The Koranic Deceptive 'Proper Names'

[The Cat]

The Koranic Deceptive 'Proper Names'

This will be a revised and completed version of the following thread:
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5978
(Note: Since comments aren't welcome herein, they should be made over there. Thanks...)

The problems of the deception from the Koranic 'proper names' are just as fundamentals as they are numerous. They include such terms as
'Allah', 'Islam', 'Koran', 'Muhammad', 'Qibla', 'Zakat' and 'Salat', 'Mecca', 'Quraysh', 'Ka'aba', 'al-Masjid', 'Deen' (or Din).... just to name a few!
In Arabic there's no capital to determine a proper name from a common one. To indicate such differentiation it uses 'ism' instead. This,
in turns, came down to deliver an excessive amount of HUGE falsifications when wronly translated/understood.

This thread will cover some of the most prominent mistakes, starting with the words 'Allah' and the 'Koran' itself, which never was written
as a title (a proper name) but as a generic for religious lecturing, or reading (from the Syriac quryan, of the same meaning). Many of these
falsifications imply shirk as they are blasphemous to the One God and the spirit of His revelations. So Muslims are utterly concerned here.


1. Is 'Allah' a proper name or a generic for The One G-d?

By now it's the actual controversy going on in Malaysia. Do Islamists have an imprimatur on this?
viewtopic.php?p=96081#p96081
This is at the bottom of the controversy that happened recently in Malaysia, where Christians were prohibited to use this name.
In reality, it comes down to incorporate God as a registered trademark, a product. It becomes like let say Coka Co'Allah Inc. !
It transforms the Eternal Almighty (whatever its name) into an object, no worthier than any other one. An industrial delusion...

http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/20 ... nite-name/

The understanding of “Allah” as a proper name reminds us of the perception of the Europeans when they first became acquainted with Islam. Because of their inadequate knowledge of Arabic they considered Allah “to be the name of the idol worshiped by the Mohammedans”. Every Muslim would, of course, feel offended by such an expression. Unfortunately, such a misunderstanding persists precisely because some people continue to those hold the view that”Allah” is a proper name.........

Saying “the” God (Allah) makes it clear who is meant. If he would need a proper name to distinguish him from other gods (âliha) then he would not longer be perceived as the only true one. If Allah is considered to be a proper name, this would imply that there are other gods with comparable proper names. Such would be the case among human beings: All are human, but all have their proper names because there are many. If there were only one human, it would suffice to call him just Adam (= human being). This one human then does not need a proper name.

Imposing a linguistic taboo that bans the use of the word Allah by non-Muslims is an act that offends the sensitivity of non-Muslims. The ban is even more unacceptable given the fact that the use of Allah is a long established linguistic phenomenon in the history of these Arabic speaking communities – long before even Muslims appeared on the stage of history.

Even the Koran acknowledges that 'Allah' had a Christian past...
22.40: Those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is Allah -
For had it not been for Allah's repelling some men by means of others, cloisters and churches and oratories
and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft mentioned, would assuredly have been pulled down....

In the hope of saving lives and troubles in Malaysia or elsewhere, upon a form of idolatry...
viewtopic.php?p=96321#p96321

Once a formidable Christian theologian, Nicholas of Kues (1401-1464) in his work 'De Docta Ignorancia' (Of Learned Ignorance), came
with the best definition for G-d I have yet encountered. He said that God is ''That in which opposites co-exist''! But a sectarian Allah
couldn't match this, so more and more Muslims are getting aware that this thing about Allah as a proper name is bound to reflect as
'The idol of the Muhammadans'... instead of the intended embodiment of The One!

As a proper name 'Allah' would be equated with any sectarian deity, any tribal leading god, like the Edomite 'Kaus'. By its proper
name he ceases to be the Supreme Being of All, a specific reference to The All, to become the Islamic tribal divinity, loosing its
universal belonging. The sectarian Allah cannot anymore be said of anything infinite, since he has been identified with a finite
wording. Allah is classified information, a registered trademark like: Allah Inc. Worse still: this 'Allah' would lose all affinities
with the Biblical G-d and its recognized prophets, including Abraham and Moses, so going against a flock of Koranic statements!

http://www.submission.org/allah-god.html

Insisting on the use of the word "Allah" which is the Arabic word for God immediately creates the illusion that "Allah" is a whole different
deity than God of the whole world. It creates a god that belongs ONLY to the Muslims, and takes the universality of Islam out of it.

In Turkey the word 'Tengri' was in use as well as Allah to talk about the ultimate G-d, without problems...
So in the Malay language Allah -is- Tuhan... just like it is Anla in Chinese, Allach in Russian or Anax for the Serbian Muslims!

To Muslims...
Let's say I concede on this. Now, do you only realize that by taking out its universality you put Allah on par with Allat,
Zeus, Humbaba and the Flying Spaghetti! That the whole operation transforms Allah into Muhammad's idol, going against
the very message of your Holy Book! So go ahead and shirk heartfully. You might as well worship 'Bob' as any Robert!

If you consider Allah as a proper name then, that Arabic tribal divinity has indeed three daughters and Muslims have no more ground
to refute this. Allah, by the necessity of its proper name, become linguistically associated with Allat, nothing lest! Now deal with it!

Your 'Allah', as a proper name, is no more the Koranic Allah and, of necessity, to be associated with Hubal as another proper name
and not with Ha-Baal, which is simply a recognized generic for 'Lord'. By way of consequences, all Christian bibles must therefore be
edited to rule out 'Allah' as a universal generic for God and the Turkish people must also expurgate 'Tanri' as a Turkish equivalent...

I could go for that: it becomes Muslims' HUGE problem. Not mine... There are some fatwas lost.

Allah is basically a contraction of Il-Ilah
viewtopic.php?p=96634#p96634

Al-Ilaah........ and......... Allah.


______________________
On the Pre-Islamic Allah.

'Kaus is Allah' an Edomite stele dated 750BC (in the time of Tiglath-Pileser III)
viewtopic.php?p=98775#p98775

The Zebed inscription; the Koranic Al-A'la and Al-Ali(yy; The Hittite Alalu (Elul, Aylūl, Elūlu).
viewtopic.php?p=99122#p99122
http://www.bukisa.com/articles/153582_t ... -god-alalu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elul
Ba'al (another generic) was also known as Ba'alah and Ba'alat... !

The Bismillah; AaLaH; Eloah; Chaldean Elahh; Greek Eleos (Aloes).
viewtopic.php?p=104047#p104047


What's troubling the etymologists is, in my opinion, that Allah may have three different regional sources. The Al-Ilah (Enlil) source comes
from the Lakhmid territories (Iraq and North Syria), while the Syro/Aramaic root of Alaha/Eloah was more influential in the biblical Levant.

Yet a third influence, in the northwest Nabatea, must be weighted in: that of the Egyptian moon-god, LAH/YAH. Lah/Yah wasn't important
and was mainly related to the moon proper, our satellite. Egyptologists think that he has been adopted by the Hyksos, all along with Seth.
Lah/Yah became associated with the moon as time (months). As such it's the root for Jericho (Yarich/Yerech) with that of Arah: wandering.
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/yah.htm

The extreme sparsity of informations about Lah/Yah might be the reason why it did escape etymologists' scrutiny, while Al-Lah is obvious.

viewtopic.php?p=121174#p121174
Not only its Christian pre-Islamic usage is emphasized Q.22.40, but the name Al-Ilah is written in 21.108, also Al-A'la (sura 87)
just as Al-Aliyy in 4.34 & 2.255 (Sublime, Highest). The closest biblical equivalent is said to be Eloah, only so written in the
Book of Ezra and Job, and the Aramaic Alaha. Yet I personally find intriguing cognate with the biblical El-Elyon, out of the
Phoenician Eliun (the Most High), Samaritan Illiyyun found in Q.83.18-21 (Illiyin), the recorder of the good deeds in opposition
to Sijjin (?). We know that Ilya was an old Arabic name for Jerusalem (Roman Aelia Capitola).

Conclusion:
The name of Allah has a deep past going way back even the pre-Islamic Arabia area, into Akkadian and Egyptian times.
To the Hittites/Alalu, the Egyptian/Lah, the Akkadian Ilu/Elulu, the Hebrew Eloah, the Aramaic Alaha, always written L or Ll.

Also in Resource Center: Could the Vedic Varuna Be Allah ?
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8394

Note: many more posts are coming up, each dealing with some, quite misunderstood, Koranic 'proper names'.
Next post will look at the word Koran (Quran, Qur'an), is it a proper or common name?

[The Cat]

Part 2: Is 'Koran' (Quran; Qur'an) a proper name?
Note: I prefer my lines to be in a book form, rather than the far stretched Internet windows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran

The word qurʾān appears about 70 times in the Quran itself, assuming various meanings. It is a verbal noun (maṣdar) of the Arabic
verb qaraʾa (Arabic: قرأ‎), meaning “he read” or “he recited.” The Syriac equivalent is qeryānā, which refers to “scripture reading”
or “lesson”. While most Western scholars consider the word to be derived from the Syriac, the majority of Muslim authorities hold
the origin of the word is qaraʾa itself. In any case, it had become an Arabic term by Muhammad's lifetime. An important meaning of
the word is the “act of reciting”, as reflected in an early Quranic passage: “It is for Us to collect it and to recite it (qurʾānahu, 75.17)”.

In other verses, the word refers to “an individual passage recited [by Muhammad]”. Its liturgical context is seen in a number of passages,
for example: "So when al-qurʾān is recited, listen to it and keep silent"(7.204). The word may also assume the meaning of a codified
scripture when mentioned with other scriptures such as the Torah and Gospel (9.111).

The term also has closely related synonyms that are employed throughout the Quran. Each synonym possesses its own distinct meaning,
but its use may converge with that of qurʾān in certain contexts. Such terms include kitāb (“book”); āyah (“sign”); sūrah (“scripture”).
The latter two terms also denote units of revelation. In the large majority of contexts, usually with a definite article (al-), the word is
referred to as the “revelation” (wahy), that which has been “sent down” (tanzīl) at intervals (20.2; 25.32). Other related words are:
dhikr, meaning "remembrance," used to refer to the Quran in the sense of a reminder and warning; and hikma, meaning “wisdom”,
sometimes referring to the revelation or part of it.

Note: According to Welch in the Encyclopedia of Islam, the verses pertaining to the usage of the word hikma should probably
be interpreted in the light of IV, 105, where it is said that “Muhammad is to judge (tahkum) mankind on the basis of the Book sent
down to him.”

The Quran has many other names. Among those found in the text itself are al-furqān (“discernment” or “criterion”), al-hudah (“"the
guide”), ḏikrallāh (“the remembrance of God”), al-ḥikmah (“the wisdom”), and kalāmallāh (“the word of God”). Another term is al-kitāb
(“the book”), though it is also used in the Arabic language for other scriptures, such as the Torah and the Gospels. The term muṣḥaf
("written work") is often used to refer to particular Quranic manuscripts but is also used in the Quran to identify earlier revealed books.

We shall deal with the other sub-meanings in a following part 2b, here to concentrate on 'Koran'.

http://www.free-minds.org/name

We see that the author is very careful not to use the word 'koran' as a proper name but as the generic for (great) reading.
So, then it reaches its real Syriac root of qeryānā (quryan, QRYN) which refers to 'religious reading' or from Kyrie for Lord.

So did argue Theodor Noldeke in 1860: "Since a cultural word like "to read" can not be proto-Semitic, we may assume that it
has entered Arabia, and probably from the North... Since Syriac has, next to the verb קּרא, also the noun qeryānā, meaning both
ἀםדםשף ("the act of reading") and ἀםדםשףלב ("the thing read"), and because of the above mentioned, the assumption of
probability increases, that the term Qur'an is not an internal Arabic development from the infinitive with the same meaning,
but a borrowing from the Syriac word that has been adapted according to the type fulʻān."

I've debated this topic too with AhmedBahgat...
someone otherwise fighting idolatry, yet committing it through his adulation of the Koranic 'proper names'!

viewtopic.php?p=98606#p98606

Well you certainly aren't disproving the bulk of his affirmation: that koran shouldn't be translated with a capital letter as indicating a proper
name while it's not the -original- intent. Since you do not challenge this, we must understand that you acknowledge his main point: ''There
are some verses that use the word "quran" to describe other readings, which is yet another indication that it must be a common description
as opposed to a proper name (13.31; 17.88). In the above verses, the word "quran" is used to describe hypothetical readings other than the
ultimate reading/quran we know. Hence, we see that "quran" is used as a common description and not a proper name.''

That's precisely what is underlined in 20.113, 43.3 and 39.28: the Muslims holy book is just -a- koran written in Arabic, not The One
and Only Koran. Your holy book acknowledges many others on par with itself. So, according to its former intention, it should be translated
as a common noun and NOT as a proper name. It is a koran, not The Koran! 12:40: "What you serve besides The God is nothing but
names that you have named you and your fathers, The God did not send down any authority for such....''

Muslims like you are just plainly idolizing a proper name.

viewtopic.php?p=98634#p98634
The very fact that there was no hamza in the Classical Arabic of the Koran debunks your statement. It had to be added so to fit the -later-
Arabic Qira'ah. So... NO... Arabic wasn't invented somewhere down the seventh heaven. It has a historical context, mainly Aramaic. See?
Qira'ah itself has been borrowed from Syriac, not the other way around.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamza

Crazymonkie saw how AB's so-called refutation came from using modern Arabic

It's not only 'Koran' that isn't Arabic, the very name of surah (chapter) for example is coming from the Hebrew 'Shura' (שׁוּרָה), meaning a
serial, a row or line. Shura 'ya'shar = straight row or sure series.

See also, in the old forum (Resource Center):
Was the Qur'an first in Arabic?
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39999

To be followed in part 2b:
Al-Kitab; Furkan & Messiany; the Wisdom (al-Hikmah); The Remembrance, etc.
We'll see how these names rarely, if ever, refer to the Koran proper as scripture, contrary to Muslims' assumptions.

[The Cat]

2b i) Al-Kitab & al-Hikma; ii) Furkan & Messany; iii) The Remembrance and the 'Oft Repeated Verses' (Al-Mathānī).

2b i) Al-Kitab (the Book) and al-Hikma (the Wisdom)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book

People of the Book (Arabic: ′Ahl al-Kitāb) is a term used to designate non-Muslim adherents to faiths which have a revealed scripture
called, in Arabic, Al-Kitab (Arabic: الكتاب ‎ "the Book" or "the Scripture"). The three types of adherents to faiths that the Qur'an mentions
as people of the book are the Jews, Sabians and Christians. However, many Muslim rulers and scholars have also included other religions
such as Zoroastrianism and Hinduism. In Islam, the Muslim scripture, the Qur'an, is taken to represent the completion of these scriptures,
and to synthesize them as God's true, final, and eternal message to humanity.

Both terms refer to something continuous, one embroidered to the others, and thus means altogether the book of Abraham, the Torah,
the Psalms (Zabur) and Gospel, maybe that of the Sabeans too as they are recognized 'People of the Book'. The Wisdom may be related
to the link between all prophets throughout the ages, those with knowledge of the hidden, with insights of the Unseen...

The tafsirs perfidiously mixed them all to solely mean the Arabic Koran, while it refers to -all- the korans as rightful scriptures.

2.151: Even as We have sent unto you a messenger from among you, who reciteth unto you Our revelations (Āyātinā**)
and causeth you to grow, and teacheth you the Scripture (al-Kitab) and wisdom, and teacheth you that which ye knew not.

** Ayatin refers to the revelations made globally, the korans, rarely setting apart the Arabic one

3.81: When Allah made (His) covenant with the prophets, (He said): Behold that which I have given you of the Scripture
and knowledge (Ĥikmatin**). And afterward there will come unto you a messenger, confirming that which ye possess.
--Thus, the Wisdom is some sort of prescient Knowledge, a living faith akin to the former meaning of 'religio', that is the inner bond
between man & the divine. Nothing to do with nowadays definition of 'religion' which is rather a 'confession' (that which is professed).

5.48: And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture (al-Kitab) with the truth,
confirming whatever Scripture (al-Kitab) was before it, and a watcher over it.
--Obviously al-Kitab must be understood as a continuity, not a break from the former scriptures.

6.89: Those** are they unto whom We gave the Scripture (al-Kitab) and command and prophethood.
**All the names (given in Syriac) in the preceding verses: Noah and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses and Aaron,
David and Solomon, Job and Joseph, Ishmael and Elisha, Jonah and Lot, Zachariah and Elias, John and Jesus.

Clearly the Arabic Koran is a book among many others, not to be set apart. Something the traditionalists couldn't bear!

If the Torah and Gospel were corrupted, as in the Muhammadan beliefs, then there's no way left to confirm Muhammad
as in many Koranic statements (3.81, 5.48, etc). He's then unable to learn from them (6.90, 10.94), nor can't he settle
disputes among them, according to their own scriptures (4.105; 5.44-45).

http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/muslim.html
The Title "The Book" (al-kitab) in the Qur'an

Not only were the people of the Book the first and original Muslims, the book that they possessed is characteristically the original Book.
Mohammad never claimed to have received a new book. He claimed that the Qur'an is the Book that was revealed before, that is, the
Bible, as the following Qur'anic verse shows (quoting 6.154-157)....

The only difference between the Bible and the Qur'an is that while the Bible was revealed in a language the Arabs did not know, the
Qur'an came in the Arabic tongue. This difference is stated in the Qur'an 43:2. So there is an Arabic Qur'an and a non-Arabic Qur'an
i.e. the Bible. But that non-Arabic Qur'an was made Arabic so that the Arabs can understand it. Again the Qur'an states: "Yet before
it was the Book of Moses for a model (-Imam-) and a mercy; and this is a Book confirming, in Arabic tongue, to warn the evildoers,
and good tidings to the good-doers" (Q. 46:12). Once more, when the Qur'an was described in relation to the Bible, the Qur'an is
called a Book but the Bible is called "The Book". According to the above verse the Book of Moses is called the Book, the Imam....

There have been claims that the Book has been corrupted. The Qur'an says, "And to you we have revealed the Book with the truth. It
confirms the Scriptures which came before it and stands as a guardian over them" (Q. 5:48). This verse clearly states that the Qur'an
was sent to confirm and to guard what had been previously revealed. To claim that the Book has been changed is to also say that the
Qur'an did not do what it was sent to achieve. Are we to say that the Qur'an is deficient?

Indeed, how could Muhammad be funded, even as the 'seal of prophets'... except in the continuity of all the Al-Kitabs!

This was also acutely perceived in Yusuf Ali comments about the term 'ayatin' (as found in 2.106):
What is the meaning here? If we take it in a general sense, it means that God's Message from age to age
is always the same, but that its form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time. That
form was different as given to Moses and then to Jesus and then to Muhammad.

So the term 'Umm al-Kitab** (mother of all scriptures) is found in 3.7; 13.39 and 43.4
13.39: Allah effaceth what He will, and establisheth (what He will), and with Him is the source** of ordinance.
43.3: Lo! We have appointed it a Lecture, in Arabic that haply ye may understand.
43.4: And Lo! in the Source of Decrees, which We possess, it is indeed sublime, decisive.

All this confirming that the abrogations refer solely to the former al-Kitab!

Yusuf Ali, commentary # 366 on 3.23:
A portion of the Book. I conceive that Allah's revelation as a whole throughout the ages is "The Book". The Law of Moses,
and the Gospel of Jesus were portions of the Book. The Qur'an completes the revelation and is par excellence the Book of Allah.

15.89-91: And say: Lo! I, even I, am a plain warner, Such as We send down
for those who make division, Those who break the Qur´an into parts.

__________________
The Wisdom (al-Hikma)...
In the perfidious tafsirs, al-Hikmah (the Wisdom) is said to mean Muhammad's Sunna!

Which is debunked by the following verses:
31.12: And verily We gave Luqman wisdom, saying: Give thanks unto Allah....

2.129 (Abraham):
Our Lord! And raise up in their midst a messenger from among them who shall recite unto them Thy revelations,
and shall instruct them in the Scripture and in wisdom and shall make them grow.

Did Abraham know the Torah, the Gospel or the Arabic Koran ? Or Jesus about the much later scripture?

2.269: He giveth wisdom unto whom He will, and he unto whom wisdom is given, he
truly hath received abundant good. But none remember except men of understanding.

N.B.: This wisdom can't be any given book... it's more like understanding from the heart!

4.105: Lo! We reveal unto thee the Scripture with the truth, that thou mayst judge between
mankind by that which Allah showeth thee. And be not thou a pleader for the treacherous.

--Muhammad isn't only receiving revelations of the Arabic Koran, he's being taught about other
scriptures to in order to judge between People of the Book, according to their own scripture...
(5.45-49) and so got to have informations on their respective books (6.90; 10.91).

5.110: and how I taught thee (Isa) the Scripture and Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel...
--We shall note that scripture and wisdom are separated from the Torah/Gospel, as if something
written in the heart, some fortitude, people led by faith and enlightenment (such as the prophets).

3.48: And He will teach him the Scripture and wisdom, and the Torah and the Gospel...
--Again, it should be understood as the wisdom inherent to the scriptures. Jesus never heard of the Arabic Koran!

In 17.39 wisdom is defined in its preceding verses:
17.31: Slay not your children, fearing a fall to poverty...
17.32: And come not near unto adultery.....
17.33: And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right....
17.34: Come not near the wealth of the orphan save with that which is better till he come to strength; and keep the covenant...
17.35: Fill the measure when ye measure, and weigh with a right balance...

Finally:
17.36: Follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.
17.37: And walk not in the earth exultant....

These are Koranic examples of the 'scripture' as knowledge and wisdom, the one enlightening the heart. The Knowledge!
17.36 is stating that without such knowledge in the heart, hearing and sight, one will only follow whatever to his perils,
most probably walking exuberant within his own sectarian madness... which is Allah's curse!

6.83: That is Our argument. We gave it unto Abraham against his folk.
We raise unto degrees of wisdom (Hakimun) whom We will....

Again, most obviously Abraham didn't have the Arabic Koran, let alone any other! But he had the Wisdom...


To be continued.... Part 2b ii)

[The Cat]

2b ii) The Criterion, Furkan & Messaniy; the oft repeated verses.

Reference: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5519
Seven Oft Verses (al-Mathani)
viewtopic.php?p=100835#p100835

Let us see why they all should be linked...
The whole sura 25 is named Criterion (Furkan) and many more ayats (2.53; 21.48; 37.117) use this name.
It it said that this was once considered to be Quran's initial name, along with Mushaf, which is Ethiopian.
Now, Furkan is Aramaic (Furkuan) for Redemption. The Quran suggests it was given to Moses (2.53) and
adds that is was a compilation of rights and wrongs (25.1; 21.48). Now, hasn't the Torah enough laws?

Muslims' exegeses said that Furkan refers to the Koran but 21.48-50 proves otherwise..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Furqan.

21.48: And We verily gave Moses and Aaron the Criterion (Al-Furqāna)
and a light and a Reminder (Dhikrāan ) for those who keep from evil...

21.50: This is a blessed Reminder (Dhikrun) that we have revealed: Will ye then reject it?

16.43-44: And We sent not (as Our messengers) before thee other than men whom We inspired
- Ask the followers of the Remembrance (Adh-Dhikri) if ye know not! - With clear proofs and writings;
and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance (Adh-Dhikra) that thou mayst explain to mankind
that which hath been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect.

From the above verses we can see that, contrary to Muslims' exegeses, the Furkan can't be the Arabic Koran,
unknown by Moses and Aaron. Furthermore, we find that the 'Remembrance' isn't the Arabic Koran. Again,
all these terms refer to something continuous, contiguous, still on-going...

25.1: Blessed is He Who hath revealed unto His slave the Criterion, that he may be a warner to the peoples.

This 'He' being Allah, and the 'slave': Moses!
2.53: And when We gave unto Moses the Scripture and the criterion (of right and wrong), that ye might be led aright.

So, what was this Criterion? In 21:48 the book is said to be “light and a guide separating right and wrong.”
Yet we must hold that this ain't the Torah, nor some scriptures. Can it be the 'Book of Abraham' (19.41)?

Now, 'Furqan' is written exactly... 7 times ((2.53, 185; 21.48; 37.117, 25.1; 3.3; 8.29)! This ain't no pure coincidence.
Thus it must be linked with the seven oft repeated verses... And, out of the ten commandments, the 7 Noahide laws!

http://www.wikinoah.org/index.php/Noahi ... the_Qur'an

Islam inherited the tradition of 7 Mathaani from the Sabians. The word Mesani is translated as meaning "repetition"
(same as the Hebrew Mishna). Two verses in Qur'an refer to Al mesani / Al mesaniy: 15:87and 39.23.

39.23: Allah hath (now) revealed the fairest of statements (Al-Ĥadīthi Kitābāan), a Scripture
consistent (Mutashābihāan Mathāniya) paired, whereat doth creep the flesh of those who
fear their Lord, so that their flesh and their hearts soften to Allah´s reminder. Such is Allah´s
guidance('Ilá Dhikri Allāhi Dhālika).

15.87: We have given thee seven of the oft-repeated (Al-Mathānī) and the great Qur´an.

Which implies that there were seven laws before the giving of the Qur'an. It is generally accepted
that saban minel masani (Seven Oft-repeated verses) and quranel azim (Grand Reading/Qur'an)
must be two different things because they are separated with conjunction waw. However many
Islamic scholars are at a loss to defined what the Mesani is. The proposal that they are the seven
laws of Noah has been found acceptable by certain muslims who have studied the issue and not
found to be theologically problematic.

Of course they must be separated. Noah, Abraham, Moses and Aaron didn't have the Arabic Koran but... the Criterion!

So there we have it: Furqan, Messani (Mathani), the seven oft repeated verses...
are all referring (the Criterion) to the 7 Noachide laws as the Day of Redemption!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah
http://www.betemunah.org/noachide.html
And it came in the Koran through Sabians' notion of 'Mathaani (many other things too...).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabians
http://wikinoah.org/index.php?title=Sabians
http://www.wikinoah.org/index.php?title ... oahide_Law

Islam as a Noahide Faith?
Prophet Noah (pbuh) is clearly seen as a lawgiver in the Qur'an.... Concerning the term "Muslim" which means "submission",
it should be noted that in the Torah, everywhere the word "Kenite" used, it is translated to Aramaic as Salamai or Muslamai.
Some suggest this refers to the great numbers of non-Jewish believers who came to sacrifice the Qurban Shlamim in Jerusalem
together with the Jews. Salamai, Musalamai, Muslims.

This could be a clear indication in our literature that Islam is an ancient religion, dating back to second temple times, at least.
And if Islam's roots are the same as what we call Bnei Noah, then it is much older, it is the religion of Noah, and Adam himself.

In 42.13 (the most revealing verse of them all), these 7 laws are ALLAH'S SHARIAH !
http://www.theholybook.org/content/view/4285/94/

In Resource Center, post 2 of 'The Laws Within the Koran'
viewtopic.php?p=132870#p132870

42.13: He hath ordained (SHARA'A) for you that religion (Din) which He commended unto Noah, and that which We inspire in thee,
and that which We commended unto Abraham and Moses and Jesus, saying: Establish the religion, and be not divided therein.

In the Koran, the Noahide laws are mainly described between 17.22 and 17.35.


Finally we shall also note that, in the religious symbolism, seven refers to sanctified completion.


____________________
2b iii)The Remembrance (Dhikr)
Reference: viewtopic.php?p=99263#p99263

Proud to be a Muslim, by M. N. Anderson

What does the word 'Muslim' mean? Does the word 'Muslim' only refer to the followers of Mohammad the prophet of Islam?
Did Islam begin with Mohammad? The Qur'an provides the answer to these questions.
----Abraham was a Muslim (3.67).
----Jesus' disciples were Muslims (5.111).
----Some of Muhammad's contemporaries were Muslims (28.52-53).
----Muhammad was commanded to be a Muslim (42.52; 10.72; 27.90).

The People of the Book
(Quoting 17.107; 13.43; 16.43) The Remembrance is not the Qur'an. It is the people of the Book who know about the Psalms.
According to Q. 21:105, "We have written in the Psalms, after the Remembrance, 'The earth shall be the inheritance of My
righteous servants'." The Remembrance is the revealed books before the Psalms. So it cannot be the Qur'an. The people of
the Book are also the people of Remembrance. The Galalan commentary says the people of remembrance in that verse are
the scholars of the Torah and the Injil.

According to Q. 13:43 the witness of those people is only second to God's witness. Therefore, those who were Muslims before
Mohammad and before the Qur'an; those who were the First Muslims, and the men possessed of the knowledge of the Book;
these are the original defenders of the true religion and Monotheism. Here is the testimony of the Qur'an concerning these
people: ''God bears witness that there is no god but He and the angels, and men possessed of knowledge - upholding justice;
there is no god but He, the Al-mighty, the All-wise. The true religion with God is Islam.'' (Q. 3:18,19).......

We've seen it above (21.48-50; 16.43-44)... How it can't solely refers to the Arabic Koran.

13.28: Verily in the remembrance of Allah (Bidhikri Allāhi) do hearts find rest!

15.9: Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder (Adh-Dhikra), and lo! We verily are its Guardian.

Since 15.6 talks about: ''And they say: O thou unto whom the Reminder is revealed'' then Muslims think it refers to
the Arabic Koran being revealed. But Muhammad was instructed (6.90) at the same time about the other al-Kitabs,
so to judge between the People of the Book. Which is confirmed by the following verses (15.10-11)....
--We verily sent (messengers) before thee among the factions of the men of old.
--And never came there unto them a messenger but they did mock him.

So here, once again, the Arabic Koran only states to be in continuity of the former scriptures. Muhammad being mocked alike.

Confirmed yet again in 21.24...

Spoiler! :

21.24: Or have they chosen other gods beside Him? say: Bring your proof (of their godhead).
This is the Reminder (Dhikru) of those with me and those before me...

And 6.114:
Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture (Al-Kitāba),
fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (aforetime, Al-Kitāba ) know that it is revealed from
thy Lord in truth. So be not thou (O Muhammad) of the waverers.

Just like we've seen at the beginning of this post, the term 'al-Kitab' is given
both to the former scriptures and the Arabic one revealed to Muhammad.

21.7: And We sent not (as Our messengers) before thee other than men,
whom We inspired. Ask the followers of the Reminder if ye know not ?

21.48: And We verily gave Moses and Aaron the Criterion (see above)
and a light and a Reminder (Dhikrāan) for those who keep from evil...

21.105: And verily we have written in the Scripture (Az-Zabūri), after the Reminder (Adh-Dhikri):
My righteous slaves will inherit the earth...

Clearly the Reminder here is the Torah and the 7 Noahide laws coming before the Psalms (Zabur)!

Conclusion:
One cannot talk about an Arabic Koran excluding all the other Kitabs, without stating that their Koran is deficient.
In all their efforts to single out their holy book, especially through Ibn Khatir's tafsirs, they are changing Allah's words!

15.89: And say: Lo! I, even I, am a plain warner,
15.90: Such as We send down for those who make division,
15.91: Those who break the Qur'an into parts.
15.92: Them, by thy Lord, We shall question, every one (of what they used to do).

Just like we've seen at the beginning of this post, the term 'al-Kitab' is given
both to the former scriptures and the Arabic one revealed to Muhammad.

On the controversy over 15.9
http://www.answering-islam.org/Response ... _q15_9.htm
On the Reminder referring to Muhammad's Sunna, another Muhammadan's falsity
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/ ... le_r1.html

Was the Bible corrupted?
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8273
Imam Abraham & the son of the Promise
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8369


--To be continued with more Koranic 'proper names'...

[The Cat]

Part 3: Miscellaneous references to covered items and short comments...

a) Abraham, the Hanif (what's a 'hahif'?)
viewtopic.php?p=15196#p15196
viewtopic.php?p=103869#p103869

Imam Abraham & the son of the Promise (no... not Ishmael)
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8369

From 'Shirk & Idolatry in Islam (shirking over Muhammad):
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1062

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_Abraham

Abraham, in Muslim belief, embodies the type of the perfect Muslim and the Qur'an mentions Abraham as a model for mankind[16.120].
In this sense, Abraham has been described as representing "primordial man in universal surrender to the Divine Reality before its
fragmentation into religions separated from each other by differences in form". The Islamic holy day Eid al-Adha is celebrated in memory
of the bravery of Abraham and Muslims perform the pilgrimage to pay homage to the Kaaba which Abraham had set up and reformed.

2.124: And (remember) when his Lord tried Abraham with (His) commands, and he fulfilled them,
He said: Lo! I have appointed thee a leader for mankind (AMAMAAN**).
** The title of Imamaan (Iman) is solely given to Abraham, Isaac & Jacob (29.27) and Moses (46.12).

We shall note that such a title, of a timeless spiritual guide, is never ever accorded to Muhammad and so...
all those human imams, like Shafi'i, Bukhari, al-Ghazali are man-made usurping Bida'a and so blasphemous!

16.123: And afterward We inspired thee: Follow the religion of Abraham (Millata 'Ibrāhīma),
as one by nature upright (Ĥanīfāan). He was not of the idolaters.

Checking on 'Millata Ibrahima Hanifaan':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanif
http://www.abcarticledirectory.com/Article/Hanif/165495

"The word hanif (pl. hunafa) is derived from hanf, meaning an inclination in the forepart of the foot or inversion of the foot.
A person having this distortion of the foot is called ahnaf. The singular word hanif occurs 10 times in the Koran (2:135, 3:67,
95; 4:125, 6:79, 161; 10:105, 16:120,123, 30:30), and the plural hunafa two times (22:31, 98:5). It occurs once as a synonym
of muslim (3:67) and also in juxtaposition with the verb aslama (4:125). The exegetes of the Koran say that hanif in the age of
ignorance signified an Arab adhering to the religion of Abraham and that title was also claimed by idolaters who only observed
certain rites of that religion, such as pilgrimage to Mecca and circumcision. The verb tahannuf means pure exercise of religion....

The Koranic prototype of the ideal hanif is Abraham: "Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, rather he was a hanif" (3:67).
Thus, the hanifiyah was the faith of Abraham. Hanif is therefore one inclining to a right state or tendency. The word is often
mentioned in connection not only with the name of Abraham, but the Prophet and his followers are also enjoined to be hanif.
It seems to signify firmness in sticking to the right state, and has reference to the inclining to error on the part of both the Jews
and the Christians: "Say: Nay (we follow) the religion of Abraham, the hanif (upright), and he was not one of the polytheists" (2:135),
"And who has a better religion than he who submits himself entirely to God? And he is the doer of good and follows the faith of
Abraham, the upright (hanif), and God took Abraham as a friend" (4:125), "Surely Abraham was an exemplar, obedient to God,
upright (hanif), and he was not of the polytheists" (16:120), and "Say: God has spoken the truth, therefore follow the religion of
Abraham, the upright (hanif), and he was not one of the polytheists" (3:95). The Koranic Prophet too, is required to become a hanif
by setting his face upright towards the true religion (10:105), and the same demand is also imposed on the rest of the people (22:31, 98:5).

Then we learn how the Millata is related to the Koranic DIN, falsely translated religion, which is nothing nowadays but a deceptive substitution for a confession, more on this later...
http://www.wakeup.org/anadolu/02/3/din_quran.html

The Koranic story of Abraham
http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/293/viewall/

___________
b) So, exactly, who's a Koranic Muslim?

From 'The Laws Within the Koran':
See, #3: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8384
viewtopic.php?p=99263#p99263

Proud to be a Muslim, by M. N. Anderson, on Answering-Islam
http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/muslim.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim

Nota Bene: The Koranic Bismallah is found in Ex.43.6; Num.14.18 & Psalm 103.8


_____________
c) What's the Koranic 'DIN' (deen) & Islam?

From 'The Laws Within the Koran'
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8384
The Koranic 'DIN' versus nowadays sects
viewtopic.php?p=143203#p143203

On Islam
viewtopic.php?p=99434#p99434
Ihsan, Din/Dharma
viewtopic.php?p=99601#p99601


­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_______________
d) The Koranic 'Shariah'

From 'The Laws Within the Koran'
See Law #2: viewtopic.php?p=132870#p132870

The Deception of the Koranic 'proper names'
viewtopic.php?p=100835#p100835


______________
e) Mecca certainly isn't where it was originally...
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8527

Many links (Part B on Muhammad/Mecca)

viewtopic.php?p=152903#p152903
Sum of the archaeological evidences against nowadays Mecca


_______________
f) How Isa isn't a proper name but an appellation, being not only the Word and Spirit of Allah
but also his will (written Yasha'u in Arabic, same YS-h root as for Yeshua, Hebrew for Jesus.

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8769


______________
g) Nasara (the Koranic term for Christians, yet sharing the same root -NSR- with the Ansars).
A thoroughly study over the term, going way, way back in time...
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5225


As these items were thoroughly explored, I've only provided basic references.


Next, we'll check the Koranic meanings of Believers/Disbelievers and that of 'Kafirs' and 'hypocrites! Stay tune...

[Wootah]

What is the point? Why is it deceptive? What occurs due to this deception? Why should we care (I want to care but I don't understand your point)?