The Quran made it clear that God has sent His message to all nations. “وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولٌ” (10:47) And Rasool is for every nation. “وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولاً” (16:36) And a Rasool has always been raised by Us in every nation.

 

Traditional scholars claim that there is a difference between Prophet and Rasool. They believe that Nabi (نبی) is a Prophet who used to warn people, give them good tidings and news of important nature through their communication with God. This is the old Biblical definition of Prophets in which Prophets were known as warner and foretellers. Whereas, it is conventionally believed among traditional Muslims that Rasool (رسول) were those who were given revelations to deliver the message of God. According to the traditional view every Rasool is a Prophet, but not every Prophet is Rasool; all Prophets were Nabi (نبی) but only those were called Rasool who were given a Book to establish their new Sharia abrogating the previous Books and earlier Sharia. They also believe that Rasool is higher in rank than a Nabi (نبی) because Rasool can see the Angels and hear their voice but a Prophet can’t see Angels of revelation however he can hear them; a Prophet is always a Nabi by birth, but a prophet becomes Rasool when he officially receives the post and declares it in public. As mentioned in “Tafseer Raazi, “Mafaateehul Ghayb” and “Al Kafi”

 

The Quranist sect (Ahl-e-Quran) believe that there is no difference between the two terms; every Prophet is a Rasool and every Rasool is a Prophet, and both terms are interchangeable.

 

 

In Arabic literature the word Rasool (رسول) literary means “delegated communication”, “delivered correspondence”, “delivered or couriered message”, “running notification”, “informant”, “transmission”, “envoy”, “mail”, “post”, “carrier”, “arriver”, “delivery”, “package”, “mission”, “address”, “speech”, “delegation”, “passing on”, “giving out”, “hand out”, and “inscription”. Arabic word Rasool (رسول) is derived from Arabic root letters “ر س ل” and root word “رسل” to mean communicated, corresponded, mailed, issued, transmitted, delegated, forwarded.

 

However, the Persian word “رسالت” (Risalat) means “Apostolate” and “Prophecy” (news bearing, power of knowing the unknown, getting advance information or foretelling with magic), which was also known as ‘Prophet Hood’ (رسالت) in the Persian terminology of pre Islam ancient religions. This is the reason why the early Islam Persian Imams translated the Quranic/Arabic word Rasool (رسول) to mean “Prophet” or “Messenger” in their own Persian terminology of their Zoroastrian religion.

 

On the other hand Arab pagans used to believe that “Prophets” were official “secretaries”, “ambassadors”, “diplomats”, “labour attaches”, “ministers”, “prime ministers”, “deputies” and “assistants” of their ‘Big God’ Allah, Who was their Almighty God over and above their countless small gods. When the nexus of Arab Pagans and, their anti-Islam Persian alliance came into power after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his true Caliphs (Radhi Allah Anhu). This disguised Arab pagan and Persian Zoroastrian nexus dealt with their actual enemy “the Quran” with evil hands and very first time since the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his faithful Caliphs, the Arabic Quran has been translated in Arabic with different meaning of its Arabic revealed words. So, the Arabic Quran was given the new meaning in Abbasid time, totally different to generally spoken Arabic, and this newly invented interpretation of the Quran was extensively published and circulated throughout the world on behalf of Islamic empire, which is known as the so called ‘golden’ era of Islam in which paganism was hugely publicized in the name of Islam and fake education of Islam was developed and highly exercised to conceal the actual message of the Quran. Hence, the nexus of Arab pagans and Persian Zoroastrians mixed up Rasool (رسول) with Prophet (نبی) to hide (أَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ) the orders of obeying God’s message, God’s communication, God’s correspondence, God’s mail, God’s package, God’s hand out, God’s transmission’ God’s inscription, God’s speech, God’s words, which is actually the Quran.

 

If you open any reputable Persian to English dictionary and find the meaning of Persian word “رسالت” (Risalat) you will find it to mean “Apostolate” and “Prophecy”. Now open a reputable Arabic to English dictionary and find meaning of Arabic word “رساله” (Risalah) you will find it to mean “letter” and “news-letter”. This is a general linguistic rule that letter “ت” (taa) usually comes at the end of Persian nouns, which replaces in Arabic with the nouns of ending at “ه”. Therefore, the true Arabic dictionaries do not recognise the word “رسالت” (Risalat) or nouns with ending at letter “ت” (taa). However, letter “ت” (taa) is used with Arabic words in entirely difference sense and all together in different meaning, which does not make a common noun to Arabic words as we can see in Persian language. However, the disciples of Zoroastrian Pagans’ scholars never followed the recognised rules of Arabic language in the translation of the Quran and pressed their inherited lies throughout the translation of the Quran.

 

In English grammar a verb + er is called a quasi-pass of subject and this verb becomes a noun such as ‘play+er=player’, ‘write+er=writer’ or ‘read+er=reader’ etc. The suffix ‘er’ is also used to express ‘more’ with adjectives to make ‘comparative forms’, such as from ‘high’ to ‘high+er=higher, ‘small’ to small-er=smaller and ‘tall’ to tall-er=taller etc. However, suffix ‘er’, used with verbs such as from ‘play’ to make ‘play+er=player’, from ‘write’ to ‘write+er=writer’ or from ‘read’ to ‘read+er=reader’ etc. is called an agentive suffix, which turns a verb into a noun that refers to the agent that performs the action of that verb. In general, the words ending in ”er” signify people who act or doer of something such as, writer, reader, singer, dancer, player etc. are nouns of doers. There is another suffix “ee” used in English that describes the relationship of the objects such as “employee” or “advisee”. Whereas, the “employer” and “adviser” are quasi-pass of subject denominating the one who employs someone or who advises someone or is taking some action of doing something but the suffix “ee” is productive, and usually has the meaning of “person to which something is done”.

Therefore suffixes “er” and “ee” used in forming nouns designating persons from the object of their occupation, labour or work such as ‘employer’ and ‘employee’ or sometimes from their place of origin or abode such as ‘Londoner’, ‘Icelander’, ‘villager’ etc. or designating either persons or things from some special characteristic or circumstance such as ‘marker’, ‘traveler’, ‘poorer’ or ‘richer’ etc. in which a marker is not itself a ‘mark’ but it has a marking substance. Likewise, a traveler is not called ‘travel’ but one who travels. Therefore ‘messenger’ is an agent of performing the action of delivering the message, who can’t be a recipient of the message. Therefore, either a message is itself a ‘nouns of doers’ and deliver a message through its words or a compiler or sender is the ‘messenger’, who acts as a ‘doer’ to justify the grammatical addition of “er” at the end of his action of sending message.

 

The same linguistic rules of Arabic language have been used in the writing of the Quran in which letter “alif” is used after first or second letter of a verb,  root or an infinitive to make it a noun of quasi-pass of subject or a ‘nouns of doers’ as seen in the above examples of the suffix “er” in English language, i.e. the doer or the one who takes an action, such as from “رَزَقَ” to “رزَّاق”, “سبح” ”to “سُبْحَانَ”, “ب ر ک” (برک) to “بارک”, “ر ح م” or “رحمه” to “رحمان” and “ر س ل” (رسل) to “رساله” etc. in which “رزَّاق” is the subject (فاعل) whose act ( فعل) is to provide provision (رزق) therefore, linguistically “رزَّاق” is a provider of “رزق”, i.e. ‘nouns of doers’. The addition of “alif” between first two letters “ر ز” of “رزق” turns it into the noun “رزَّاق” that refers to the agent that performs the action. Likewise, “سبح”  (س ب ح)means: swim, float, move, drive out and occupation and “سُبْحَانَ” is a subject (فاعل) who causes swimming, floating, driving out or moving and who holds or occupies almost everything. Same as “رحمان” is a subject (فاعل) of “ر ح م” or “رحمه” and “رساله” is a subject (فاعل) of “ر س ل” (رَسَلَ). Therefore, “رساله” is actually a messenger, transmitter, communicator, deliverer, courier, carrier, arriver, news-letter and informer. This is the reason why a news- letter magazine or a regular publication is called “رساله” because as an envoy or as a messenger it contains information, it delivers news, features, message or editorial of its editor, writer or its publisher. Therefore, Rasool (رسول) is not a recipient or reader of “رساله” but a phrasal adjective noun of “رساله” which is actually a collection or complete consignment of “رساله”, i.e. a complete informant, dissertation, treaty, charter, epistle, booklet, leaflet, brochure, textbook, handbook, abstract, precise, act, circular, speech, writing of sent messages, communications, correspondence, posts, mails, couriers, handouts, orders, delivered inscriptions. However, to hide the actual messenger (رسول) of God (the revealed Book), behind the cult of personality our scholars mistranslated the Quranic word “رسول” and the Quranic phrase “رسول اللہ”.

I am pretty sure that the above stated grammatical rules will pass over the heads of our ignorant scholars and their thick disciples because let alone Arabic they even don’t know the grammar of any language and to cover their ignorance and negligence they falsely believe that no grammar was used in the Quran. However, an intelligent common person who is familiar with English grammar will easily pick the evilness of those who have destroyed the actual message of the Quran and clearly understand the correct meaning of the Quranic word Rasool (رسول) from the above explained comparison of English and Arabic grammatical rules.

 

The formation of the noun “رسول” (Rasool) is quite common in Arabic language and this type of nouns are commonly used in general Arabic and the Quran has also used Arabic nouns of similar formations, which do not refer to anyone who is a subject of taking an action like player, reader, writer, sender etc. such as the pattern or formation of the following Arabic/Quranic words is the same as seen in the formation of Arabic word “رسول” (Rasool) but they are not the ‘nouns of doers’ such as we have been given the traditional understanding of the word ‘messenger’:

“نزول” from “نَزَلَ” is not a ‘revealer’ but ‘revelation’. “دخول” from “دَخَلَ” is not used for one who enters or ‘enterer’ but ‘entry’. Likewise, the following Arabic/Quranic words and so many other words of similar formation are not translated to mean “nouns of doers”, such as  “نحول” from “نَحَلَ”, “قبول” from “قَبِل”, “بتول” from “بَتَّلَ”, “فضول” from “فَضَلَ”, “حلول” from “حَلَلَ”, “غسول” from “غَسَلَ”, “اصول” from “اَصَلَ”, “أُثُول” from “أَثَلَ”, “اجولة” from “اجل”, “احول” from “احل”, “ذلول” and “ذَلُولًا” from “ذَلَلَ” and “ذَلَ”, “شلول” from “شَلَ” and “اشل”, “غلول” from “غَلَّ” and “غَلَّلَ”, “ملول” from “مَلّ”, “بطولا” from “بَطَل”, “بقول” from “بَقَل”, “تبول” from “تَبَل”, “تجول” from “تَجَلَ”, “عسول” from “عسل”, “فسول” from “فسل”, “مسول” from “مسل”, “نسول” “نسل”.

There are so many Arabic/Quranic words the nouns of which are formed by suffix “ول” but they are not taken and not translated to mean the quasi-pass of subject of having “er” agent. Those who translate ‘messenger’ from “رسول” to mean a person who delivers a message or deliverer of the message, why don’t they translate “نزول” to mean the ‘revealer or who reveals a message’? What is the difference in the formation of “رسول” and “نزول”? Why “دخول” is not translated to mean ‘enterer’ or who enters? Why “قبول” is not taken to mean believer or accepter? The formations of “مسول”, “عسول”, “غسول”, “فسول”, “ذلول”, “أُثُول”, “نسول”, “احول”, “شلول”, “غلول”, “ملول”, “تجول”, “تبول”, “بتول”، “اصول” and uncountable similar nouns are not translated as they translate the word “رسول” of the same linguistic formation. This is because Arabs themselves distort the Quranic words because of their pagan beliefs, which they don’t want to leave at any cost.

This is the common problem among those who don’t want to understand the Quran; they think Arabs are not ignorant of the language of the Quran because they always had learned scholars among them and since Arabic is their own language they do everything right and follow the Quran correctly and Arabs supposedly understand the Quran better than anyone else. However, the reality is that Arabs don’t follow the Quran at all as their current religion or faith is solely based on traditions (Hadith) invented by non-Arab Persian Imams and fiqah (Jurisprudence) or Islamic Sharia invented by Zoroastrian Persian Judges of Abbasid Persian administration consisted of Zoroastrian & Buddhist cabinet of Ministers, known as ‘Bramikids’ of Abbasid Caliphs and their over ruling states women Khizrian and Zubaidah.

 

However, Allah Himself made it clear in the verse 9:97 of Surah “Tauba” that Arabs are the worst in Unbelief and hypocrisy. Although the traditional translations of this verse have been slightly modified to satisfy the Arabs, and to make modification in the meaning of “رَسُولِهِ” but it still serves the purpose of explaining the issue of following the Arabs to understand the Quran.

 

(9:97) “الأَعْرَابُ أَشَدُّ كُفْرًا وَنِفَاقًا وَأَجْدَرُ أَلاَّ يَعْلَمُواْ حُدُودَ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَاللّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ

‘The Arabs of the desert are the worst in Unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah hath sent down to His Messenger: But Allah is All-knowing, All-Wise.’ (Translation of Yusuf Ali)

The above translation is not even a proper translation but it still answers the question of those who reject the clear message of the Quran by following the pagan Arabs in understanding the Quran and Islam.

Yusuf Ali added the words “of the desert” after the definite noun “الأَعْرَابُ” (The Arabs), which is not the part of this verse. Whilst most scholars have deleted this word “الأَعْرَابُ” (The Arabs) from their translations out of blind faith in Arabs or to simply escape from their anger. Some scholars have even replaced the Quranic word “الأَعْرَابُ” (The Arabs) with the “villagers” or Badduins”. However, the Quran is very clear in its statement and uses the plural definite noun “الأَعْرَابُ” to mean “The Arabs” which cannot be replaced by any other word in the translation.

 

If you honestly analyse the opening clause of the above verse 9:97:  “الأَعْرَابُ أَشَدُّ كُفْرًا” you will find that “الأَعْرَابُ” is the definite noun to mean ‘the Arabs’ which refers the whole nation of Arabs, Arab people, and Arab scholars. “أَشَدُّ” is a superlative form of comparative adjective to mean “extremely”, “extremist” or “worst”. The prefix “alif” makes it superlative as seen in the formation of “اکبر” the most higher. “كُفْرًا” means of “kafar”. The suffix “alif” at the end of “كُفْرًا” is a preposition to mean ‘of’. The word “كُفْرًا” is derived out of its root “کفر” means ‘concealer of the truth’, which links to those old times formers who used to hide the seeds under the layers of earth. Therefore, in Arab culture “کافر” was used to refer those who bury the truth and ungrateful to God. However, when the Quran was translated under the likeminded Arabs and Persian administration the meaning of “كُفْرً” has been altered to ‘unbelief’ and “کافر” has been changed to “nonbeliever” or “unbeliever”. However, the true meaning of this Quranic word “كُفْرً” is not limited to the ‘belief’ but it has been used in the Quran in a broad spectrum which includes lying, deceiving, bluffing, fraud, dishonesty, cruelty, injustice, unfairness, discrimination, falsifying, cheating, betraying, state of ungratefulness and thanklessness etc.

 

Therefore, the opening clause of the verse 9:97 “الأَعْرَابُ أَشَدُّ كُفْرًا” clearly describes that “The Arabs are extremist of nonbelieving/hiding the truth/ungratefulness/dishonesty/unjust/lying/deceiving/cruelty

وَنِفَاقًا” means ‘and of double standards’, ‘of double dealing’, ‘of duplicity’ and ‘of hypocrisy’. “وَأَجْدَرُ” means a ‘highest wall’. “أَجْدَرُ” is a superlative derivative of the root word “جدر”, which is a synonym of Arabic word “حائِط” to mean

‘Wall’, ‘continuous vertical structure of brick’, ‘enclosure of stone having little width’ and ‘having smallpox’. The common factor among ‘walls’, ‘vertical stone structures’ and ‘smallpox’ are hindrance and blockage. Thick pus filled blisters of this contagious viral disorder “smallpox” block the surface like a brick wall or a stone structure hiding the area underneath and beyond. Also, the print of smallpox is similar to the impression of a stone wall.

Therefore, ‘creating hindrance’, ‘blocking’ and ‘hiding’ are actions of the root word “جدر” the derivative “أَجْدَرُ” of which has been revealed in the above verse 9:97 that we are studying to reach its correct meaning. These meaning of this Quranic word “أَجْدَرُ” are also consistent with the word “كُفْرًا” used in the opening clause of this verse 9:79, which is an evidence that the Quran is word to word consistent and no ambiguous word has been used in the Quran. So, “وَنِفَاقًا وَأَجْدَرُ” correctly means “and of hypocrite/double standards and concealing stone wall hindrance’

أَلاَّ يَعْلَمُواْ” means “they are those who don’t understand at all/they don’t know at all

The prefix “alif” (أَ) in the beginning of “أَلاَّ” is a comparative particle of superlative degree which is used with negating particle “لاَّ” to mean “at all”. Therefore, “أَلاَّ” will be correctly translated to mean “not at all”. “يَعْلَمُواْ” means ‘those who understand’ is a passive voice verb of present form which also contains the objective pronoun. The word “حُدُود” is a plural of Arabic word “حد” derived from Arabic root word “حدد” to mean ‘point’, ‘mark, ‘specify character, ‘draw a lines’, ‘objective’, ‘target’, ‘purpose’, ‘term’, ‘prescribe’, ‘define’, ‘outline’, ‘condiments’, ‘set’, ‘fix’, ‘indicate’, ‘assign’, ‘determine’ and ‘appoint’. However, throughout the Quran this Arabic Quranic word “حد” and its plural “حدود” are wrongly translated to mean Persian “حد” and its Persian plural “حدود” for limits, restrictions, boundaries, ordinates and orders. This is the reason why so called Islamic states press charges on people and give them unjustified inhuman sentences imposed by “Hadud Ordinance” of Satanic ‘Sharia’ which was made by evil Persian Imams and has nothing to do with the Quran. Whereas, the objectives “حدود” of the Quran are reformation and rectification based on humanity instead of imposing ‘stone to death’ like Dark Aged cruel sentences. Majority of victims of this ‘stone death’ sentence are innocent women who are raped first and then killed by stones. If you don’t believe what I have mentioned about this sentence of Satanic Sharia please write on google ‘stone to death’ or ‘stoning’ and find for yourself what has been happening in the Muslim world in the name of non-Quranic Islam.

Article “مَا” is used to mean ‘what/which/that’. “أَنزَلَ” is the command verb and a superlative verbal noun to mean ‘cause to reveal’, ‘revelation’, accommodate, lodge, provide lodgings for, put up, house, cause to displace downwards, cause to bring down, cause to go down to a lower level, cause to go down, cause to take down, cause to come down, cause to fall down into a lower level,  cause to reduce the height or pitch or elevation of something, settle down (وَطّنَ), cause to sink, cause to discharge, lay down, locate, place, position, put down, set (down), settle (in), settle down (in), put up, drop, launch.

A popular Arabic term “أنزل سفينة” is used to mean ‘Launch a ship’.

 

The same word “انزل” is also used as a noun. These nouns are called “Elative Nouns” in Arabic grammar, which I have already explained in my article “Correct Translation of the verse 34:28 of Surah Al Saba” in which you can find the grammatical details of how to make verbal nouns from the verb in which I have given examples of the formation of superlative verbal nouns “اکبر” and “اَرسَل”. The next word is “اللّهُ” which you know is translated in English to mean of Allah or Allah’s and “عَلَى” is coming afterwards, which is only translated to mean ‘on/upon/at’ in the misleading translation of those verses of the Quran the actual statement of which our scholars want to change according to their personal beliefs. However, the correct meaning of “عَلَى” are as follows:

  • عَلَى” as a verb “اِتّبَعَ” to mean ‘adopt’, ‘follow’, ‘pursue’ and ‘take up’.
  • عَلَى” as a verb “اِتّجَهَ إلى” to mean ‘be aimed at’, ‘be directed to’, ‘be oriented to’, ‘be tend to’, be turn to or toward.
  • عَلَى” as a verb “اِتّفَقَ” to mean ‘agree on or about’, ‘arrange’, ‘bring about an understanding or agreement’, ‘come to terms’, ‘conclude or strike’.
  • عَلَى” as a verb “اِتّكَلَ” to mean ‘base on’, ‘be based on’, ‘count on’, ‘depend on’, ‘draw upon’, ‘found on’, ‘founded on’.

 

Uses of “عَلَى” in general Arabic are as follows:

“على أساس المقاولة” and “على أشغال عمومية” are Arabic legal terms to mean “contract price”.

“تشـغيل على البارد” is used as a military term throughout the Arab world to mean ‘cold start’.

“يحـافظ على الزخـم” to mean ‘maintain momentum’ is again a military term which is used throughout the Arab countries.

As a preposition “عَلَى” is used to mean: within, across, upon, over, at, about, on, among, according to, for, in its true form and by, which can be seen throughout the Quran as well as in the general Arabic. However, prepositions are used and translated according to the relevant verbs and keeping in view the other articles as seen in English grammar in which ‘get up’ is meaning-wise different to ‘get out’ and ‘get on’ is different to ‘get off’. Likewise, ‘set up’ is meaning wise different to ‘set off’ and ‘set aside’, ‘put up’ is different to ‘put out’ and ‘put on’. Therefore, prepositions or little particles and single letter articles along with Arabic words are used to keep the statement consistent, fixed and meaning wise accurate to understand the sentence from the writer’s point of view in which no one goes wrong to understand the statement and no one can translate the sentence different to its actual spirit. However, in sheep practice, due to lack of knowledge and because of our non-Quranic dogma we ignore the above stated linguistic rules and twist the translation of the Quranic words of fixed meaning according to our belief due to which the actual understanding of the verses of the Quran is destroyed.

The next word is “رَسُولِهِ” which is a combination of هِ + رَسُولِ in which “هِ” is a third person singular objective pronoun to mean ‘His’ and “رَسُولِ” means ‘inscription’, ‘communication’, delivered mail’, ‘correspondence’, ‘ address, ‘informant’, ‘handout’, ‘circular’, ‘message’, delivery, post, and consignment.

وَاللّهُ” and God is “عَلِيمٌ” intellect/intellectual, “حَكِيمٌ” correctly means “Authority”.

The conventional translations of this Quranic phrase “عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” to mean ‘Knowledgeable and Wise’, ‘Learned Wise’ and ‘Knowing Wise’ etc. are the meaning of Persian words “عالم” (Knowing/knowledgeable) and Persian word “حکیم” from “حکمت” who were known as wise people throughout the Persian history such as old time expert physicians, scientists, astronomers, mathematicians and philosophers etc. who were all in one due to their extensive knowledge. However, in the Arabic words “عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” God does not compare Himself with the worldly experts, who gain knowledge through their teachers and become wise on the basis of their gained knowledge because God Himself is a teacher “عَلَّمَهُ الْبَيَانَ” (55:4) and computed/ mathematical/ accurate/expert designer of the sun and the moon “الشَّمْسُ وَالْقَمَرُ بِحُسْبَانٍ” (55:5).

So, Allah did not learn from someone and did not become knowledgeable or wise by learning anything but He was already ‘Intellectual’ (عَلِيمٌ) and known ‘Intellectual Energy’ or ‘Intellectual Power’. This is the difference between Persian “عالم” (knowledgeable) and Arabic “عَلِيمٌ” to mean naturally talented or intellectual. The Quranic word “حَكِيمٌ” is derived out of Arabic root word “حکم” which is not a Persian or Indian physician or a philosopher but the One Who Possesses Authority. Hence, Arabic “حَكِيمٌ” is an ‘authority’ whose word is the last word.

What about the translation of other Quranic words if our scholars could not translate simple Arabic words “عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” with their true meaning?

Hence, is the correct translation of the verse 9:97 of Surah Tauba, the word to word true analysis of which you have seen in the above lines is as follows:

(9:97) “الأَعْرَابُ أَشَدُّ كُفْرًا وَنِفَاقًا وَأَجْدَرُ أَلاَّ يَعْلَمُواْ حُدُودَ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَاللّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ

The Arabs are extremist of nonbelieving/hiding the truth

and of hypocrite/double standards and concealing stone wall hindrance they are those who don’t understand at all defined outlines/objectives of what God causes to reveal on His communication/delivered message and God is Intellect Authority.

(Word to word correct translation of 9:97)

 

Furthermore, the verse 40:78 clearly defines what “Rasool” is but all Quranist and traditional scholars have concealed the original statement of this verse 40:78 in their fake translations and false exegesis. Therefore, to understand the correct meaning of this verse 40:78 we need to analyse the Arabic text of this verse:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلًا مِّن قَبْلِكَ مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُم مَّن لَّمْ نَقْصُصْ عَلَيْكَ وَمَا كَانَ لِرَسُولٍ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ بِآيَةٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا جَاءَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قُضِيَ بِالْحَقِّ وَخَسِرَ هُنَالِكَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ” (40:78)

لَقَدْ” is used when such a universal fact is described which remains constant and unchanged in past present and future, i.e. to mention anything which is never affected by time periods or time factors and gives the same result every time. Basically, “لَقَدْ” refers to a nonstop continuation of something from past to future with the same outcome. Therefore, in general Arabic “لَقَدْ” is correctly translated to mean “always” if it comes with imperfect (present) verb but with perfect verb (past verb) “لَقَدْ” is translated to mean “always have been” and “always had been”. In Arabic grammar the past verb is called ‘perfect’ verb because the action of this verb has been completed in the past which makes this verb ‘perfect’ because of its fulfilled action. Whereas, the actions of present and future verbs are still remaining to be completed this is the reason they are called ‘imperfect’ verbs.

أَرْسَلْنَا” is a combination of نَا + أَرْسَلْ in which “نَا” is the first person plural objective pronoun to mean “our/us”, which cannot be translated to mean “we” as a subjective pronoun. However, our scholars always ignore this key linguistic rule and translate “نَا” to mean “we”. Whereas, in Arabic language “نَحنْ” is used to mean “we” and the Quran has used “نَحنْ” in many verses where Allah wanted to say “we”. Therefore, replacing objective pronouns with subjective pronouns in the translations is the biggest mistake of the translators which they deliberately commit to change the meaning of the statements of the Quran according to their false beliefs. However, where these scholars and translators feel that they will be instantly caught changing Allah’s words they don’t interfere and translate correctly such as they never change objective pronoun in the phrases like “رَبَّنَا” and correctly translate it to mean “our Lord” otherwise they will be caught if they translate “رَبَّنَا” to mean “we Lord”. However, to twist the meaning of the verses of the Quran they sneakily change their objective pronouns where they feel that no one will easily catch them.

أَرْسَلْ” is derived from “رسل” which is the root word of first form (past) of Arabic verb “رْسَلَ” and “أَرْسَل” is the 4th form of its verb, which is technically an imperative or command verb that orders someone to communicate, to correspond, to deliver a message, to message, to address, to post, to mail, to consign and to inscribe etc. However, according to its formation “ارسل” is also a ‘verbal noun’ of highest comparative degree called “اسم فضیلت” a superlative noun or elative noun, which is made by adding letter “alif” in the beginning of first form of Arabic verb or the source (مصدر). An easy remembering and well-known example of “اسم فضیلت” (Elative noun) is “اکبر” which is actually کبر + ا = اکبر to mean ‘the biggest’, ‘most highest’ or ‘almighty’. However, at the same time this is also an imperative verb but there are further rules of its use and determination as an Elative verbal noun or an imperative verb. These rules are not difficult neither there is any confusion upon taking such words as a verbal noun or as an imperative verb but instead of using personal opinion of hitting or missing, an intensive linguistic knowledge and careful attention is required to correctly translate these phrases, such as keeping in view simple grammatical structure of making Arabic sentences, “Verb+Subject+Object” and paying attention to the placement of pronouns, prepositions, articles and particles coming before and after such complex phrases. In the phrase “أَرْسَلْنَا” of the verse 40:78 “نَا” cannot be treated as a subject because it is already in objective form therefore it does not fit in the rule of grammatical structure of forming Arabic sentence with regular verb (Verb+Subject+Object). Hence, in the verse 40:78 “ارسل” of “أَرْسَلْنَا” is not a verb but a ‘verbal noun’ of highest comparative degree (اسم فضیلت) to correctly mean “Our exalted delivery”.   “رُسُلًا” (ا + رُسُلً) is an Accusative Past Verb in a typical Classical Arabic style in which automatic system of cases (اعراب /vowel movements of fatha, kasra & damma) has been phonetically adjusted with full letters of vowels contrary to the style of “cases” (اعراب) invented and added on the words of the Quran quite after the death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Therefore, wherever, it was necessary the Quran has itself created the “cases” (اعراب) within the formation of its own words by using full vowels (alif-wao-ya) to protect the meaning of Quranic words without any external interference of changing the meaning of Allah’s words. Therefore, “رُسُلًا” is an accusative past verb, which takes a direct object of the subject (“ارسل” exalted delivery of “أَرْسَلْنَا”) without change of meaning. Although, the nominative case marker “damma” was added on “رُ” of “رُسُلًا” afterwards, to achieve the same purpose of directly referring “رُسُلًا” to the subject (ارسل ofأَرْسَلْنَا) by making it a nominative case but this afterwards invented addition of case markers on the words of the Quran is not necessarily required because nominative case is the default case which is automatically achieved in pronunciation. “مِّن” is a preposition to mean “from/of” and the phrase “قَبْلِكَ” is the combination of كَ + قَبْلِ in which “قَبْلِ” means ‘before’ or ‘earlier’ and “كَ” is a second person singular objective pronoun to mean “your/yours”.

This pronoun “كَ” has been misused to make “Rasool” to Prophet (pbuh). As I have explained above in the details of objective pronoun “نَا” that it cannot be translated as a subjective verb to mean “we” and we have also seen the example of “رَبَّنَا” in which taking objective pronoun “نَا” as a subjective pronoun to mean “We” will ruin the correct meaning of “رَبَّنَا” by giving its opposite meaning “We Lord” instead of its correct meaning “our Lord”. The same rule applies on the objective pronoun “كَ”. If we replace “كَ” from objective to subjective pronoun the phrases like “رَبّْكَ” will be translated to mean “You Lord” instead of “your Lord”. This is the reason why our scholars carefully take the correct meaning of phrases like “رَبّْكَ” to mean “your Lord” so that no one catch them making changes in the statements of the Quran because this phrase “رَبّْكَ” is quite common and known to almost everyone like the phrase “رَبَّنَا” and both phrases are used in supplications as well to which people usually remember by heart.

However, the same scholars deceive Allah and His people by twisting the same objective pronoun “كَ” to mean “YOU” in the translation of other phrases, where they want to add their non Quranic beliefs and lies in the interpretation of the Quran.

Therefore, “قَبْلِكَ” correctly means “BEFORE YOUR/BEFORE YOURS

There is a big difference between “YOU” and “YOUR”. The person who is being addressed is referred by “YOU” but something in his possession is referred by “YOUR” or “YOURS”.

If you go to school to drop off or pick up your children and meet other parents there whom you want to say something about their children what will you say ‘your children’ or ‘you children’?

If you want to say something about the place where someone lives you will say ‘your house’ instead of ‘you house’. If you talk to someone about the book that he has got, you will say “your book”. Likewise, in the verse 40:78 that we are studying Allah is saying “قَبْلِكَ” to mean ‘before yours’, which means the book, the message, the inscription, the post before your one.   This is quite simple and just a matter of common sense but extremely difficult to understand for those who have blind faith in the false exegesis of their scholars who are the root cause of our deviation from the actual Islam.

Therefore, the words “وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلًا مِّن قَبْلِكَ” of the verse 40:78 correctly means “And always our exalted message has been delivered before from yours

مِنْهُم” (هُم+مِن) of/from them, “مَّن” is normally taken as a ‘Relative Pronoun (اِسْمٌ مَوْصُول) to mean who, what, which, that and whoever but the same word “مَّن” is also used as a verb “اِسْتَقَى” and “اِسْتَمَدّ” to mean borrow from, derive from, draw from, get from, obtain from and take from. However, the layout of these words “مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ” linguistically required a verb among prepositions, pronouns and nouns in the set of the words “مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ”. Therefore, in accordance with the grammatical rules the word “مَّن” will be counted here as a verb instead of a ‘relative pronoun’ otherwise these words “مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ” will not express anything. The phrase “قَصَصْنَا” is the combination of نَا + قَصَصْ in which “نَا” is the first person plural ‘objective’ pronoun to mean “our/us”, the detail of which can be seen in the above paragraphs and “قَصَصْ” means ‘clip’, ‘literature’, ‘recounting’, ‘repeat in speech or writing words previously said or written. “عَلَيْكَ” is a combination of كَ + عَلَي in which “كَ” is a second person singular objective pronoun to mean “you/yours”, which cannot be translated to mean “you” as we have discussed earlier with the examples of “رَبّْكَ” to mean “your Lord” and “رَبَّنَا” to mean “our Lord”. Nor is “رَبَّنَا” translated to mean “we Lord” neither “رَبّْكَ” is taken to mean “you Lord”. Therefore, if “رَبّْكَ” is not translated to mean “you Lord” how is “عَلَيْكَ” translated to mean “on you”?

Hence, “عَلَيْكَ” is not “on or upon you” but “on or upon your referred thing”, which is in your possession or belongs to or nominated to the addressee. So, Prophet (pbuh) was an addressee, who can’t be addressed by objective pronoun “your”. Therefore, objective pronoun “كَ” to mean “your” refers something else other than the personality of the Prophet (pbuh) such as “on your book”, “on your inscription”, “on your delivered message” etc.

However, “عَلَي” means ‘found on’, ‘founded on’, upon, on, about and within as explained in the analysis of the verse 9:97 in the beginning of this article. Therefore, “عَلَيْكَ” correctly means ‘within your/yours’, ‘on your/yours’, ‘upon your/yours’, ‘founded on your/yours’ etc.

So, the words “مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ” correctly means “from them derived/drawn/got/obtained/taken our clip/literature/recounting/repeat in speech/previously said or written words founded on yours”.

The next clause of the verse 40:78 that we are studying starts from the phrase “وَمِنْهُم” in which conjunction “و” links this clause with the previous clause of speech and “مِنْهُم” (هُم+مِن) means of/from them. The next word “مَّن” is a ‘Relative Pronoun (اِسْمٌ مَوْصُول) to mean who, what, which, that, whatever, whoever, and verb to mean borrow from, derive from, draw from, get from, obtain from and take from. “لَّمْ” is a negating particle to mean “no, not, without”. “نَقْصُصْ” means ‘downtrend’, ‘diminish’, ‘drop’, ‘curtailment’, ‘contraction’, ‘lower’, ‘lessen’, ‘dwindling, ‘hole’, ‘wane’, ‘come to an end’, decrement’, ‘imperfection’, ‘defect’, ‘lack’, ‘deformity’. “عَلَيْكَ” correctly means ‘within your/yours’, ‘on your/yours’, ‘upon your/yours’, ‘founded on your/yours’ etc.

Hence, the clause “وَمِنْهُم مَّن لَّمْ نَقْصُصْ عَلَيْكَ” correctly means “and from them whatever/obtained/drawn, without lack/defect/deformity founded on yours

وَمَا” means ‘and not’ because article “مَا” is coming before the past verb “كَانَ” therefore, according to the linguistic rules this particle “مَا” is taken as a negative “مَا” (مَاالنافیةٍ). “كَانَ” is the past of ‘Be’. The phrase “لِرَسُولٍ” is the combination of رَسُولٍ + لِ in which “لِ” is a preposition to mean ‘for’, in order to’ and ‘to’. Whereas, “رَسُولٍ” is the ‘delivered message’, ‘mail’, ‘memorandum, ‘communication’, ‘correspondence’, ‘ address, ‘informant’, ‘handout’, ‘circular’, ‘message’, delivery, post, ‘consignment’ and ‘inscription’. “أَنْ” means ‘that’, ‘so as to’, ‘with a view to’, ‘while’ etc. “يَأْتِيَ” with forthcoming preposition “ب” is an idiom to mean “bring”, “fetch”, ‘derive’, ‘happen’, ‘occur’, ‘take place’, ‘come about’, ‘transpire’, ‘fall’ itself, ‘crop up’, ‘materialise’, ‘arise’, ‘arrive’, ‘appear’, ‘come to pass’, ‘befall’, ‘take or occupy a specified position in space itself. The phrase “بِآيَةٍ” is the combination of هِ + آيَتِ + بِ in which “بِ” is the preposition to mean ‘with’, ‘by’ and “آيَتِ” means ‘verses’, and “هِ” is a possessive pronoun in objective form to mean ‘its’, which refers the verses of “رَسُول”.

This phrase “بِآيَةٍ” again makes it clear that “رَسُول” is not a person but in fact an ‘inscription’, ‘delivered message’, ‘circular’, ‘consignment’, memorandum or a ‘delivery’ of its verses.

Hence, “وَمَا كَانَ لِرَسُولٍ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ بِآيَةٍ” correctly means “and it was not for Rasool (message) that to befall with its verses”.

إِلَّا” means except and “بِإِذْنِ” is the combination of إِذْنِ + بِ in which “بِ” is the preposition to mean ‘with/by’ and “إِذْنِ” means authorization, permit, license, warrant, acknowledge, admit, listen to “اللَّهِ”  God.

إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ” means “Except by authorisation of God

فَإِذَا” means ‘in fact when’. Letter “ف” in the beginning is used to make the forthcoming statement a ‘universal fact’, ‘necessary’ and ‘entire truth’. Therefore, this prefix “ف” must be translated in the translation to mean ‘indeed’, ‘for sure’, ‘actually’, ‘must’ and ‘in fact’ etc. “جَاءَ” means ‘turn up’, ‘come’, ‘get to’, ‘reach’, ‘arrive’. “أَمْرُ” means ‘mandate’, ‘condition’, ‘order’, ‘decree’, ‘instruction’. “اللَّهِ” God’s. “قُضِيَ” decide, judge, adjudicate, ‘try’, ‘award’, ‘settle’ and ‘require’.

بِالْحَقِّ” means appropriately, correctly, duly, equitably, fairly, fitly, honestly, justly, properly, rightfully, rightly, truly.

Hence, “فَإِذَا جَاءَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قُضِيَ بِالْحَقِّ” correctly means “indeed when came God’s order justifying right

و” is linking conjunction to mean “and”. “خَسِرَ” is opposite to come or arrive (جَاءَ) therefore, “خَسِرَ” means ‘caused destruction’. ‘suffering loss’, ‘incur loss’ ‘perish’ ‘destroy’ ‘annihilate’ die (for animals), forfeit, throw away, lost, neglect, mislay, slip, omit, fail to make use of, fail to take advantage of and let go by, obliterate, wipe off the face of the earth, wipe off the map, kill, slaughter, exterminate, eliminate, liquidate, eradicate, extinguish, finish off, erase, root out, crush, decay, demolish, devastate, eat up, exhaust, overwhelm, ruin, suppress, wreck, smash, shatter, finished off, liquidate, negate, wipe out, out date.

The phrase “هُنَالِكَ” is a combination of “هُنَاكَ” and preposition “لِ” to mean ‘for/to’. “هُنَاكَ” is pointing from far or an indication noun (اِسْمُ إِشَارَةٍ لِلْبَعِيد) to mean ‘there are’, ‘there is’ and ‘therein’ etc. It is also used to express confirmation, dismay, disappointment, shock, sadness, depression and alarming situation.

الْمُبْطِلُونَ” is the definite plural noun of “مُبْطِل” derived out of Arabic root word “بطل” means ‘void’, ‘invalidate’, ‘nullify’, ‘vitiate’ ‘deny’, ‘reject’, ‘revoke’ and ‘abolish. So, “الْمُبْطِلُون” correctly means ‘the rejecters’, ‘those who are revoking’, ‘the revocatory’, ‘the deniers’, ‘the abolishers; ‘the invalidators, ‘the nullifiers, ‘the revoking, ‘the voids’ and ‘the avoiders (Arabic legal term). Also, according to “Sihah” of AI‐Jowharee, “Misbah” of Al- Feiyoomee, “Kenz el‐Loghah” of Ibn‐Maaroof and Kamoos of Al Ferozabadi “الْمُبْطِلُون” are ‘those who are ‘bigheaded or strong hearted in fighting or war’. So, according to the above mentioned classical Arabic lexicons “الْمُبْطِلُون” also means ‘the fighters’ or ‘the warriors’.

 

And incurred loss therein for the avoiders/and caused distraction therein for the rejecters or the deniers/ and there is forfeited dismay for the revokers/and mislaid disappointment therein for the abolishers, the invalidators, the nullifiers, the fighters, the warriors, those who vetoed”.

Here is the correct translation which we have derived from word to word analysis of the verse 40:78.

مِنْهُم مَّن قَصَصْنَا عَلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُم مَّن لَّمْ نَقْصُصْ عَلَيْكَ وَمَا كَانَ لِرَسُولٍ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ بِآيَةٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا جَاءَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قُضِيَ بِالْحَقِّ وَخَسِرَ هُنَالِكَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ” (40:78)

And always our exalted message has been delivered before from yours, from them obtained our literature founded on yours and from them whatever drawn without deformity founded on yours and it was not for Rasool (message) that to befall with its verses except by authorisation of God, indeed when came God’s order justifying right and caused loss therein for those who are the deniers.

(Word to word correct translation of the verse 40:78)

 

We have seen the word to word correct translation of the above verse 40:78 in the misleading translations of which all traditional and Quranist scholars did nothing but sneakily played with the pronouns to make Prophets to the verdict of Allah came in His message to all Prophets. Allah called “Rasool” to its delivered message but our scholars concealed Allah’s statements revealed in the Quran and made “Rasool” to Prophets (Quranists interpretation) and Personalities above and over the Prophets (Traditional interpretation). In the above verse 40:78 the word “بِآيَةٍ” to mean “with its verses” after the words “رَسُولٍ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ” if we take Rasool as a prophet in these words it means “befalling prophet with its verses, which is absurd because verses are the sentences of a message but they are not counted the parts of human body of a prophet. So, only a message is consisted of verses which is called Rasool (رَسُولٍ) in the above verse 40:78.

 

Therefore, all traditional and Quranist translations and exegesis (tafseer) of the Quran are false and misleading, which were invented to bring down whole Muslim nation towards obeying the non Quranic literature invented in the name of ‘Sunnah’ (practice) of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) centuries after his death, when the nexus of anti-Quran Arab pagans and their polytheist anti-Islam Persian Zoroastrian partners came into power and occupied Islamic Empire.

 

Since, than it became an essential part of our belief that “Rasool” mentioned in the Quran were people like Prophets and some Prophets were “Rasool” and some were not “Rasool” but just Prophets. The only purpose of this evil forgery was to keep the Quran away from people assigning them the non-Quranic even non-Islamic satanic literature in which they brought back into Islam all polytheist and pagan rituals, which were declared unlawful in the Quran and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) stopped them and stood against them when he received Allah’s message in which including Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) Allah ordered everyone to obey Allah and obey the Message. “أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ” (4:59). In fact this verse applies on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as well in relation to obey Allah and Obey Rasool (the message). Therefore, if the Prophet (pbuh) was Rasool himself then who was his “الرَّسُولَ” to be obeyed? Whereas, Quran has nowhere made any exception for Prophet (pbuh) !

Also, the word “أَطِيعُواْ” (obey) never came with “نبی” (prophet) but the orders were given to “نبی” (prophet) throughout the Quran. Whereas, no order was given to “الرَّسُولَ”. All orders of Salaat, Zakat and instructions regarding family and wives were given to “نبی” (prophet). Whereas, “الرَّسُولَ” (Rasool) was not mentioned anywhere in these orders except obeying the Rasool.

 

Therefore, if Rasool was the title of a person he should be involved in other matters of life as well as an ideal personality or a role model but throughout the Quran no such example of Rasool has been given except to obey Rasool.

 

If the words “نبی” (prophet) and “الرَّسُولَ” (the Rasool) refer the same personality why did Allah use two different names “نبی” (prophet) and “الرَّسُولَ” (the Rasool) for the same person and if they are two personalities why did “الرَّسُولَ” (the Rasool) remain absent in all other aspects of human life?

If only “نبی” (prophet) has been portrayed as an activist then what was the function or where is the activity of “الرَّسُولَ” (the Rasool) as a person?

Blind people can’t see vigilant words of the Quran in which “Cult of Personality” has been discarded “وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ” (3:144).

The definition of the “Rasool” what we have seen in the analysis and correct translation of the verse 40:78 the same definition of “رَسُولٌ” came in the verse 3:144 of Surah Al Imran in which the opening words “وَمَا” to mean “and not”, “and no”, “and without” are clearly negating the “Cult of Personality” of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The words “وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ” refer the situation without Muhammad (pbuh) and time when Muhammad (pbuh) was not there, when Muhammad (pbuh) is not there and when Muhammad (pbuh) will not be there, “إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ” Only Rasool has always been occurring/ happening.

This Quranic word “خَلَتْ” is an epithetical noun of typical classical Arabic literature, which contains Godly attributes. However, meaning wise “خَلَتْ” is a synonym of the word “أخل” used in modern Arabic language to mean “Contravene”, which is defined in all standard Arabic dictionaries to mean “offend against the prohibition or order of a law, treaty, or code of conduct”

The root word of “خَلَتْ” and “أخل” is the same and the only difference between two is “خَلَتْ” contains attributes of God as an epithetical noun which is made by adding letter “ت” at the end whereas, letter “alif” is added in the beginning to make an Elative noun (اسم فضیلت) for general use as seen in the formation of Elative nouns “أرسَلَ” or “اْنزِلَ”etc. explained earlier in this article. Hence, both “خَلَتْ” and “أخل” are based on the same proto root “خ ل” to derive their same meaning.

However, including this verse 3:144 the Arabic word “خَلَتْ” is wrongly translated throughout the Quran to mean Persian word “خلوت”, which is used in Persian language for “تخلیہ” to mean ‘go away’, ‘pass away’, ‘leave alone’, ‘isolate’ or ‘empty’. You might have noticed the use of these Persian words “خلوت”, and “تخلیہ” in popular film “Mughl-e-Azam” together with so many other Persian, Mughal or Turkish screenplays made on the royal stories in which when Caliphs or kings want secrecy or isolation from others they are shown using the same word “تخلیہ” and “خلوت”. The same words also used when go to their bedroom.

Therefore, to sabotage the actual statements of Arabic Quran and to bring non-Quranic false beliefs in the interpretation of the Quran, the key Arabic words used in the verses of the Quran were replaced in the translation with phonetically similar Persian words.

The anti-Quran forces have used the same evil formula to sabotage the actual statement of the verse 3:144 “وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ” in which Allah told us that “Not Muhammad but Rasool (Message) has always been His order of law or code of conduct”, “مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُbefore the delivery of his message.

So, the opening clause of the verse 3:144 is clearly telling us that “Muhammad is not Rasool but Rasool is God’s code of conduct or His order of Law that has been always delivered since before Muhammad

 

Hence, the above verse 3:144 is defining that “Rasool” is Allah’s ‘Order of Law’ or His ‘Code of Conduct’.

 

When this ‘Code of Conduct’ or ‘Order of Law’, called Rasool (رَسُولٌ) in the Quran, was sent to all communities and each and every nation (10:47, 16:36) God took the most righteous people from them to deliver on them His Code of Conduct (رَسُولٌ) and appointed them to commission it in their land and among their people. These exalted Message bearer and Commissioners of Devine Law are called Prophet (نبی) in the Quran.

However, Rasool (رَسُولٌ) and Prophet (نبی) were correlatives and had a compulsory working relationship between each other but they were from different kinds or species in which Code of Conduct or Rasool (رَسُولٌ) was Devine memorandum or Devine Inscription consisted of delivered message, delivered communication, delivered address, delivered speech, delivered consignment and delivered mail of God, which is also the established evidence over people including the Prophet as a certificate, i.e. a necessary document of God’s verification and certification of Prophet hood (2:143) “وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًاand the delivered message establishes a certificate on yours (community and yourself- pronoun كُمْ of عَلَيْكُمْ refers all people including the Prophet as عَلَى النَّاسِ mentioned in the beginning of this verse). Therefore, Rasool (الرَّسُولُ) is actually a certified legal instrument (شَهِيدًا) of a Prophet which contains Divine Law and Code of Conduct.

Whereas, the Prophet (نبی) is a person and a representative from human species, who is also bound to obey the Rasool (رَسُولٌ) together with whole human species (يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ – 2:143 and وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ -4:59), This is also mentioned in earlier Inscriptions (وَإِنَّهُ لَفِي زُبُرِ الْأَوَّلِينَ – 26:196)

 

Furthermore, the Quran states that Allah and His Angels communicate on the NABI (Prophet) “إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ” (33:56), and nowhere mentioned in the Quran that Allah or His Angels ever communicated with “Rasool” (رَسُولٌ). This is because “Rasool” (رَسُولٌ) itself is an established communication on the Prophet (نبی).

Hence, there is no confusion in the Quran on the matter of “Rasool” (رَسُولٌ) and Prophet (نبی), and on the orders of obeying the Rasool (رَسُولٌ) but only pagans have created a confusion in understanding “Rasool” (رَسُولٌ) and Prophet (نبی). They have sat aside the Quran and made “Rasool” (رَسُولٌ) to Prophet (نبی) on purpose so that they can constrain Muslims to follow whatever they have invented in the name of the Prophet (pbuh) instead of obeying the Quran which is actual Rasool (رَسُولٌ) in Allah’s words to be obeyed (يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ – 2:143 and وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ -4:59) by everyone.

 

Therefore, words of the Quran are our beckons and Quran is a certificate of Islam and the Quran alone certifies us as a Muslim. If we sat side the Quran for what Persian Imams or anyone else has invented we are definitely not Muslim. This is because Allah has clearly said in the Quran “وَلاَ يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا” (18:26) “And He does not involve anyone in His order”. Quran has also quoted the statement of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the verse 10:15 “مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أُبَدِّلَهُ مِن تِلْقَاءِ نَفْسِي إِنْ أَتَّبِعُ إِلاَّ مَا يُوحَى إِلَيَّIt is not to me that I make any change from myself as I only follow what is revealed to me. “إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” (69:40) “That it’s the word/statement of noble message”.

In the above verse 69:40 the Noble Quran has been called “رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” and its words called its “قَوْلُ”. If we believe and translate “رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” to mean “noble Prophet” then “إِنَّهُ” makes the whole Quran “قَوْلُ” of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) instead of “قَوْلُ” or word of Allah. Whereas, the noble Quran is the word of God revealed on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Prophet (pbuh) did not write the words of the Quran with his personal opinion. Therefore, the verse 69:40 leaves no room of taking “رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” to mean “noble Prophet”. I am sure you are familiar with the word “قَوْلُ” which is also used with the sayings of popular saints, such as “قَوْلُ” of Hazrat Ali (RA) or “قَوْلُ” of baba Farid or “قَوْلُ” of such and such person in which “قَوْلُ” is correctly taken to mean “کلمہ” or “کلام” of someone. In the same way Allah has called His revelation ‘Word of God’ “كَلِمَةُ اللّهِ” (9:40), “كَلِمَاتُ اللَّهِ” (31:27, 10.64, 6:34), “كَلِمَةٍ مِّنَ اللّهِ” (3:39) and “كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ” (40:6, 10:96, 10:33, 7:137).

If the statement of the verse 69:40 “إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” is taken to mean “the word of NABI Karim (noble Prophet), where is the Word of Allah then?

Alternatively, you will have to believe that the words of the Quran were not Allah’s own words but invented by noble Prophet, if you believe that “رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ” means “noble Prophet”. So, there is no way of taking “رَسُول” (Rasool) to mean Prophet.

 

Therefore, to bring this false dogma in Islam the actual statements of the Quran have been systematically distorted throughout the translation of the whole Quran and paid a careful attention to all relevant verses of the Quran to make sure the consistency of evil forgery so that no one can catch the wickedness of evil scholars of Islam.

 

To achieve their evil purpose of constraining people to obey their satanic inventions they gave misleading translation of the following verse 7:158 in which they invented a false statement from Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that “I am Rasool of Allah” same as they had invented it the fake Ahadith and falsely attributed them to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that he was Allah’s Rasool and Muslims are bound to obey his Ahadith in compliance with Allah’s order of “وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ”. The blind followers of evil take their words more than Allah’s words and set aside the Quran, which is actually the Rasool (الرَّسُولَ) mentioned to obey in the words “وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ”.

قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللّهِ إِلَيْكُمْ جَمِيعًا الَّذِي لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ النَّبِيِّ الْأُمِّيِّ الَّذِي يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ وَكَلِمَاتِهِ وَاتَّبِعُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ (7:158)

To invent the false translation of the words “إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللّهِ”   (I am Allah’s Rasool) of the above verse 7:158 our scholars and their pagan ancestors distorted the word “إِنِّي” to mean “I am”. Whereas, the whole world knows that first person singular pronoun “اَنَا” is used in Arabic to say “I am”, which has been an accepted and recognised first person singular pronoun in Arabic language since and even before the revelation of the Quran. This is not even the case as if Allah did not know the use of this Arabic pronoun “اَنَا” because the pronoun “اَنَا” has been already used in the Quran to mean “I am” in the same way as it is used in general Arabic language.

However, to justify the false meaning of “إِنِّي” to mean “I am”, our scholars have invented packs of lies in their exegesis (Tafseer) that uneducated backward Arab Badduins (villagers) say “إِنِّي”    to “أنا”     . Some scholars falsely claimed that “أنا”    is called “إِنِّي” in Palestine, some said in Egypt “إِنِّي”    used instead of “أنا”   to mean “I am”, some invented that “إِنِّي” is spoken in Tunisia to mean “I am”, some said “إِنِّي” is used to mean “I am” in Lebanon and some lied that “إِنِّي” is spoken in Damascus to mean “I am”, instead of “أنا“.

To cover their one lie our scholars have invented hundreds of lies in their Tafseer but again they could not hide and alter the truth with their fake exegesis. This is because Arab Badduins are the one who speak correct Arabic and use “أنا” to mean “I am”. Also, nowhere in the Arab world including Palestine, Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon and Damascus “إِنِّي” has ever used instead of “أنا”   to mean “I am”.

However, to press lies on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) the phrase “إِنِّي” of the above verse 7:158 has been changed to first person pronoun “أنا” and falsely translated it to mean “I am” in all translations of this verse 7:158. Whereas, the phrase “إِنِّي” is the combination of ي + إِن in which “إِن” means “that” and “ي” is the first person singular objective pronoun to mean “my”. You can see the correct use of this first person singular objective pronoun “ي” in the phrases like “رَبِّی”, which is correctly translated to mean “My Rab”, “My Lord” or “My Sustainer”. If our scholars do not translate “رَبِّی” to mean “I am Rab”, “I am Lord” or “I am Sustainer” how can they translate “إِنِّي” to mean “I am”?

Therefore, إِنِّي” correctly means “that my”. So, “قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللّهِ” correctly means “Said, O people my God’s message”.

إِلَيْكُمْ” = كُمْ (second person plural objective pronoun to mean ‘your’) + إِلَيْ (on, upon, over, founded on). In Arabic “جَمِيعًا” is called to something which is ‘everything all alone’, ‘complete and as a whole’, ‘the only thing’, ‘all without exception’, ‘one and all’, ‘a thing complete in itself’, ‘all there is of a thing’.

Therefore, “إِلَيْكُمْ جَمِيعًا” means: founded on your everything all alone/on your everyone collectively.

In the misleading translations of this verse the word “جَمِيعًا” has been wrongly connected with the forthcoming word “الَّذِي”. Whereas, according to the linguistic rules letter “alif” at the end of “جَمِيعًا” turns it over back to the subject “رَسُولُ اللّهِ” (Allah’s message). Therefore, technically “جَمِيعًا” is approaching its subject according to Arabic grammar. “الَّذِي” is the subjective pronoun and “لَهُ” means ‘to Him/for Him’ as a combination of proposition “لَ” to mean ‘to/for’ and “هُ” is the third person singular objective pronoun to mean ‘His/Him’. “مُلْكُ” ownership, property, rule, power, domination. “السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ” of the skies and the earth. “لاَ” not. “إِلَـهَ” a deity. “إِلاَّ” but. “هُوَ” He. “يُحْيِـي” gives life/is giving life. “وَيُمِيتُ” and gives death/and is giving death.

One more thing is notable in the misleading pagan translation of this verse 7:158 that Allah has been defined as a deity in the translation of the words “لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ” and translated to mean “there is no deity but He” or “There is no god but He”. So, pagans have eventually brought their belief and dogma of having deity in their religion no matter only one or more but deity is always a lifeless and dead deity. Whereas, Allah’s words are discarding the pagan belief in deities by His clear words “لاَ” not. “إِلَـهَ” a deity. “إِلاَّ” but. “هُوَ” He. “يُحْيِـي” gives life. “وَيُمِيتُ” and gives death, which clearly means that God is not a lifeless dead deity but He is the owner and ruler of the skies Who Himself has a power of giving life and death.

فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِmust accept God with (letter فَ in the beginning emphasizes to mean must), “وَرَسُولِهِand His delivered message.

The next word “النَّبِيِّ” is not connected with the previous phrase “وَرَسُولِهِ” because linguistically “وَرَسُولِهِ” is the ending phrase of previous clause of speech “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ” and “وَرَسُولِهِ” finishes on possessive pronoun “هِ” of “اللّهِ” used in the phrase “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ” that makes “وَرَسُولِهِ” to mean ‘Allah’s Rasool’. Whereas, “النَّبِيِّ” is independently starting with the definite article “ال” and there is no possessive or objective pronoun “هِ” is coming at the end of “النَّبِيِّ” to count it similar or same as “وَرَسُولِهِ” but in fact “النَّبِيِّ” is being defined by its adjective “الْأُمِّيِّ”. Also the subjective pronoun “الَّذِي” has been used to elaborate “اَلنَبِّی” further from the point of view of his individual efforts of accepting Allah with believe (يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ) as a first of the believers who is “الْأُمِّيِّ”. The first individual who obeys the compulsory order of “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ” and His words (وَكَلِمَاتِهِ) that is actually “وَرَسُولِهِ” (His message) coming right after “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ”.

So, the words “النَّبِيِّ الْأُمِّيِّ الَّذِي يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ وَكَلِمَاتِهِ” are actually saying that “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) was “الْأُمِّيِّ” who (الَّذِي) accepts/believes (يُؤْمِنُ) in Allah (بِاللّهِ) and His Words (وَكَلِمَاتِهِ) in accordance with Allah’s orders (فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ).

You don’t need to be an expert in Arabic language to understand the Rasool, even a layman, who is not blind, can understand that “رَسُولِهِ” is not “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) but “النَّبِيِّ” (the prophet) is the one who was given a compulsory order of believing in Allah and His Message. Same message is applied on everyone to believe in Allah and His Message (فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ) and “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) accepts this order of believing in Allah and His words (يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ وَكَلِمَاتِه).

In fact Quran itself defines “رَسُول” with an example of “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) that “رَسُولِهِ” mentioned in the earlier clause of speech “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ” is actually “كَلِمَاتِه” repeated in the next clause with the same pattern “يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ وَكَلِمَاتِهِ”. Hence, according to the Quran “رَسُول” is not “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) but Allah’s Words (كَلِمَاتِه).

The word “الْأُمِّيِّ” is derived out of Arabic root word “امم” to mean ‘to take over ownership of services’, ‘nationalize’, ‘associate’, ‘communalize’, ‘league’, ‘join’, ‘consort’, ‘mingle’, ‘tie up with’, ‘hang out’, ‘run with’, ‘get together’, ‘keep company’, ‘get around’, ‘agree with’, ‘connect with’, ‘lead’, guide’, ‘master’, ‘foundation’, ‘base’, ’fundament’, ‘umbrella’.

In Arabic language ‘mother’ is called “اْمِّ” because the attributes of all above stated core meaning of this root word “امم” are found in ‘mother’. The popular Arabic word “اِمام” means ‘leader’ is also derived from the same root word “امم”. Throughout the Arab world the phrase “أم الکتاب” is used to mean ‘master book’, “أم السوستة” is used to mean ‘master spring leaf’ and “أم البلاد” to mean ‘Mother country’. Whereas, “ام” is the verb of the root word “امم” to mean ‘generate’, ‘beget’, ‘pamper’, ‘cocker’, ‘indulge’, ‘bring’, ‘brew’, ‘bear’.

This is quite common grammatical rule in Arabic language that letter “ی” is added at the end of a verb to make it a ‘gerund’, which is a type of verbal noun but a ‘gerund’ also contains some verbal actions similar to what we make in English by adding “ing” at the end of the verb. Hence, according to its correct grammatical formation this Quranic word “الْأُمِّيِّ” is actually a combination of يِّ + أُمِّ + الْ = الْأُمِّيِّ means “THE BEARING” or “THE LEADING

Curse on those evils who have been committing blasphemy by falsely translating this Quranic word “الْأُمِّيِّ” to mean ‘uneducated’ (جاھل) or ‘illiterate’ and they called our exalted prophet Muhammad (pbuh) an illiterate (جاھل) or uneducated person in their translations and exegesis

I have scientifically proven in my research articles “UMMI NABI” and “HOW WORDS AND LANGUAGES WERE INVENTED” that our beloved prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was highly educated person of his time, who was expert in Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew languages, and educated in prevalent Aramaic language from top academic institutions of his time.

Our ignorant scholars have been forwarding ahead the same translation of the Quran, which was initially given by anti-Muhammad and anti-Quran nexus of Arab pagans and Persian Zoroastrians in the so called golden era of Islam in which all anti-Quran pagan rituals were incorporated into Islam through excessive circulation of false Islamic literature.

So, النَّبِيِّ الْأُمِّيِّ” correctly means, ‘the bearing prophet’ or ‘the leading prophet’. The word “وَاتَّبِعُوهُ” is a combination of هُ + اتَّبِعُو + وَ in which “وَ” is a conjunction to mean “and”, “اتَّبِعُو” is a passive voice command (imperative) verb to mean “be followed” and “go behind”, “هُ” is a possessive pronoun to mean “its/his” which refers to what “النَّبِيِّ” (the prophet) was bearing or leading (الْأُمِّيِّ). Therefore, “اتَّبِعُوه” orders to everyone or to all human beings addressed in the beginning of this verse (يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ), including “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) to follow his bearing, which is Allah’s message (رَسُولِهِ). Now the Question arises if “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet) is himself “رَسُولِهِ” how will this order “فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ” apply on “النَّبِيِّ” (the Prophet)?

The phrase “لَعَلَّكُمْ” is a combination of كُمْ + لَعَلَّ in which “كُمْ” is the second person plural objective pronoun to mean “your”, which cannot be translated to mean “you” as seen in all misleading translations of this verse. Why don’t they translate the same objective pronoun “کْم” to mean “you” in the phrases like “ایمانکم”, “دِينِكُمْ” and “إِلَٰهُكُم” etc.? This is because people will catch the evil work of our scholars, if they translate “ایمانکم” to mean “you belief” instead of “your belief” and “دِينِكُمْ” to mean “you Deen” instead of “your Deen”, and “إِلَٰهُكُم” to mean “you deity” instead of “your deity”. However, they sneakily twist the statement of Allah by taking wrong meaning of the same words where they want to insert their false beliefs in the words of God. Are they and their followers really Muslims?

The word “لَعَلَّ” correctly means ‘force’, ‘power’, ‘strength’, ‘might’ and ‘cornelian’. However, throughout the pagan translation of the Quran “لَعَلَّ” is wrongly translated to mean “may be” to create uncertainty in Allah’s words to stagger our belief in Allah’s statements. Whereas, only Allah’s words are certain and without any doubt. If Allah has said in the next phrase “تَهْتَدُونَ” that you are guided it means you are definitely guided, in which no one can bring any chance or possibility by using “may be” to create a doubt whether we will be guided or not. Indeed Allah’s words are certain and dead sure without any doubt.  Anyway, “تَهْتَدُونَ” is a plural verb in passive voice to mean ‘to keep you on the right path/to keep you guided’.

Here is the correct translation of the verse 7:158, which is falsely referred as a proof that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself said, “I am Allah’s Rasool”

قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللّهِ إِلَيْكُمْ جَمِيعًا الَّذِي لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ النَّبِيِّ الْأُمِّيِّ الَّذِي يُؤْمِنُ بِاللّهِ وَكَلِمَاتِهِ وَاتَّبِعُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ (7:158)

Said O people my God’s message founded on your everyone collectively, Who has His ownership to the skies and the earth, not a deity but He gives life and gives death, you must accept God and His message, the prophet bearing, who accepts God and His words and be adapted his bearing, your cornelian to keep you guided on the right path.

(Word to word correct translation 7:158)

 

Despite seeing word to word analysis of all above verses and Allah’s statement“الأَعْرَابُ أَشَدُّ كُفْرًا وَنِفَاقًا وَأَجْدَرُ أَلاَّ يَعْلَمُواْ حُدُودَ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَاللّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” (9:97) that “the Arabs are worst non-believers and hypocrites, have double standards, hide the truth and are real hindrance who don’t understand at all what Allah has revealed in His message and Allah is an intellect authority”. Some people don’t believe in Allah’s words and still comment, “how can Arabs be wrong in understanding the Quran since Arabic is their mother tongue which they use all times”. These commentators probably don’t know that Arabs call Rasool (رسول) to anyone even to non-Muslims because from inside they know that Rasool (رسول) is not a prophet in their language.

 

PUNDIT NEHRU AS “RASOOL”(رسول):

On 27 September 1956, when Indian Prime Minister Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru visited Saudi Arabia the Saudi authorities called Nehru “Rasool”!

 

The Tribune Express reported Arabs labelled Nehru Rasul-as-Salam.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1000123/nehru-a-tryst-with-destiny/

 

Saudi Arab greeted Pundit Nehru “مرحباء یا رسول السلام” (Welcome O Rasool Al Salam)

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_FT7CwAAQBAJ&pg=PT181&lpg=PT181&dq=arabs+called+rasul+to+nehru&source=bl&ots=2HKa49Dqxb&sig=nYzsEym5GPp1eC2kWfnvY2qDGnQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJmtfupuLTAhVmI8AKHWMnDIYQ6AEILTAB#v=onepage&q=arabs%20called%20rasul%20to%20nehru&f=false

 

Arabs gave a title of “Rasool” (رسول) to Pundit Nehru in 1956.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jiDYjw4gCzEC&pg=PA87&lpg=PA87&dq=nehru+in+saudi+arabia+was+called+rasool&source=bl&ots=UNBWduEqrX&sig=YeZvfDN0k_Gt4BWN4suvUqJq7so&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQ19aMsuLTAhVMLMAKHWZLBtsQ6AEIRTAH#v=onepage&q=nehru%20in%20saudi%20arabia%20was%20called%20rasool&f=false

 

Idol worshipper was addressed in Saudi Arabia “Ya Rasool As Salaam?

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=RklwAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA190&lpg=PA190&dq=nehru+rasool+of+salaam&source=bl&ots=Op1AzXVq6P&sig=tizVDvJmjLm2mSod3RLNJHNqPJ0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoqPCptOLTAhWJK8AKHZzWCdgQ6AEIIjAA#v=onepage&q=nehru%20rasool%20of%20salaam&f=false

 

The news of calling Pundit Nehru a “Rasool” (رسول) by Arabs can be seen in all International leading newspapers including daily Jang of Pakistan of 27, 28 and 29 September 1956 and also on internet search engines.

 

So, if Rasool (رسول) is a prophet (نبی) then all Arabs became non-believers and went out of Islam since they gave the title of “prophet” to Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru.

 

Hence, in Arabic language “Rasool” (رسول) is not a prophet but a ‘memorandum’, a ‘delivered message’, ‘a delivered speech’ and ‘an addressed circular’. Therefore, Arab knows the correct meaning and correct use of Arabic word “Rasool” (رسول) but unfortunately, when the same words come in the Quran they take them differently and entirely different to how they use them in their daily life. This is due to their false beliefs and non-Quranic dogma which bared them to understand the Quran in the same way as they speak their language. Our scholars work in the same way in which they don’t look at the words of the Quran but invent lies in the translation and exegesis (tafseer) of the Quran following the Arab pagans.

 

Quran is not different to what they speak in their general Arabic language because Allah Himself said in the Quran that the Quran was made and revealed in simple, straightforward, and general Arabic so that no one can make any excuse of not understanding Allah’s message, if it was revealed in other than simple and straightforward Arabic language which people use in their everyday life.

 

Therefore, according to the above statement of Allah the Quran is not in our scholars’ exegesis (tafseer) but in the general and standard Arabic language which is duly recognised in all academic institutions throughout the world in which Rasool (رسول) is not a prophet but a message.

 

Hence, the Quran is our Rasool (رسول), which we have forgotten and kept aside without thinking that we are called Muslims only because of the Quran otherwise we are non-Muslim pagans.

Advertisements