنَّاكَ فُتُونًا (same as in case of prophet Younis) to be more clear see the verses 51/40,20/97.  
8) SAAHIL = the logical end . In this case the logical end of Moses training.  
9) USBAHA FOWAAD = Made apparent (comprehension of theme )  
 
 
 
Remember I used the dictionary ALMANJAD to take out the sense from the respective roots.  
 
مِشْكَاةٍ =The Universe (loh-e-mahfooz)  
 
مِصْبَاحٌ = The thing which distinguishes RIGHT from WRONG.  
 
زُجَاجَةٍ =Easy to see (transparent)  
 
كَوْكَبٌ دُرِّيٌّ = The object could be known through a specified logical way (the planet known by the sun light called كَوْكَبٌ دُرِّيٌّ )  
 
يُوقَدُ مِن شَجَرَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ = creating more branches of divine knowledge.  
 
وقَدُ = The development of more branches from the stem.  
 
زَيْتُونَةٍ = any source /discipline of knowledge (the specific fruit is called Zaitoon because it is the source of extracting “Zait”(the oil).  
 
زَيْتُهَا = Conceiving of ideas / thoughts “laws of nature” (Oil is called zait because it is the extraction of seed).  
لَّا شَرْقِيَّةٍ وَلَا غَرْبِيَّةٍ = the most balanced laws/ ideas  
 
يَكَادُ = Self explanatory.  
 
كَادُ زَيْتُهَا يُضِيءُ وَلَوْ لَمْ تَمْسَسْهُ نَارٌ = those laws of nature/universal values are so sufficient to understand or self explanatory even further guidance (Alkitab) not reached to help  
 
نَارٌ = Guidance,(like Musa said inni aanastu NARUN)  
 
نُّورٌ عَلَى نُورٍ = The guidance to DEEN-ALLAH  
رٍ يَهْدِي اللَّهُ لِنُورِهِ مَن يَشَاءُ = Any body who wants guidance to know his DEEN certainly could get through due course of understanding.  
ZINA= Distortion of ideology.  
FOHASH = the anti Islamic literature.  
SHIRK = the un Quranic(parallel to Allah’s) commandments.  
NISA = the weaker segment of the society.  
NISA ANNABI = the people from the “JMAAT ANNABI”.  
JALDA = the cover of protection.  
RAMY = Arrangement (read upon) to convince them.  
FROOJ = Weaknesses.  
ABSAAR = Close observation (with wisdom)  
AZWAJJ = Group of people.  
KHUMARI HINNAH = their way of concealing.  
AQEEM ASSALAT= to establish the Islamic state.  
IJLIN HANEEZ = The perennial concocted stories having anti Islamic materials.”  
1:- ABAQA = Created serious dispute due to lake of patience,(harried to see the results)  
2:- FULKA = the platform for the group of people of same ideology.  
3:- SAHAMA = Weak in a strength.  
4:- MUDHAZ = Depressed one.  
5:- MULEEM = Feeling of sadly Lamentation  
5:- HOOT = secret plan of action.(see the verses 7/163,18/61-63)  
5:- MUSABBAHEEN = Followers of commandments of Allah  
6:- YOUM-E-YUBASOON = the time of Islamic revolution..  
7:- NABAZA BIL ARAA = to rescue from hopeless conditions.  
8:- SAQEEM = Became week due to been ill.  
9:-AMBATA ALAIHI SHAJARA = the division among people in his matter.  
10:- MIATA ALF = Large in numbers.  
.TAARIQ =NAJM USSAQIB = NABI-E-WAQT (HAVING ALKITAB IN HIS HAND)  
.SAMAA= HALAT-E-ZAMANA including all universe......  
SHAQ AL QAMAR = THE FALL OF RULING STELLITE STATE OF AN EMPIRE.  
KITAB AL ARABIYUN = the book which explain its message very clear by TASREEF AL AYAAT see the vese 20/113.  
NOOH :- A man how calls in a repeated way with anxiety and whole heartedly.  
IBRAHIM:- It is driven from “ABRAHA” means who talk with arguments and evidences.  
ISMAIL:- It is derived from “ ASMAA” .A man with a good repute in a society( Ismail with the same weight of mekail)  
ISHAQ:- Sahaq is the quality of a person who convince the opponent by repeatedly arguing (Ashaq al Qalb means a soft hearted man) SAHAQ to grinde.  
YAAQOOB:- A good successor (jan nashin), Al aqoob means who follow the foot steps.  
YOUSUF:- tawassaf al baerah( a camel with a new hair grown after dropping old ones) Or apparent a fine material after pealing it out.A MAN UP LFTED (DEVELOPED) FROM THE DOWN TRODDEN TO THE ELIET STATUS.  
 
MUSA:- A man who routs out the false hoods from the society (erazor is called musa because it remove the hairs out of skin).  
MASIEH:- To know the sense of this attribute plz see the MASHA in the verse, where, "Wamsaho be ruoosikum wa Arjulokum" has been elaborated by Dr. Qamarzaman in Haqeeqat –e-salat.  
MOHAMMAD:- Praise worthy (a man with the good qualities) WITH SIFAAT AL HAMIDAH .  
FIRAON:- See the RAAN, RAON(a man having a quality to move fast at a height), Raoonah (an anger stooped with short temper ,wrathful)  
HAROOT MAROOT, YAJOOJ MAJOOJ  
 
The orthodox translators/ interpreters developed and extract the PROPER NOUN as following, which ultimately devastated the whole ETERNAL DIVINE MESSAGE into the confined limited state, resultantly whole DEEN converted into futile rituals  
TERMINOLOGIES/ ATTREBUTS CONVERTED BY ORTHODOX INTO PROPER NOUN  
Masjid-e-haram, masjid-e-aqsaa, masjid-e-zarrar,safa,marwa, maqam-e-ibrahim,masieh,uzair,khizr, Firaoh mummy,River niel,maryam,jibrail,Mikhail,haroot,maroot,yajooj-majooj,sidratul muntaha,bacca/macca,hujraat of Umm al momineen, Mr. Zaid, laondi,Ghulam, the Babil city in Iraq, Judi mountain, Rabwa in Pakistan,Badar the battle field in Madina, Misr (the egypt) in middle east ,Zaitoon ,teen(the fruits in Phalisteen) a long list.  

Comments by: aurangzaib On 16 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Brother Moazzam,  
 
While thankfully acknowledging your hard work, I very humbly agree with all the meanings you have quoted. My questions relate to NAMES of persons; so we can exclude the meanings of terminology so as to squeeze the scope of discussion into a smaller fold.  
 
So far as the Names are concerned, naturally all the names have literal meanings as they are derived from the language of daily use. Almost all the names have attributes as no parents would like to name their children with unpleasant words. So there seems to be nothing peculiar with names of Messengers having glorious attributes.  
 
Having cleared the point of attributes, I may point out that none of my questions above has been answered.  
 
I am much concerned about the tendency of emphasizing literal meanings of those names as this style creates confusion in understanding the Quranic episodes and the meanings they unfold. Should we exclude all the Messengers from Quranic narration because they are not PERSONS but just attributes. Moreover, there has to be a PERSON to be attributed with ATTRIBUTES. No names means no persons, hence no attributes.  
 
Sorry! And thanks in advance.

Comments by: moazzam On 17 May 2011
Brother Aurangzaib ! Your concern that “Should we exclude all the Messengers from Quranic narration because they are not PERSONS but just attributes. Moreover, there has to be a PERSON to be attributed with ATTRIBUTES. No names means no persons, hence no attributes”(Aurangzaib)  
Yes Brother, for example, “ABU LAHAB “is not the proper noun rather the attribute. plz go to the verses 111/1-3, here a character (may be any person) who will go in the fire of Jahaam and face the consequences written in verses 77/31, 111/3 will called ABU LAHAB.The second example is the attribute HAROOT MAROOT which has also taken by orthodox translators as a proper noun.The third example is animal feel in the phrase ASHAB-E-FEEL.  
The creature (Allah) arranged /set the eternal examples with the definite characters (attributes) to make us understand the divine message, so that mankind may seek appropriate guidance in each era. The mankind ( in their time )have to see the relevant characters in the resembled situation to handle it according to this eternal divine guidance.  
As we know the Alkitab is beyond time and space, which provides eternal guidance for each era.  
Quran al arabiyun mubeen doesn’t mean the book written in ARABIC SECRIPT, rather the self explanatory book easy to understand. The language doesn’t matter , it might be in Chinese or English.  
This ALKITAB (alrooh) , we don’t know how and where the conscious man received it first time(17/85).  
But we have in our hand as it is (in Arabic text.  
 
As far as, second part of your question is concerns as given under.  
” so far as the Names are concerned, naturally all the names have literal meanings as they are derived from the language of daily use. Almost all the names have attributes as no parents would like to name their children with unpleasant words. So there seems to be nothing peculiar with names of Messengers having glorious attributes.”(Aurangzaib).  
You are right Brother, but, remember; Mohammad, Ibraheem,Yousaf (the characters with specific attribute) might have any personal name in their societies like NIKSON, NOOR BAUF, LENON,ABDULLAH.etc.  

Comments by: Junaid2 On 17 May 2011Report Abuse
Salaam;  
 
Brother Moazzam, can you please translate the following verse according to the concept of attributes you are talking about?  
 
قُلْ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ  
وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَٱلْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ  
وَٱلنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُۥ  
مُسْلِمُونَ  
 
I'll be obliged,

Comments by: moazzam On 17 May 2011
Dear Junaid and all Aastana Members! Regards.  
.This is a very mysterious as well as important topic indeed. To know the fact we have to ponder into the Alkitab.  
1:- kindly go to the verse 2/2,2/44,2/53,2,87,2/113 and there are other 232 verses of Quran where you will find the word ALKITAB (the book). This is the same ALKITAB which have been given to every rasool.  
Firstly, it was revealed at the most intellect person in the Adams’s society when Adam existed into full conscious being,but we don’t know when and where it happened because (Alkitab=Alrooh ) see the verse 17/85.  
All the prophets will seek guidance through pondering into this Alkitab , whatever will conceived in their mind will be called NOZOOL- QURAN (wahy), remember the rasool also takes guidance from nature as well.  
The name of rusul mentioned in Alkitab are not proper noun rather, the ATTREBUTES of the characters mentioned in the eternal example set by Allah ,who might be called by any personal name in their societies, and this process will be continued till the end.  
like mohammad,ibrahim,mosa,yahya,noha, etc  
2:- come to the verse 15/9, the ZIKR,and QURAN is the same ALKITAB.  
See the verse 7/145,7/150,7/154, 85/22,54/13 here we find the word “LOHH”this also means the ALKITAB/SUHOF.Now you consolidate these all verses with respect to their context which conclude that the protection of this “ALKITAB” has been under discussion.  
The actual thing is the mentality of the religious leaders in each era, as they always had/has been tried to devastate the divine message as per their wish, for example in the form of INJEEL(BIBLE), TALMOOD, TAURAAT,and this process is still going on.  
 
"Qul, man kaana 'Aduwwan li JIBREELA fa innahu nazzalahu 'ala Qalbika bi Iznillah musaddaqan li maa bayina yadayihi wa Hudan wa Bushra lil Momineen.  
Man kaana 'Aduwwan Lillahi wa MALAAIKATIHI wa Rusulihi wa JIBREELA WA MIKAALA fa innallaha 'Aduwwan lil Kafireen".  
 
قُلْ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ  
وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَٱلْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ  
وَٱلنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُۥ  
مُسْلِمُونَ  
 
THIS NAZOOL IS THE CONCEIVING OF POIS IDEAS IN THE MIND OF ANY RASOOL WHILE PONDERING INTO THIS ALKITAB TO SEEK THE GUIDANCE FOR HIS NATION IN ANY ERA.  
 
 

Comments by: Mubashir Syed On 17 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Maozzam, I agree with this line of thought process, please keep up the good work. And you must be aware that more work has to be done while replacing attributes over names to remove preconcieved ideas which were built by considering them as names.  
 
Thanks,  
Mubashir Syed.

Comments by: Damon On 17 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Moazzam Bhai,  
 
I TRULY and SINCERELY appreciate your hard work and efforts. Please keep up the great work.  
 
Sincerest Regards,  
Damon.

Comments by: Junaid2 On 17 May 2011Report Abuse
I agree with Brother Mubashir and Brother Damon!  
 
Bro moazzam, Thanks for answering my question in such a beautiful manner.  
You really deserve all the appreciation :)

Comments by: Maniza On 18 May 2011
Salam dear brother Moazzam,  
 
i am not in the habit of writing, i only read, and see what goes on in the Blog, but this was just such a marvellous thread and your efforts cannot go un appreciated, i will copy and save your research...  
 
may God bless you  
ps. dont use word creator for Allah :) brings up horrible visions

Comments by: Nargis2 On 18 May 2011Report Abuse
I soo agree, here is a hug from meeee  
 
Even the proper noun “muhammad” is not in the Quran  
By Saim Bakar  
http://biblical-islam.blogspot.com/2009/11/even-proper-noun-muhammad-is-not-in.html  
 
Even the proper noun “muhammad” is not in the Quran  
 
Yes it is true. The proper noun ‘muhammad’ is not found written in the Quran. This means the Quran does not recognise ‘muhammad’ as the name of the Prophet of Islam. This is a very big claim but as usual it is easy to prove this point from the Quran.  
 
 
First here is a simple lesson in arabic. In arabic all proper nouns are prefixed with ‘al’. So in arabic it should be al-muhammad. But there is no ‘al muhammad’ in the Quran. In arabic a proper noun is called an isme ma’rifah. When it is NOT a proper noun, without any prefix “al” then it becomes a simple noun. In arabic a simple noun is known as a nakirah.  
 
But here is the catch : there is no mention of a simple noun ‘muhammad’ in the Quran either. What is found written in the Quran are the adjectives “muhammadoon”, “muhammadeen” and “ahmadoo”. These are all adjectives in the arabic language and are definitely not proper nouns (isme ma’rifah) nor simple nouns (nakirah).  
 
“Muhammadoon” and “muhammaddeen” are adjectives meaning a ‘praiseworthy person’. Similarly ‘ahmadoo’ is an adjective meaning someone ‘who shall be praised’. We will relook all these five verses shortly to see how these adjectives fit perfectly into the context and meaning of these five verses.  
 
How did I stumble upon this? The four verses in the Quran where the scholars misinterpret and mistranslate the adjectives “muhammadoon” and ‘muhammadeen” to become the proper noun ‘muhammad’ are 3:144, 33;40, 48:29 and 47:2. The scholars are being dishonest.  
 
The fifth verse which the scholars misinterpret and mistranslate is 61:6 where the adjective ‘ahmadoo’ is twisted around to become the noun ‘ahmad’. Then they twist the meaning once more by saying that this imaginary noun ‘ahmad’ also refers to ‘muhammad’. So first they magically invent the nouns ‘ahmad’ and ‘muhammad’ from thin air and then say that these created nouns are interchangeable. This is just more dishonesty. The verse 61:6 only mentions the adjective “ahmadoo.”  
 
After undertaking such linguistic gymnastics the scholars say that the Quran has five references to the Prophet’s name. There is no such thing. There are only five different mentions of the adjectives “muhammadoon”, “muhammadeen” and “ahmadoo”.  
 
When I studied the Quran, minus any preconceived notions or prejudices, I realised there was something not right with the traditional understanding of the following verse in the Quran.  
 
33:40 Ma kana muhammadoon abaa’a ahadin min rijaali-kum wa laakin rasoolul laahi wa khaatama al nabiy-yeena wa kaanallaahu bi kulli shay-in aaleeman  
 
Here is the traditional translation by A Yusuf Ali:  
 
33:40 Muhammad is not the father of any of your men (sons), but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.  
 
 
The first question that popped into my head was why would God NOT make the Prophet the father of any sons? Why deny the Prophet the joy of being the father of sons?  
 
Then the scholars say that the Prophet did have one son – Ibrahim – who died as an infant. Even if this story was true, it simply means that this verse in the Quran has been disproven – it becomes a historically false statement because at a point in time in history, the Prophet did have a son.  
 
If the scholars retort that the verse was revealed after the baby Ibrahim had died, it raises even more doubt. Surely God knew he would be revealing this verse at some point in history. So was God condemning the baby Ibrahim to an early death just so that this verse would stand? Asides from trying to potray God as very cruel, it is also illogical.  
 
 
Then I realised that there was no proper noun ‘muhammad’ in this verse at all. ‘Muhammadoon’ is an adjective which means ‘praiseworthy’. Only then the true meaning of the verse fell into place:  
 
33:40 It is not praiseworthy to be the father of sons from among you, but it is so to be the Messenger of God, and to be the last of the Prophets: and God has full knowledge of all things.  
 
Obviously this verse addresses a culture which prefers sons over daughters. Not only Arab but Chinese, Indian and other cultures have a distinct preference for sons over daughters. This verse seeks to correct this misconception. It is not praiseworthy to have sons over daughters. The meaning of this verse then fully tallied with other verses in the Quran which chastises the wicked custom of burying female infants alive. Here are the verses:  
 
81:8 And when the female (infant) buried alive shall be questioned.  
81: 9 For what sin she was killed?  
 
 
So it is not praiseworthy to prefer sons over daughters.  
 
Once I realised this simple truth, the three other verses that mention “muhammadoon” and “muhammadeen” fell into place too.  
 
3:144 : Wa maa muhammadoon illa rasoolun qad khaa-lat min qablihi al rasoolu afaa-in maata au qutila in qalabtum ala iqaa bikum waman yan qalib ala aqi bayhi fa lan yadurra Allaaha shay-an wa sayaj-zee Allahu al shakireena.  
 
Here is the traditional translation by A Yusuf Ali:  
 
3:144 Muhammad is no more than a messenger: Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; but god (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.  
 
 
Here is the more accurate translation:  
 
3:144 There is no (bigger) praiseworthiness than to be a messenger: Many were the messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; and God will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.  
 
 
And here is 48:29  
48:29 Muhammadun rasoolullaahi wallatheena ma’ahu ashaddoo ala alkuffari ruhmaai baynahum tarahum rukka’an sujjadan yabtaghoona fadlan minallaahi wa ridwaanan seemahum fee wujoohihim min athaari as sujoodi thaalika mathaaluhum fee al tawraati wamathaaluhum fee al-injeeli kazara akhraja shataa-hu faazarahu faistaghlatha faistawa ala sooqihi yu aajibi al zura’a li yagheetha bihim al kuffaara wa’adallaahu allatheena aamanoo wa’amiloos saalihaati minhum maghfiratan wa ajran atheeman  
 
 
Again here is Yusuf Ali’s translation:  
 
48:29 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward  
 
Rephrasing just the beginning of this verse, it sounds like this:  
 
48:29 It is praiseworthy indeed to be the messenger of God...  
 
This tallies exactly with verse 3:144 above. Here is the last one which mentions ‘muhammadeen’  
 
47:2 Wal-lathee na amanoo wa’aamiloos saalihaati wa amanoo bimaa nuzzila ala muhammadeen wahuwa al haqqu min rabbihim kaffara anhum sayyi-aa tihim waslaha balaahum  
 
Yusuf Ali translates it as :  
 
47:2 But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition.  
 
The more acccurate translation is : And those who believe and work righteousness and believe in what was sent down upon praiseworthiness – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition.  
 
Finally lets look at the adjective “ahmadu” which is mentioned in 61:6 and which meaning has been twisted to become a noun ‘ahmad’.  
 
61:6 Wa-ith qaala eesa ibnu maryama ya banee isra-eela innee rasoolul laahi ilaykum musaddiqan lima bayna yadayya min al tawraati wamubashiran bi rasoolin ya’tee min ba’dee ismuhu ahmadu falamma jaa ahum bil bayyinaati qaloo haatha sihrun mubeenun  
 
 
Here is A Yusuf Ali’s translation :  
 
61:6 And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!  
 
Here first I would like to show you two other translations of this verse by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall and Rashad Khalifa.  
 
Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall : And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One. Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic.  
 
 
Rashad Khalifa : Recall that Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O Children of Israel, I am GOD's messenger to you, confirming the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be even more praised." Then, when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, "This is profound magic."  
 
Please note that both Pickthall and Khalifa do not use any noun form “ahmad” – because they both acknowledge that it is not a noun. They stick to the adjective ‘ahmadu’.  
 
Then in 2009 Professor Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a native German born Muslim and a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Munster in Germany made a statement that was quite startling to many people. Professor Kalisch said that there was no evidence to support the existence of a historical “Prophet Muhammad”. I did smile when I first read this. Here is an English translation of an extract from Professor Kalisch’s paper.  
 
 
 
Up to some time ago I was convinced that Muhammad was a historical figure. Although I always based my thinking on the assumption that the Islamic historical narrative regarding Muhammad was very unreliable, I had no doubts that at least the basic lines of his biography were historically correct.  
 
I have now moved away from this position and will soon publish a book in which I will, among other things, comment on this question and explain my arguments in more detail. This essay is only a short summary of my most important arguments. It also deals with the question of what implications historical-critical research has for the Islamic theory and how I deal with my research results as a theologian.  
 
With regard to the historical existence of Muhammad ... I consider my position simply as a continuation of the most recent research results. It appears so spectacular only because it has been said by a Muslim ... Most Western scientists turn down such an hypotheses out of respect for Islam or because they are afraid of the reactions of their Muslim friends or because they think it is speculative nonsense.  
 
 
 
The word "respect" sounds wonderful but it is completely inappropriate here because one really refers to the opposite. Whoever thinks that Muslims can't deal with facts puts Muslims on the same level as small children who can't think and decide for themselves and whose illusions of Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny one doesn't want to destroy.  
 
Whoever really bases his thoughts on the equality of all human beings must expect the same intellectual performance. Really treating Muslims with respect would imply that they are strong enough to deal with their religion on the basis of our modern level of knowledge. "Islamophobes" think we Muslims are barbarians, the "kind-hearted" take us for "noble savages"... The result is the same: Muslims are seen as different from the rest of the world -- they either belong in a "petting zoo" or in cages for wild animals, but by all means they belong in a zoo.  
 
The final argument is even more awful because it can only be described as cowardly. Religious fundamentalists are spreading out (not only Islamic fundamentalist) and freedom of thought must be defended no matter what. There must not be any compromise on this otherwise we set the track for a retreat into the Middle Ages and this can happen much faster than many people think.  
 
 
 
My position with regard to the historical existence of Muhammad is that I believe neither his existence nor his non-existence can be proven. I, however, lean towards the non-existence but I don't think it can be proven. It is my impression that, unless there are some sensational archeological discoveries -- an Islamic "Qumran" or "Nag Hammadi" -- the question of Muhammad's existence will probably never be finally clarified.  
 
Some people have said that by denying the name ‘Muhammad’ I am denying the very existence itself of a Prophet of Islam. I beg to differ. There was a Messenger or Rasool sent to us who was also a Prophet or Nabi. He was no doubt an Arab because he delivered to us the Quran which is in Arabic. We therefore cannot deny that God did send a Messenger. But his name was not Muhammad – at least not in the Quran.  
 
 
Is the identity of the Messenger important? Lets listen to the Quran (4:163-166)  
 
4:163 We have inspired you, as we inspired Noah and the prophets after him. And we inspired Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, the Patriarchs, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon. And we gave David the Psalms.  
 
4:164 Messengers we have told you about, and messengers we never told you about. And GOD spoke to Moses directly.  
 
4:165 Messengers to deliver good news, as well as warnings. Thus, the people will have no excuse when they face GOD, after all these messengers have come to them. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.  
 
4:166 But GOD bears witness concerning what He has revealed to you; He has revealed it with His knowledge. And the angels bear witness as well, but GOD suffices as witness  
 
God lists many Messengers or Rasools who were despatched to mankind. Noah, Abraham, Ismail, Jacob, Jesus were just some of them. But in 4:164 above, God says that there were also other messengers “we have told you about, and messengers we never told you about.”  
 
 
So the exact history and identities of all the Messengers is not important. What is really important is the content of the message which the Messengers brought. This is made clear in 4:165 and 4:166 above. “Thus, the people will have no excuse when they face GOD, after all these messengers have come to them. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise”.  
 
Whether we know the Messenger’s identity or not, the message has been delivered. We, the people have no more excuse. And all the Messengers from Abraham, Moses right down to the last Messenger have delieverd the same message. Here is the Quran:  
 
87:18 Surely this was also recorded in the earlier books.  
 
87:19 The books of Abraham and Moses.  
 
So the teachings of the Quran are exactly the same as what was revealed to Abraham and Moses. This is simple logic – the same God cannot be teaching different things to different people. The Message is certainly more important than the messenger.  
 

Comments by: aurangzaib On 18 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Moazzam Bhai,  
 
I could never dream that to ask a few simple questions would become so frightful on this blog so soon, and would raise a mount of irrelevant philosophical output.  
 
I withdraw my simple questions in utter disappointment and would approach someone else who could understand the point and just simply answer them.  
 
Best regards.

Comments by: Mubashir Syed On 18 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Maozzam and All, we very well know bout science of history and we can’t rely on history as it can be fabricated in the interest of people in power over a period of time.  
 
This fact must have been known by people who lived 1400 years back. So too they might have not been relying on events occurring hundreds of years back like Noah, Ibrahim, Moses, Isa….etc  
 
Note : Just a thought……..these guys must be around all the time( Good line of thought process to work on.)  
 
Thanks,  
Mubashir Syed.

Comments by: William On 19 May 2011Report Abuse
Brother Moazzam,  
 
I read this earlier on today, but didn't have a chance to comment!  
 
Just want to say you've done a good job! Some extensive research has clearly been done! Great effort!  
 
Thank you for the detailed info!  
 
William  
 

Comments by: moazzam On 19 May 2011
Brother Aurangzaib ! Sorry for not to come up at your satisfaction. The input was given as per my limited knowledge. Correction in this regards will be highly appreciated.Thanks.

Comments by: aurangzaib On 19 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Moazzam Bhai,  
 
You know, we together, are following the same trail of learning.  
So, it's of no consequence if we arrive at a stalemate upon the sharp focus of some questions.  
We must stand united with solidarity disregarding any 'promptings' that have caused an ugly display on one of the threads.  
At your service always.

Comments by: dawood On 20 May 2011Report Abuse
Dear Moazzam Bhai, SA: Thank you for your exhaustive work. May Allah bless you. For my understanding, I would still refer you back to Br. Aurangzeb's comments and questions. A fundamental dilemma is that the "PHYSICAL" book that we hold in our hands and commnly call it "ALQURAN" was written by an individual? It did not fall from the sky in its present form. It may not be of any consequence to know the exact name of the exalted personality that received, conceived, and wrote this book, yet, that personality cannot be divirced from this reality. I don't understand as to what is the problem with various names? In fact, a good example is an example that is concrete and not abstract, because majority of us has a problem in understanding the abstract concepts.  
 
When you write the following:  
 
"قُلْ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ  
وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَٱلْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ  
وَٱلنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُۥ  
مُسْلِمُونَ  
THIS NAZOOL IS THE CONCEIVING OF POIS IDEAS IN THE MIND OF ANY RASOOL WHILE PONDERING INTO THIS ALKITAB TO SEEK THE GUIDANCE FOR HIS NATION IN ANY ERA," Are you suggesting that it could be any RASOOL without names? If this verse can refer to general RASOOLs, how and why it cannot refer to particular RASOOLS that it is in fact talking about????

Comments by: moazzam On 20 May 2011
Dear Dawood, Aastana Members!  
A fundamental dilemma is that the "PHYSICAL" book that we hold in our hands and commonly call it "ALQURAN" was written by an individual? It did not fall from the sky in its present form.(dawwod)  
Moazzam: I, Agree at the said dilemma, therefore I tolled in my previous post that, this is a mystery (Wama utitum minal ilm-e- illa qalila). Yes every one is free to dig into history along with the support of anthropologists to solve it.  
It may not be of any consequence to know the exact name of the exalted personality that received, conceived, and wrote this book(Dawood)  
Moazzam: Yes, this is what I say.  
Yet, that personality cannot be divirced from this reality.(Dawuud)  
Moazzam: You are right, there should be a personality among the societies no matter with any calling NAMES and blood line.  
I don't understand as to what is the problem with various names? (dawood)  
Moazzam :The problem arises when CHARACTERS with their specified ATTRIBUTS taken into the proper noun, therefore this eternal book becomes confined in space and time, and reflects the sense of predestined play at the earth (all preplanned events) ,which ultimately devastates the fundamental core message, and negates its eternity.  
 
 
You write the following (Dawood)  
 
"قُلْ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ  
وَإِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَٱلْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَآ أُوتِىَ مُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ  
وَٱلنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُۥ  
مُسْلِمُونَ  
THIS NAZOOL IS THE CONCEIVING OF POIS IDEAS IN THE MIND OF ANY RASOOL WHILE PONDERING INTO THIS ALKITAB TO SEEK THE GUIDANCE FOR HIS NATION IN ANY ERA," Are you suggesting that it could be any RASOOL without names? If this verse can refer to general RASOOLs, how and why it cannot refer to particular RASOOLS that it is in fact talking about????  
 
Moazzam: I meant, that, the guidance/truth seeker should see and find out that personality in his society, who may possesses the specified attribute of the specified CHARACTER mentioned in ALKITAB like Noh, Moses, Mohammad, Dawood, Ibrahim etc. Because, this divine book used these characters as an example till the last day.  
 
 
 

Comments by: dawood On 20 May 2011Report Abuse
Thank you Br. MOazzam for your kind reply. I would still request your input as to "what is the criterion based upon which you decided that these are attributes and not names?" Which particular verse points us in that direction? Thank you once more.

Comments by: Nargis On 20 May 2011Report Abuse
 
 
is it possible that Muhammad is a quality or character, that any human being could acquire if he follows the Quran?Or Moses, Abraham, Eesa, etc?  
 
Because if it is IMPOSSIBLE for others to develop these characters, then these attributes/characters are only subject to al Rusuls, but if they are not unachievable properties, then these attributes can easily serve as descriptions of certain types of personalities / character  
 
One can not become a different person physically, but one can develop his / her properties,character ...  
 
Is it just me who thinks it's weird that "prophets" mentioned in the Quran are told about in relations to issues they solved? And their task to solve is luckily reproduced and described in their "name"..(I mean where is the information about their customs, eating habits, friends, family, background ?maybe its not important because "Mohammeds" that comes every 2000 years, may have similar characters, but everything else is possibly different? cough cough)  
 
How did S Mohammed's mother know that he will be the the praised one ? She named him Mohammed and just suddenly and completely random, he BECAME Mohammed through his achievments? Same with Maryam, S Eesa, S Yahia etc,, what a a coincidence...  
 
But it is certainly difficult for many to imagine that the prophet is a human being who have developed these nobel characters which s possible for others too ...If you have seen Dances with Wolves (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMOQORiWn80) you can see WHEN and WHY he is named Dances with wolves...
 

Comments by: dawood On 21 May 2011Report Abuse
SA Dear Sister: Syedna Muhammad’s mother did not name him Muhammad. If history is any guide, his given name was Ahmad. He became known as Muhammad due to his deeds. His other attributes were AMEEN, SADIQ, etc. This is, however, history, true or false? Take it or leave it, who cares.  
In general, people name their offspring with names having good meanings. The probability that a person’s name has good meanings is much higher than a person having a name with bad meanings.  
Secondly, what purpose can be achieved by omitting the name of a person while retaining the attributes? In fact, it makes a good example if one could show with specificity that person X had such and such attributes. More specifically, which verse tells us that these are attributes and not the names?  
Just as an example, please read Dr. QZ’s book “Mujezaat-e-Musa.” It’s a fascinating work, clearly showing that MUSA was name of a person. Of course, this person had many attributes, not just one.  

Comments by: UmeAimon On 21 May 2011Report Abuse
Salam,  
 
Good points brother Dawood. Also a rasool should have many many good attributes. Actually all the good one.  
But in the end the point that needs to be emphasized on is tht we need not make it too important of a point as whether its a name or an attribute...as its the message that is relevant and needs to be concentrated on not the messenger.  
 
kisi sayanay ne kaha hai ...ye na dekho kon keh raha hia, ye dekho k kia keh raha hai.  
(mubaiyana tor pe haarat Ali jo k mubaiyana tor pe aik messenger ke damad thay)  
 
If we follow this philosophy most will be spared from wasting time in manyyyyy useless discussions..  
 
regards  
 
UmeAimon

Comments by: Nargis2 On 21 May 2011Report Abuse
Brother Dawood :-  
 
"He became known as Muhammad due to his deeds."  
 
 
HAH, so you admit it’s a reference to the DEEDS,,,& not a birth name....  
 
Do you think these deeds are unachievable by other human beings?  
 
If it is, then how come other "Mohammeds" are not included in the description, how do we know about others who became Mohammed duo to their deeds?  
 
Is the Quran limited to few parts of the history, or is beyond time and space?  
 
Is it talking about human nature and how it works when it operate as abu lahb, abu jahl, Moses, Eesa, Adam, Iblees, Abraham or Mohammed, or is it talking about actual people who did what they did as quirky and unique onetime occurrences?If Iblees and Shaitaan are not Demons but still alive as a part of human nature, then why can’t Adam, Noh, Abraham Moses and Mohammed accepted to be alive as characters (possible to achieve)?
 

Comments by: moazzam On 21 May 2011
Dear Dawood, Junaid Bhai : There is difference between "QASES" and "ASATEER" read the following points to be cleared from chaos.  
1) Qises = the set forth example of some characters with their attributes, to give the alive message in a more elaborated way. See the veses3/62, 7/176, 12/3, 12/111.  
Read the sense of verses2/178-179, here, it is made realized, that IN ALL TYPES OF DISPUTED MATTERS AMONG YOU, we have written down (obligatory) for you "THE QASES "(set forth stories, examples) from all aspects of life. Whatever relevant details in th the Qases has been left, is by our grace,so you have to follow the best conventional rules of the societies to solve your disputes. This is the leniency for you from your sustainer.  
Mind; any sort of aggression from any side will be treated harshly (tormented).  
Qisas written in verse 5/45 means some thing given in penalty (Badla) against any sort of damage of same nature.  
ASATEER = Means physically happened past events in history. Remember the Kuffar of the time used to claim ,that these Qases of Quran are nothing, axcept, the Asateer al awaleen, see the verses 16/24, 6/25, 8/31, 27/68.  

Comments by: Nargis2 On 21 May 2011Report Abuse
Brother Dawood said take it or leave it “Who cares”?  
 
why no1 cares if we believe in and add concepts regarding Allah and rusools as told in history, when it is not proven to be true, and not approved by the Quran itself?  
 
The harm done by these "history" bed time stories have made Muqame Ibrahim into a dead stone, and thus NOT something everyone should strive to achieve..  
 
*It made a beneficial socioeconomic system into a boring destructive namaz, and as a result, the system is ignored and not implemented...  
 
* History made Riba into interest so every other harming system which illegally INCREASE the wealth of few selected ppl, is not taken into account  
 
*History made khamr into beer, so the real khamr that constantly block your senses and leads to stagnation, is ignored.  
 
*History made protection into flogging,  
 
*history made Soum into fasting, so people wasted their time on fasting instead of working hard to achieve the desired result as muttaqi.  
 
* History made black cube into Gods house, which resulted in a funny but sad scenario, that people dressed up like clowns started to kiss Allats black stone, Instead of getting buzy with the required work to establish human rights, they are getting dizzy by running around the so called house 7 times.  
 
*History made Jannat into bordell , and Jahannum into a hell  
 
Because of this,How many people lost their right to know the actual truth in the Quran, how many people lost their opportunity to develop, how many people are victims of mental bondage, how many people are lost because of these fairy tales named history?  
 
So take it or leave it, who cares? YOU and I along with EVERYONE should care.  
 
When human beings disagree with their strong views, they will adopt new information. Perfection is in the development  
 
Book is the WRITTEN form, but it’s not enough to know Arabic or grammar to understand it, but we also need HIKMA WISDOM to understand it.  
 
Try math, you know the letters and characters,1 2 3, +-*/,,,but when they works as a task given in algebra, you need SENSE, UNDERSTANDING and PERCEPTION to PENETRATE the core of this task and solve it…(and with these skills ,maybe create Bruj Al Arab, pyramids, Eiffel tower etc. ) Same goes with the Quran, it’s in written form, and senses are needed to understand its core, HIKMAT WISDOM is the required skill to solve its task and understand its message. If it’s beyond time and space, then every word should be beyond time and space.  
 
Take it HELL NO  
 
or  
 
Leave it, LIKE HELL I WILL  
 
Everyone should care and pull their hair.
 
 
 

Comments by: dr shahid On 21 May 2011
Assamualaikum brother Moazzam  
i very much appriciate you for your hard work which you have done on Quranic terminologieis which had been changed and replaced by the so called orthodox translators rather i would say the kuffars. i do agree with you that all the names which are used by the translators as proper noun are the attributes/the status/posts in modern language  
you are the real assets for this blog.After quite along time i could spare some time to come at this blog and i saw your post, i could not resist myself to write somthing to appriciate you

Comments by: moazzam On 22 May 2011
THANK YOU DR SHAHID FOR ENCOURAGEMENT.

Comments by: dawood On 23 May 2011 Edit DeleteReport Abuse
Dear Sister Nargis: I have come to your post little late. For sake of saving some time, please refer to the following. It may answer (or may generate) some of your questions:  
http://www.aastana.com/blog/aastanablog.asp?MID=3&SID=29&QID=1281&MSG=

»«
OTHER QUESTIONS ON
HADITH KEY NAM PE DHOKA KIYOUN?
SA: I cannot read or download "Hadith Key Nam pe Dhoka Kiyoun?" The link is inactive, please correct it. Question by: dawood On 05/01/2010
 
Salam I could open this book.Please give me guidance. Question by: Rehan_Khan From INDIA (BHOPAL) On 19/01/2010
 
Sir, can you prove the wording mentioned on page # 21before the Heading of "AAhadees ke Purane Nuskhein" Question by: Adnan Khan On 09/03/2010
 
dear qamar zaman i have just readbook hadith ka nam par dhoka in which at the end you write that the suras and every thing of quran was arranged by the prophet himself.and since his age quran is in the book form.plz give proof.God bles u Question by: bilal_khan5181 From PAKISTAN On 24/06/2010
 
Dear All, Please Tell me about S Moses and his stick turning to a snake . tell me about the story in detail. Explain it to me as im 2 years old, so nothing is missed out. (im a bit slow:(:)) Question by: Nargis2 From TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO (TOMBACCO) On 04/11/2010
 
Peace upon u all. according to Arabic grammar ASSALAM U ALEKUM is to greet more than 2 people as u know 2 is not plural in arabic its rather TASNIAH, which means 2, so how come plural greetings to a single or 2 persons? Question by: hameedkhattak From PAKISTAN (PESHAWER) On 27/12/2010
 
Members pls explain Quran 5:51! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people Question by: Saeed From PAKISTAN (KARACHI(MSAEEDTAJ@GMAIL.COM)) On 22/05/2011
 
Comments...
Blog Home Question Explorer Member's Area Mission & Vision Join AASTANABLOG
© 2006-2010 Aastana e Research and Understanding Quran. All Rights Reserved
www.aastana.com