• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Name of God vs Titles of God


Veteran Member
Premium Member
A name is a title, but a title isn't a necessarily a name.

Ar-Rahman, Allah, etc, are all titles of God. They don't a difference whether we address Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) or Rahman (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), because to him belongs the beautiful names and titles. However, what is meant in Quran by asmallah al-husna, is beautiful names, not titles. So they don't refer to "Allah" "Arahman" which are titles. Some titles are not absolute. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) means that which is worthy of Worship, and that includes all titles of perfection. But say he lacked a perfection as a Creator, still none would be compared to him, and he would still be Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). So Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) despite what everyone says is not a comprehensive name. In theory you can be the only God but lack a trait of glory or perfection. In reality Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is above lacking perfection, but the name "Allah" does not imply that.

Khomeini would say all titles include all other titles and descriptions but this is not true. The complete beautiful names he thought referred to 'Arahman' 'Allah' in the aya is saying, it doesn't matter what titles you call God, because you only describe him by titles and know him through his beautiful names. Now Husna means there is no beauty or adornment that these names of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) don't have. It's this reason that Khomeini (q) would say the titles are all touring complete in encompassing the glory of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and beauty, they imply all other names. From the viewpoint that he is One (Ahad), all descriptions are describing the same glory. But the titles themselves forgetting that, doesn't describe it. The titles themselves however are not all comprehensive, nor all beautiful, unless, you keep in mind unity of God and know him to absolute highest essence with no division and that he is full of all blessings, beauty, glory, power, honor, etc.

It's keeping in mind the glory and beauty at the essence is undivided, that Ar-Rahman describes the same glory as Ar-Raheem or even the opposite Severe in punishment. But none of them are complete descriptions of that glory and this was a mistake by Khomeini , the titled is the one with all high attributes and descriptions, but the attributes they differ, and even some are more essential to know about God then others.

What is meant by "entirely beautiful names" is not titles, but the words of God spoken to life, which are the Imams (a).

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in fact has no name, he has many titles, and has chosen his name and face as a metaphor, he has chosen that to be a reference to himself since they are completely his light.

This is what is meant by God's words "in families/households that God permitted to be risen and his name remembered therein".

The holy spirit/face of God/name of God is all referring to the same truth.

Titles of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) are just descriptions of him in words, but none of them are complete in themselves nor all beautiful but rather are limited, in words of Imam Sajjad (a) "attributes go astray regarding you".


Active Member
Interesting ideas. Words are labels. They are imperfect labels that we associate with things that objectively exist in reality, as well as conceptual ideas we might have.

A word can never equate to the thing it describes, just like a map is an imperfect representation that can never equate to the land it describes. Without the words or the map, the objective things would continue to exist. However, without people and our thoughts, the conceptual ideas we imagine and label would not exist, and I think gods fall into this imaginary category, not the category of objective objects.