Allah's failure to communicate.

[KWED]

is Islam defined according to what Quran and Hadith says or it is defines as what the majority of Muslims define it?

By the contents of the Quran and sunnah, obviously. Otherwise you are saying that people's subjective choices are more important than the word of god.
Yet more shirk.

 

[stevecanuck]

No problem. God had manifested in Muhammad. God manifests in His messengers. So, when the Quran says, not make any distinction between God and His Messenger is because, while God is God, and Muhammad is Muhammad, yet, God has chosen to be manfested in Muhammad.
Here is Hadith, so, you know I'm not making things up:

"Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Whosoever shows enmity to someone devoted to Me, I shall be at war with him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks."

The Hadith tells us, God can become every part of a person's body. So, in this sense there is no distinction between God and His Messenger, and here is the evidence from the Quran:

"And you did not kill them, but it was Allah who killed them. And you threw not, [O Muhammad], when you threw, but it was Allah who threw that He might test the believers with a good test. Indeed, Allah is Hearing and Knowing" 8:17

This verse says, when Muhammad threw shafts at enemies, it was not Muhammad, but it was God who threw, meaning, Muhammad and God are the same in this sense that the Will of God became manifested from the person of Muhammad.

That was a brilliant job of mixing the literal with the figurative. Allah frequently uses that sort of phrasing, but only in the sense that he's the conductor - not an embodiment of the person doing his bidding. That was a metaphor, and you know it.

 

[KWED]

You aren't explaining much. Was Yahya and Isa successors of Musa per Quran and hadiths?

There was no political succession there, so no.
Are you claiming that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman did not succeed Muhammad?

 

[Link]

There was no political succession there, so no.
Are you claiming that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman did not succeed Muhammad?

So let us see what Mohammad (s) said and what he meant.

The Holy Prophet said, "Bani Israel, prophets were leading them; when a prophet died another prophet succeeded him. But after me there will be no prophet; there will be Caliphs (successors)." (Saheeh Bukhari Kitab-ul-Manaqib).

So this is one of the hadiths that give context to what is meant by succession.

The king that killed Yahya (a) to you would have succeeded Musa (a) (A king who derives his authority from God) while Yahya (a) would not be, because he was not supported by popular support.

I will quote verses and more hadiths later. I'll await what you say about this.

 

[stevecanuck]

My bad, there is a third miracle which is about the giant boulders he threw but this partially in Quran "You did not throw when you threw but God threw", but the details of the extent of the size of what he threw is in Sunnah (hadiths).

This is where I drop the mic and walk off the stage. This thread is all about Allah's failure to communicate. As absolute proof of that, we have you in post #160 saying Mohamed threw "giant boulders", while @InvestigateTruth in post #135 claims he threw "shafts", with both of you quoting verse 8:17. Clear signs? What a joke. I'll leave it to you two to duke it out. I'll be over here eating popcorn.

 

[Link]

There was no political succession there, so no.
Are you claiming that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman did not succeed Muhammad?

What is truly a political power (because power is a relationship in our heads, and is abstract) is debated intellectually among the deepest thinkers and is not agreed upon. The Quran also says "exalted be God the True King". There are false kings and true kings. Of course a false king is a king in a sense people take him as king same way "gods" are gods in the sense that people do worship them. There is only one God per Quran, meaning all gods are not truly gods except for the True One God. The true King is God and so those who he appoints are true kings by his authority.

This can be seen in how Quran has talked about kings appointed by God as a favor.

 

[Link]

This is where I drop the mic and walk off the stage. This thread is all about Allah's failure to communicate. As absolute proof of that, we have you in post #160 saying Mohamed threw "giant boulders", while @InvestigateTruth in post #135 claims he threw "shafts", with both of you quoting verse 8:17. Clear signs? What a joke. I'll leave it to you two to duke it out. I'll be over here eating popcorn.

@InvestigateTruth may not know the history regarding it. I'm not sure for his reasons.

 

[stevecanuck]

It's okay. I'll let you digest it over sometime, then we can discuss it. The mind doesn't like unknowing what it thinks it knows. Because it has to build and rebuild. But in time, inshallah, you will understand.

I see I've forced you to resort to paternalistic condescension in lieu of actual rebuttal. You have no response and it shows.

 

[Link]

I see I've forced you to resort to paternalistic condescension in lieu of actual rebuttal. You have no response and it shows.

You didn't respond to the content of that post. Just dismissed it. And so I said it's okay, I will give you time, and inshallah when you digest the content, we can discuss it.

 

[stevecanuck]

@InvestigateTruth may not know the history regarding it. I'm not sure for his reasons.

Don't you understand that it doesn't matter? If Allah's "signs" are "clear", then it simply shouldn't matter if a person knows the history or not. YET AGAIN you prove the OP.

 

[Link]

Don't you understand that it doesn't matter? If Allah's "signs" are "clear", then it simply shouldn't matter if a person knows the history or not. YET AGAIN you prove the OP.

It's clear, you are mixing the details (not found) with it being unclear. The details don't need to be there for it to be clear.

 

[stevecanuck]

You didn't respond to the content of that post. Just dismissed it. And so I said it's okay, I will give you time, and inshallah when you digest the content, we can discuss it.

And .......... he's doubles down on his condescension in lieu of argument.

 

[Link]

And .......... he's doubles down on his condescension in lieu of argument.

Pot and Kettle classic.

 

[stevecanuck]

It's clear, you are mixing the details (not found) with it being unclear. The details don't need to be there for it to be clear.

Okay, now you're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Link]

Okay, now you're just embarrassing yourself.

.... so embarrassed you have no idea.

 

[KWED]

So let us see what Mohammad (s) said and what he meant.

The Holy Prophet said, "Bani Israel, prophets were leading them; when a prophet died another prophet succeeded him. But after me there will be no prophet; there will be Caliphs (successors)." (Saheeh Bukhari Kitab-ul-Manaqib).

So this is one of the hadiths that give context to what is meant by succession.

So, are you saying that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman did or did not not succeed Muhammad?

The king that killed Yahya (a) to you would have succeeded Musa (a) (A king who derives his authority from God) while Yahya (a) would not be, because he was not supported by popular support.

No idea what you are trying to say here. There was over 1000 years between Moses and John the Baptist/Herod. Neither can be considered to have succeeded Moses. John never claimed to be a king. As usual, you seem to be confusing yourself.

BTW, most kings throughout history claimed to derive their authority from a god or gods.

 

[Link]

So, are you saying that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman did or did not not succeed Muhammad?

They did not.

 

[Link]

The hadith says that Islam will flourish under 12 caliphs.
It doesn't say that only those caliphs can interpret the Quran.
Also, the 12 caliphs after Muhammad are not the "12 imams" of Shiism.

It doesn't flourish. It uses the word "EZA" which means it will remain honorable. The Sunni explanations shows Sunnis and their scholars to be hypocrites per Quran and Surah hyporcites with Prophet (s) calculating his words, has exposed them.

I wrote this in signs of eloquence of Quran:

Salam

Surah Hypocrites is a miracle to me big time. And it's how the nature of Sunnah and Quran compliment each other in exposing hypocrisy.

I will start with the point that hypocrites don't understand that honor belongs to God, Messenger, and believers. It might seem anyone who reads Quran, understands this. It's repeated through out that believers are honorable in God's eyes and disbelievers disgraced.

However, we see Prophet (s) said to Ali (a) "No one will love you except a believer and no one will hate you except a hypocrite" (hadith found in authentic sunni sources).

No one of hypocrites today is going to admit they hate Ali (a). But it comes out, and no one will say "honor doesn't belong to believers", but it comes out.

Prophet (s) said "This affair won't cease to be honorable having Twelve Successors who will exercise authority over the nation"

The meaning of "eza" which Surah Munafiqoon is shown to belong exclusively to God, Messenger and believers. It's get often translated as "glorious" in the Sunni translations of these hadiths.

To deny that Ali (a), Hassan (a), Hussain (a)... to Al-Mahdi (a), are the twelve successors, they say, that believers and Islam was in a state of disgrace in Shiism according to Shiism.

In this way, they are giving honor to Yazid and crooks like him, and denying it from believers like Surah Hypocrites show they don't understand.

The other feature is they measure honor of Islam through richness, materialistic measures, and showing mighty military power and conquering other nations (unjustly or justly, doesn't matter to them).

This another thing of this Surah, it exposes, they are materialistic. Of course, hypocrites say they love God and will pray outwardly, but when tested with this hadith (Twelve Caliphs), they fail the test to see treasurer and true honorable sustenance and richness lies in God's light, power and connecting to him while being aloof from Dunya.

Another it exposes is they are against Tawasul. During Prophet (s) time, they would not come to him to ask forgiveness for them. But these arrogant hypocrites of our time, of course, will come up with an excuse. He is dead and it's shirk to talk to dead they say. This is despite Salah taught by Prophet (s) - Muslims were taught to address the Prophet directly "Peace be upon you O Prophet".

Understand how Prophet (s) calculated the words of Twelve Successors - honor - authority.

Hate of Ali (a) comes out when they deny him as first of these Twelve Successors based on what we see is hypocrisy per this Surah. It also comes out when they go against Tawasul through Ali (a) and seeking Ali (a) as mediator.

 

[KWED]

They did not.

They did. That is an historical fact. You are just talking your usual delusional nonsense.
I remember now why I stopped engaging with you.
Good day to you sir.

 

[Link]

They did. That is an historical fact. You are just talking your usual delusional nonsense.
I remember now why I stopped engaging with you.
Good day to you sir.

You helped me see how Surah Munafiqoon is a miracle when coupled with these hadiths. Good day to you too.