FROM HAROON SHADMAN
Verses regarding the name of the prophet ‘muhammadun’ (3;144, 33:40 and 48:29) and ‘muhammadin’ (47:2)
Are these all proper nouns or adjectives?
Your question about Quranic words ‘Muhammadun’ in the verses 3:144, 33:40 and 48:29, and ‘Muhammadin’ in the verse 47:2 is quite technical and demands complete honesty to determine whether they are the proper nouns to mean the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or they are just the linguistic adjectives. I was looking for explaining them since I found out the reality that “Prophet is not Rasool” and have written numerous research articles to explain “Rasool” in the light of the Quran. However, I could not write on these Quranic words ‘Muhammadun’ and ‘Muhammadin’ because I was still waiting for the outcome of comparison of those Quranists brothers who want to accept this reality that “Prophet is not Rasool” but at the same time they do not want to leave their false dogma invented by their scholars that “Prophet is a Rasool”. These confused brothers have been struggling to employ “تصریف آیات” (cross reference of verses), a false method of interpreting the Quran given by anti-Islam Manichean Iranian agents and their pagan alliance in which Quranic words are compared in the verses throughout the Quran without taking into account their contexts, their grammatical formations and their linguistic expositions.
In general the Arabic word “محمد” is the given or the first name, which is a nominative proper noun and “محمد” is also an adjective or passive participle of Arabic root “حمد” (HMD) to mean be praised, praiseworthy, commendable, be commanded, be acclaimed, be complimented, be recommended, attributed, applauded, be mentioned, glorified, lauded, optimized, elevated, erected, constructed, structured, cheered, approved, hailed, be greeted, be welcomed, defined praise, crowned, garlanded, ornamented, charmed, draped, covered, wrapped around, fallen in folds, rotated, enveloped, folded, enclosed, dressed, displayed, approved, lined, rolled, spread, modeled, fitted, turned out, decked, lapped, adhered, attached, encased, enchained, pinned, fixed, put together, glued, united, roped, stick, shackled, strapped, bowled, rolled along, endowed, flexed, inflected, fascinated, thanked, useful, beneficial, helpful, celebrated, appreciated.
Whereas, Arabic root word “حمد” (HMD) means: cheer, acclaim, praise, also synonym of “هلل”, commend, laud, telling one’s rosary, thankful, appreciate, speak favourably of, win with affection of, praise worthy deeds or performance, applause, celebrate, express approval or admiration for somebody or something, encomium, eulogy, extolment, tribute, construct, structure, put up, erect, elevate and define something high.
Therefore, in all recognised languages of the world including Arabic language ‘passive participles’ are always used to form acclaimed or admiring phrases in which taking the ‘passive participles’ or adjectives as a personal name is considered a severe mistake.
Hence, according to the recognised grammatical rules of Arabic language a personal name or a proper noun does not come in an indefinite form. Whereas, ‘passive participles’ and rest of the linguistic articles such as nouns and adjectives etc. come in both definite (الاسم المعرفة) and indefinite (الاسم النكرة) forms as seen in all standard Arabic grammars including the following link of lesson 23 of the world famous Al Madinah Arabic Books of grammar.
You can see in the above screen shot and link of Al Madinah Arabic scholarly books of grammar that a noun is either definite i.e. الْمَعْرِفَةُ or indefinite i.e., اَلنَّكِرَةُ and an indefinite noun is used to defined “unspecific person, place or thing” e.g., a man رَجُلٌ, a book كِتَابٌ, a city مَدِينَةٌ, and a cow بَقَرَةٌ. Whereas, a definite noun defines “the name of a specific person, place or thing” e.g., Muhammad محمد, Makkah مَكَّة, or Black-Stone اَلْحَجَرُ الأَسْوَد etc.
Hence, in the above statement of Al Madinah series of books of Arabic grammar and all other standard books of Arabic grammar the name Muhammad محمد comes in the category of ‘definite nouns’ (الاسم الْمَعْرِفَةُ) only as the name of a specific person or known name of Prophet Muhammad.
Whereas, according to Arabic grammar Nunation or Tanween (تنوين) does not come with any definite or specific name of a person or a thing and presence of any types of Nunation or Tanween (تنوين) makes the noun indefinite (اَلنَّكِرَةُ).
There are main three types of Nunation or Tanween (تنوين) used in Arabic:
1-Tanween damma (ضمة تنوين) is a double short vowel Nunation, which is made with writing twice a comma like sign “ٌ” or ‘’, sounds “un”. This double short vowel markers ‘damma’ is placed over the last letter of an unspecified noun, one normal comma “ُ” like marker and one reverse (ٗ) on top or by simply writing double ‘damma’ (”) where there is no provision of reversing ‘damma’ is available in type writer or letter settings. When a vowel sign is doubled it is taken to be equivalent to a short vowel joined to the letter ن (Nun) with a سكون zero vowel such as “دٌ” = “دُنْ” (dun). As Tanween damma (ضمة تنوين) is a nominative case (مرفوع) so it denotes that a noun having double ‘damma’ (ٌ) is a subject of the sentence being an indefinite noun (اَلنَّكِرَةُ).
2- Tanween fat-ḥa (فتحة تنوين) is also a double short vowel Nunation, which is made by writing double dash “ً” like “an” sound. This double short vowel marker of ‘fat-ha’ is placed over the last letter of an unspecified noun (اَلنَّكِرَةُ). If this is the last word of the sentence or when stopped upon it an additional “alif” is added and it prolongs to sound like “aa” instead of “an”. However, when this double fat-ha vowel sign comes on the last letter of a word which is not the last word of a sentence it is taken to be equivalent to a short vowel joined to the letter ن (Nun) with a سكون zero vowel such as “دً” = “دَنْ” (dan). As Tanween fat-ḥa (فتحة تنوين) is an accusative case (منصوب) so it denotes that a noun having double ‘fat-ha’ (ً) is indirect object being an indefinite (اَلنَّكِرَةُ) noun, which is usually governed by a preposition.
3- Tanween kasra (كسرة تنوين) is also a double short vowel Nunation, which is made with writing double dash like sign “ٍ” sounding “in”. This double short vowel marker of ‘kasra’ is placed under the last letter of a word, which is taken to be equivalent to a short vowel joined to the letter ن (Nun) with a سكون zero vowel such as “دٍ” = “دِنْ” (din). As Tanween kasra (كسرة تنوين) is a genitive case (مجرور) so it denotes that a noun having double ‘kasra’ (ٍ) is a ‘possessor’ of something coming after.
However, Tanween or Nunation is a phonetic guide like case markers at the last letter of a word in which the vowel point reflects the inflection case or conjugation mood.
Although, the case markers were added on the words of the Quran quite after the revelation and the death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but their initial purpose was determining the correct functions and places of nouns in the sentences (verses) of the Quran to derive the true understanding of Quranic verses, exactly according to the spoken Arabic of its natives observing their fundamental style of conjugating Arabic words.
However, the case markers were limited to nouns only but later on the said case marker system was falsely extended to the verbs and other linguistic articles to sabotage the actual statements of the Quran in which it was invented that damma (a comma like short vowel) on the verbs makes them imperfective verbs, fa-tha (a dash like short vowel on the letter) makes them perfect (past) verb, and sukoon also modifies verbs in the imperative or jussive moods. This is totally fake because like the other languages of the world Arabic language has its own vast grammar in which verbs are properly formed following the Arabic verb forms. For example the default Arabic verb is always considered perfect or past verb such as “کتب” (kataba) and instead of relying on short vowel signs a full vowel “ی” (ya) is added in the beginning of the default perfect verb to make it present (المضارع) verb such as “یکتب” and full vowel “alif” is added in the beginning of the default perfect verb to make it an imperative or command verb such as “اکتب”, which is the 4th form of Arabic verb forms. Hence, modification in Arabic words using case marking system of short vowels is totally out of question and a false invention which never uses in standard Arabic language except the Quran and other Islamic literature.
In fact it is the main characteristics of all Semitic languages including Arabic that the words are automatically built up around their root letters or ‘radicals’ by prefixing, affixing and inserting articles, and by changing the vowels so as to express variations of meaning automatically arising out of the idea conveyed by the root letters of the words used in a sentence. Hence, in standard Arabic an ‘n’ (Nun) sounds, Nunation or Tanween (تنوين) and rest of the case markers are automatically determined with the context and formation of other words in a sentence. Therefore, no such case markers are really required in general Arabic in which the phrases such as “مدير المكتب” are automatically pronounced “Mudeer ul Maktab” and correctly understood to mean “Director of the Office”. The phrase “كتاب المدرس” is correctly understood to mean “book of the teacher” or “the teacher’s book”. University’s President or President of the University is called “رئيس الجامعة” and University’s Student means “طالب الجامعة”. Engineer of electricity is called “مهندس كهرباء”, teacher of school is called “معلم مدرسة” and girls’ school is called “مدرسة البنات”. Likewise, the Quranic statements are not different to the statements of standard Arabic in which Quran follows the same pattern of phrasing for general public such as the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse in question 48:29 which is actually “Muhammad of Allah’s Rasool” and truly means “Praiseworthy of Allah’s Rasool” but it is falsely translated to mean “Muhammad is Allah’s Rasool” in which they try to falsely bring the helping verb “is” in the translation using the added Tanween (ٌ) on the last letter “د” (dal) of Muhammad sounding “مُّحَمَّدٌ” (Muhammadun). However, despite adding Tanween (ٌ) to make “Muhammad is Rasool of Allah” is totally out of the rule because Tanween (ٌ) never used to mean “is” but this Tanween (ٌ) is actually making Muhammad an unspecified indefinite (اَلنَّكِرَةُ) adjective noun (اسم صفت) or a passive participle of root word “حمد” to praise or define rosary of forthcoming words “رَّسُولُ اللَّه” simply means: Praise of God’s Message.
This is the point where native Arabs and Quranic scholars commit mistake to understand the Quran with its true sprit because they don’t want to admit the fact that if the Quran was made in Arabic language it supposed to use the same Arabic words as a verb, as an adjective, as a noun etc. to compile its statements for general understanding. If Allah wants His message (Rasool) to be praised or to be defined highly welcoming or to be greeted or to be optimized or to be elevated He will also have to use an adjective or a passive participle of the root word “حمد” which is nothing but “محمد” in Arabic language.
A native Egyptian Arab lady recently started reading my articles and passed liking remarks on many articles but when she reached my article in which I had explained the Quranic word “انھار” she seemed put off and commented that my explanation of Arabic words is invalid and incorrect because she uses the word “انھار” to mean “river” in Egyptian dialect. I replied to her comments in full explanation of Arabic root “نھر” to mean, escape, flow and irrigate, already mentioned in my article and explained her the correct grammatical formation of the word in question “انھار” to mean “irrigators”. This is because when “alif” is added in the consonants of root or verb it becomes and active participle or noun of doer of the action of any verb such as “طالب” from “طلب”, “عامل” from “عمل”, “صادق” from “صدق” and “شاھد” from “شھد” etc. Therefore, like the above exampled formations of active participles or doers nouns the word “انھار” it a plural active participle of “نھر” in which prefixed “alif” in the beginning makes it plural and another “alif” in the middle of the consonants of “نھر” makes it an active participle or doer of escaping or flowing water or irrigation. I also wrote that the Quran usually takes root meaning of its words to keep its statements fixed and unaffected by any deformation of time and change of dialect. Furthermore, the function of a river is also “irrigation” and escaping water. Hence, there is no doubt that all rivers are irrigators and water escapers that’s why she was also right as in practice and with the passage of time irrigators can be called “rivers” because of their functions of irrigation, flowing and escaping water but obviously Arabs can’t fix the word “نھر” and its active participle “انھار” everywhere to mean “river” because of its grammatical use as a verb, as an adjective, as a noun and as so many other linguistic articles essentially used in making sentences and statements in which the timely modified word “river” cannot be used everywhere. How will they form a proper sentence of a statement if they start taking each and every derivatives of “نھر” to mean “river”? Will they say irrigate the crops or river the crops? If someone wants to say, “I have irrigated my land or plants”. Will they say, “I have rivered my land or rivered my plants”? Likewise, if they want to say, “Rain irrigates the land”, do they say “Rain rivers the land”? Also if this is the case then why do they call the department of “انھار” to the irrigation departments?
The said Egyptian reader never came back after my reply, which leads everyone to believe that they are Arabs who don’t want to understand the Quran with its own words and themselves are a big hindrance in the correct understanding of the Quran. Moreover, they are very much into Hadith and non-Quranic literature due to which they have not only corrupted their own language but also affected the correct understanding of the Quran. Also, like the majority of natives of all other languages Arabs don’t need to know the grammar of their language because they speak their language with the natural fluency. However, grammar is essentially required to correctly write or translate inscription with its true spirit.
The same thing applies on the question of using the derivatives of Arabic word “حمد” such as the use of indefinite noun “محمد” in the Quran.
If you look at the books and exegesis of our scholars you will find for yourself that they clearly mention Tanwee (تنوین) or Nunation comes only with the indefinite noun and the names of persons and specified things fall in the category of definite noun without any Tanwee (تنوین) or Nunation but on the other hand they falsely say that there is an exception to this rule for the name Muhammad. This is because due to their false beliefs they don’t want to translate the Quran correctly and on purpose go out of the way to destroy Allah’s message revealed in the Quran.
These scholars have invented a fake rule of “المضاف إلى معرفة” in which they falsely assert that an indefinite noun added before a definite noun becomes definite according to the rule of “اضافة” (addition) but they really don’t know the correct use of the rule of “Idafa” (اضافة) and its correct application in which an indefinite adjective is used to describe a noun in a non-specific sense, i.e. an indefinite noun and also an adjective will never be the second term of an idafa (اضافة), such as seen in the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse in question 48:29 in which “مُّحَمَّدٌ” is the first term and “رَّسُولُ” is the second term. Hence, according to the rule this indefinite article “مُّحَمَّدٌ” has been correctly placed in the Quran to take it as a nonspecific adjective being the first term of this phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّه”. It is also noted that the only definite noun is “اللَّهِ” in all three terms of “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّه” which clearly defines ‘high greeting or praising of Allah’s message’.
As mentioned in my numerous articles on Rasool that according to its grammatical formation the word “رَّسُول” is not a messenger or a prophet but the product of “رسل” (RSL) which is made by adding vowel “و” (wao) in the consonants of “رسل” as seen in the formation of popular Arabic word “اصول” from “اصل” in which “اصل” means origin, source, cause, reason, base, foundation, reference, ancestry, descent, linage, parentage, starting point, extraction and genesis. Whereas, its product “اصول” means lined up, properties, elements, basics, fundamentals, principles, rules, decency, essentials, assets and roots etc. Also “ذلول” means manageable, tractable, accessible, under control, subordinate, lowered etc. which is the product of “ذلل” means lowness, abjectness, surrender, inferior, lower oneself before someone, subservience, disgrace, dishonor etc. Hence, when someone becomes low (ذل) they actually become a subject of subordination and everyone can easily surrender them and becomes their authority to manage their affairs, which is correctly denoted by “ذلول” as an after effect product of “ذلل” or “ذل”. Likewise, “اصل” is a foundation and its product “اصول” refers to fundamental elements and basic principles and core properties. There are so many Arabic word are made on the same pattern of adding “و” in their consonants to denote their after effects or their products such as “ملول” from “ملل” in which “ملل” means boredom, tedium, uneasiness and its product “ملول” is taken to mean board, fed up tired, sick and weary. Hence “رسل” means: messaging, dispatch, transmit, communicate, shipping something, sending, posting, uploaded, consigning, forwarding, addressing, diplomatic act, corresponding, act of passing on information, motion, feeling and its product “رسول” is transmission, communication, sent message, consignment, correspondence diplomacy and informant etc.
In the previous article, “ALLAH “اللہ” IS FALSELY DERIVED FROM THE ROOT WORD OF LIFELESS IDOL DEITIES TO MAKE ALLAH A DEITY”, we have already seen the word to word analysis and correct translation of the verse “فَأْتِيَا فِرْعَوْنَ فَقُولَا إِنَّا رَسُولُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ”. (26:16). ‘indeed introduce Pharaoh a statement of that Message of Sustainer of the universes” (word to word correct translation 26:16).
We have also noted that Yousuf Ali and some other mainstream translators did not translate “رَسُولُ” to mean “Messenger” or Prophet in their translation of the above verse 26:16: “So go forth, both of you, to Pharaoh, and say: ‘We have been sent by the Lord and Cherisher of the worlds” (Yousuf Ali’s translation of the verse 26:16)
However, to bring the cult of personality in Islam the word “رسول” has been falsely made viral to mean Messenger or Prophet. The same false dogma has been inserted in the translation of all those verses of the Quran in which the word “محمد” has been used as an unspecified indefinite noun of Arabic root word “حمد”.
In my numerous articles I have made it clear with solid evidence from Guinness book of the world record and word counts from internationally reputable Arabic dictionaries and lexicons that Arabic language has much less words compared to the other big languages of the words. This is the reason why 74140 words of the Quran are derived from only 400 root words. Therefore, in Arabic language there is no option but to repeat the same words as the linguistic articles as well as the names. However, it is a totally fake boasting of our scholars that Arabic is extraordinarily comprehensive and the largest language of the world. Those ignorant who blindly accept this fake statement of our scholars they falsely claim that the Quran is not translated in any other language. If we accept their false claim then a serious question arises whether the Quran is limited to Arabs only and what about rest of the people of the whole world? Did Allah not send the same Quran to the whole world, if no one can understand and translate the Quran other than some pagan Arabs and their evil disciples?
In fact they are the prisoners of their false beliefs and have no knowledge of the language in which Allah has made Quran easy. They did not even hear the popular proverb “less is more” nor did they ever use their common sense to ponder upon the fact that a language of less words is more compact, easy to understand, easy to learn and easy to translate following its basic linguistic rules. Therefore, Arabic is the perfectly chosen language to reveal Allah’s message for the whole world, which can be easily and accurately translated if you are honest in translating Allah’s words keeping aside your false beliefs and pagan dogma.
However, if a language has more than hundred or thousand names of each single thing, as Arabic is falsely defined, it becomes more difficult even to write a single sentence let alone speaking, learning or understanding. Not only the writers of such a puzzling language will become mad in choosing an appropriate word out of hundred or thousand words for each article but the readers will also become well confused in understanding the sentence. So, you can understand what will happen if hundred people will understand a sentence in hundred different meanings and thousand people will understand the same sentence in thousand different meanings taking the words of their choice from hundred and thousand words for each single linguistic article? Due to which the statement of Allah revealed in the Quran will not remain constant. This is the reason why these infidels have made up that the words of the Quran are unclear, ambiguous and full of metaphor and they are well confused in correct understanding of Quranic statements due to their false beliefs, which they don’t want to leave at any cost.
Anyway, phrases such as the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse 48:29 are grammatically called the “Noun-Adjective Phrases” in which “رَّسُولُ” and “اللَّهِ” are nouns and “مُّحَمَّدٌ” is an adjective. In the typical formation of Arabic “Noun-Adjective Phrases” the preposition “of” is automatically created between all combinations of “Nouns and Adjectives” without having any Tanween (تنوین) or Nunation between or on any of them, same as seen the similar “Noun-Adjective Phrases” in standard Arabic language in which no Nunation (Tanween) or no case markers are used and people understand them correctly. Therefore, in all cases with or without Tanween (Nunation) either the preposition “of” or apostrophe with letter “s” (‘s) is used to indicate the possession of possessive nouns which own other nouns. So, in accordance with the linguistic rules the proposition “of” or possessive article (‘s) is necessary built in conjunction between all types of indefinite to definite adjectives and nouns, definite to indefinite adjectives and nouns, definite to definite adjectives and nouns and indefinite to indefinite adjectives and nouns. This rule is equally applied in both “اضافة” (IDAFA) phrases and also when an adjective conjugates with the other terms of nouns placed next to each other without having any article between them. However, this rule of having built in proposition “of” or possessive article (‘s) will not apply if any article such as adverb, helping verb, preposition or conjunction etc. comes between two nouns or between nouns and adjectives, such as the phrases like “الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ” (2:176, 2:213, 3:3, 4:105), “الْكِتَابِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ” (2:231, 3:48, 3:79, 3:164, 4:54) and “الْكِتَابَ لِلنَّاسِ” (39:41) already contain preposition “بِ” (الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ), conjunction “و” (الْكِتَابِ وَالْحِكْمَة) and preposition “ل” (الْكِتَابَ لِلنَّاسِ) between them. Therefore, such phrases do not fall in the category of “المضاف” to apply rules of “اضافة” (IDAFA) nor do they fall in the category of “Noun-Adjective Phrases” in which “of” or apostrophe (‘s) is supposed to be built in.
However, the grammatical formation of Quranic phrases with built in “of” or apostrophe (‘s) are as under:
For example: Quranic phrase “مَالِكَ الْمُلْكِ” is actually مَالِكَ of الْمُلْكِ and correctly means: Owner/Possessor/Holder of the domination/the sovereignty. The phrase “كِتَابَ اللّهِ” is actually كِتَاب of اللّه and correctly means: Allah’s book or book of Allah, and “كِتَابِ رَبِّكَ” correctly means “book of your Lord”. The phrase “آيَاتُ الْكِتَابِ” correctly means “verses of the book”, “آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِ” correctly means “verses of the Quran”, “عِلْمُ الْكِتَابِ” correctly means: “knowledge of the book”, “الْكِتَابِ الْحَكِيمِ” correctly means “the book of the authority” if you take Arabic “الْحَكِيمِ” to mean Persian “حکیم” which is “wisdom” then again according to the grammatical formation of “الْكِتَابِ الْحَكِيمِ” you cannot avoid using “of” in the translation to mean “the book of the wisdom” and “كِتَابَ الْأَبْرَارِ” (83:18) means “book of the rational/justification/vindication”
The phrase “كِتَابُ مُوسَىٰ” (11:17, 46:12) correctly means “book of Musa”, and despite changing the case marker from ‘damma’ to kasrah on the word “كتاب” the phrase “الْكِتَابِ مُوسَىٰ” (19:51) still means “the book of Musa” and the phrase “مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ” (11:110, 17:2, 25:35, 28:43, 32:23) means “the Musa’s book” or again “the book of Musa”, in which you will also have to use either “of” or ‘s.
Likewise, “الْكِتَابِ مَرْيَمَ” (19:16) correctly means “the book of Mariam” no matter whether someone believes in female prophet or not but Quran certainly mentions “the book of Mariam”. I still remember a long lecture in the Dars-e-Quran of the Quran-only sect in which it was highly preached that because women remain impure and filthy for nearly half of the month due to their menstruations this is the reason why Allah did not make women prophets (correctly prophetess). Furthermore, to establish Allah’s discrimination towards women the fake translations of the verses 12:109, 16:43, 21:7 (وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِم) were quoted to support the false beliefs of their school of thought that revelation did not come to women.
Anyway, the phrase “الْكِتَابِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ” (19:41) means “the book of Ibrahim”, “الْكِتَابِ إِسْمَاعِيلَ” (19:54) means “the book of Ismail” and “الْكِتَابِ إِدْرِيسَ” (19:56) means “the book of Idris”.
Now, to understand Tanween (تنوین) or Nunation more clearly we can compare two similar phrases “الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ” (12:1, 26:2, 28:2, 43:2, 44:2) and “كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ” (6:59, 10:61, 11:6, 27:1, 27:75, 34:3). In the first phrase “الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ” the both terms “الْكِتَابِ” and “الْمُبِينِ” are definite or specified (معروف) terms. Therefore, “الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ” will be correctly translated to mean “the book of the significant clarity/of the simplified expression/of the clear understanding/of the plain talk”. Whereas, the phrase “كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ” (kitabin mubeenin) is consisted of unspecified or indefinite (غیرمعروف/النکرۃ) terms mentioned with kasrah Tanween “كِتَابٍ” (kitabin) correctly means “a book” and “مُبِينٍ” (mubeenin) means “a significant clarity/a simplified expression/a clear understanding/a plain talk”. However, in both definite (الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ) and indefinite (كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ) phrases their first term (الْكِتَابِ/ كِتَابٍ) and the second term (الْمُبِينِ/ مُبِينٍ) are compounding each other with built in conjunctive preposition “of” without taking into account any case marker or Nunation (تنوین).
Likewise, the indefinite phrase (with Kasra Tanween) Kitabim muneer “كِتَابٍ مُنِيرٍ” (22:8, 31:20) also describing “a book of enlightening”. The similar indefinite phrase Kitabun kareem (with damma Tanween) “كِتَابٌ كَرِيمٌ” (27:29) correctly means “a book of liberal/free/openhanded/philanthropic/tolerant/ thoughtful/ openhearted” and kitanun hafeezun (with damma Tanween) “كِتَابٌ حَفِيظٌ” (50:4) is also an indefinite phrase to correctly mean “a book of conservator/maintainer/retainer/perpetuate”.
Hence, the correct translation is always based on the grammatical formation of the phrase. Therefore, according to the formation of all above stated Quranic phrases coming the helping verb “is” between the terms of “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse 48:29 is not possible in any way whether we take “مُّحَمَّدٌ” as a proper name or as an adjective. So, for sake of avoiding further arguments if we take “مُّحَمَّدٌ” as a proper definite noun then again there is no way of translating this phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” to mean “Muhammad is Rasool of Allah” but “Muhammad of Rasool of Allah”, which clearly describes that Muhammad itself is not Allah’s Rasool but something of Allah’s Rasool. In other words Muhammad is different to Rasool of Allah, i.e. Muhammad and Rasool of Allah are two different things in which Muhammad is something else and Allah’s Rasool is something else. So, if we want to take this unspecified noun “مُّحَمَّدٌ” to mean Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) then it will be automatically understood that Rasool is the message of Allah given to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or Allah’s Rasool of Muhammad or Allah’s message of Muhammad (pbuh) or Allah’s message or Rasool belongs to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
However, it will become more sense if we take “مُّحَمَّدٌ” as an adjective or passive participle of Arabic root “حمد” (HMD) in the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse 48:29. In this case “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” will be more accurately translated to mean: “glorified of Rasool of Allah”, “praiseworthy of Rasool of Allah”, “to be acclaimed of Rasool of Allah”, “to be praised of Rasool of Allah”, “to be commended of Rasool of Allah”, “to be complimented of Rasool of Allah”,
So, more accurate and simple translation of “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ”: “Allah’s message of praiseworthy”, “Allah’s message of highly defined”, “Allah’s message of highly recommended”, “Allah’s message of highly attributed”, “Allah’s message of highly acclaimed”, “Allah’s message of highly elevated” “Allah’s message to be welcomed”, “Allah’s message to be commended”, “Allah’s message to be greeted”.
This is the beauty of the Quran which never lets you go wrong if you are honest in understanding Allah’s message. So, the bottom line is whether you take “مُّحَمَّدٌ” as a proper definite noun or as an adjective or passive participle of root word “حمد” this phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse 48:29 does not define Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) a Rasool of Allah but Muhammad of Rasool of Allah in which Rasool is “Message” of praiseworthy or of Muhammad. Hence, there is no way of taking Muhammad as a Rasool.
To hide these realities and facts mentioned in the Quran it is invented that no grammar has been used in the Quran so that the infidels can freely translate Allah’s words in whatever way and sabotage the actual statements of the Quran. So they have falsely made Rasool (Allah’s message) into Prophets to start Manichean cult of personality and committed unforgiveable sin of interfering in God’s words. This is not as simple as to look at these words “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” and invent that “Muhammad is Allah’s Rasool”. They should learn the basic know how of Arabic language before claiming that they know what is written in the Quran. Knowing some words of Arabic language from the exegesis does not mean that one is capable of understanding and teaching Quran to others but there are people who have been certainly digging their graves in the hell fire by teaching false interpretation of the Quran taking fake words from here and there, and conveying wrong message of the Quran.
Arabic language is highly grammatical, fluent, smooth and very conjunctive in which phrases like “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” cannot be taken as dangling, broken and uncoordinated way as we usually take them like “Muhammad Rasool Allah” and falsely understand that “Muhammad is Allah’s Rasool”.
Although it is said that there is no helping verb in Arabic language but practically in standard Arabic as well in the Quran the article “هو” is used as a helping verb, which is according to the correct Arabic grammar. For example: “This is the pen” is correctly said in Arabic “هذا هو القلم”. ‘Faisal is the writer’ is correctly said “فيصل هو الكاتب” and ‘Faisal is the author of the book’ is correctly said “فيصل هو الكاتب الكتاب” in which the article “هو” is used as a helping verb to mean “is” between the first two terms فيصل and الكاتب whereas, there is no conjunctive article is found between the second and the third terms “الكاتب الكتاب”, which does not mean that we take them as uncoordinated terms and translate “الكاتب الكتاب” in a broken language “the writer the book” but “the writer of the book”. This is because “of” is always a default coordinator between such phrases where no conjunctive article is used.
The Quran follows the same grammatical formations of its phrases as seen: “إِنَّهُ هُوَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ” (12:83, 12:100, 51:30) correctly means: “That He is the conversant/cognizant/intellect of the authority”, “إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ” (17:1) correctly means: “That He is the informant of the keen/insight/perceptive”, “إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ” (41:36, 44:6) correctly means: “That He is the informant of the intellect/conversant/cognizant”. In the above verse “إِنَّهُ” is the combination of هُ + إِنَّ in which “هُ” is already the pronoun of the subject “God”. Hence, “هُوَ” cannot be taken as another pronoun of the subject to mean “He” but to mean “is” as a helping verb. Also “هُ” is a pronoun which must be linked with the forthcoming noun “الْعَلِيمُ” or “السَّمِيعُ” as seen in the aforementioned standard Arabic example of “هذا هو القلم”. (this is the pen) and “فيصل هو الكاتب” (Faisal is the writer) otherwise without using “هُوَ” between the pronoun – noun or between the noun – noun or between any combination of noun-adjective the conjunctive preposition “of” will automatically stand in between to link such nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and indicative articles etc. However, as no such article came between second and third terms “الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ”, “السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ” and “السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ” of the above verses therefore, according to the linguistic rule they linked with each other by means of conjunctive preposition “of” to establish their possession or possessive relation among themselves as seen in the above mentioned standard linguistic sentence “فيصل هو الكاتب الكتاب” (Faisal is the author of the book).
Hence the phrases “السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ” (40:20, 40:56, 42:11) and “سَمِيعٌ بَصِيرٌ” (22:61, 22:75, 31:28, 58:1) are actually السَّمِيعُ of الْبَصِيرُ andسَمِيعٌ of بَصِيرٌ but “السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ” is consisted of both definite terms whereas the both terms of “سَمِيعٌ بَصِيرٌ” are indefinite or unspecified. So, there is no difference in using injunctive or possessive article “of” in the translation of both types of phrases apart from taking them as the specified or known terms of “السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ” or unspecified terms of “سَمِيعٌ بَصِيرٌ” because of using Nunation (تنوین) on “سَمِيعٌ بَصِيرٌ”. Hence, bringing helping verb “is” between any of the term is far beyond the standard linguistic rules of Arabic language. Therefore, translating or understanding the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” to mean “Muhammad is Rasool of Allah” is totally wrong and a false myth of corrupt scholars of the Quran, who brought the cult of personality in the translation of the Quran by distorting Allah’s own words revealed in the Quran, so that they can invent lies in the name of Prophet (pbuh) by making him Rasool and urge us to obey Allah and obey whatever they have invented on behalf of Rasool. Whereas, Rasool is the Message of God which used to come to all other Prophets (pbut) before Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and according to its linguistic formation “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” is just a praising sentence of God’s message in which “high Praise of God’s message” has been defined.
Hence, if we are as blind as saying white to universal black crow and adamant to insert “is” between the terms “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ” of the Quranic phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” then the Quranic phrases “كَلَامَ اللَّهِ” (2:75, 9:6) will be “Kalaam is Allah”, “آيَاتِ اللَّهِ” (4:140) will be “Aayaat is Allah”, “حُكْمُ اللَّهِ” (60:10) will be “Hukam is Allah”, “لِحُكْمِ رَبِّكَ” (068:48), will be “Lihukam is your Lord”, “أَمْرٍ حَكِيمٍ” (44:4) will be “Amar is Hakeem”, “خَيْرُ الْحَاكِمِينَ” (7:87. 10:109) will be “Khair is the rulers”, “آيَاتُ الْكِتَابِ الْحَكِيمِ” (10:1, 31:2) will be “verses is the book is the Hakeem” and “مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ” (11:110, 17:2, 25:35, 28:43, 32:23) will be “Muses is the book” and so on.
So, all translations of similar Quranic phrases are complete wrong and totally false. For example the phrases “الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ” (3:62, 5118, 14:4, 16:60. 27:9, 29:26, 29:42, 30:27, 31:19, 34:27, 40:8, 42:3, 45:37, 57:1, 59:1, 59:24, 60:5, 61:1, 62:3, 64:18), “الْعَزِيزِ الْحَكِيمِ” (3:126, 39:1, 45:2, 46:2, 62:1), “الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ” (62:2), “وَالْقُرْآنِ الْحَكِيمِ” (36:2), “عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا” (4:56, 4:158, 4:165, ), “عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ” (2:220, 2:228, 2:240, 2:260, 3:6, 5:38, 8:10, 8:49, 8:63, 8:67, 9:40, 9:71, 31:27, ), “عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا” (4:11, 4:17, 4:24, 4:92, 4:104, 4:111, 4:170, 33:1, 48:4, 76:30), “عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ” (4:26, 8:71, 9:15, 9:60, 9:97, 9:110, 12:6, 22:52, 24:18, 24:58, 24:59, 49:8, 60:10), “حَكِيمٌ عَلِيمٌ” (6:83, 6:128, 6:139, 15:25, 27:6), “حَكِيمٍ حَمِيدٍ” (41:42), “السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ” (2:127, 2:137, 3:35, 5:76, 6:13, 6:115, 8:61, 10:65, 21:4, 22:34, 26:220, 29:5, 29:60), “سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ” (2:181, 2:224, 2:227, 2:256, 3:121, 7:200, 8:17, 8:53, 9:98, 9:103, 24:21, 24:60, 49:1) …..and rest of the phrases of the whole Quran are wrongly translated.
Hence, total Quran has been falsely translated outside the recognised, valid, accredited, accurate, true and authentic Arabic language ignoring Allah’s numerous statements of the Quran such as the following:
“وَهَٰذَا كِتَابٌ مُصَدِّقٌ لِسَانًا عَرَبِيًّا” (46:12) “And this book of accredited/authentic/ accurate document of a language of an Arabic” (correct translation), “مُصَدِّقٌ” refers to something which is accurate, approved as true, certified, accepted, recognised, believed as true, acknowledged as true, attested copy, admissible, accredited, endorsed, validated, certified, registered, confirmed and an authentic document.
So, in the above verse 46:12 Allah Himself declares Quran a book of true Arabic language. In the verse 12:2 Allah has made it clear “إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ” while Our revelation that’s Quran/compilation of an Arabic to explain your intellectuals/wise men/who have sense of understanding.
Suffixed “هُ” at the end of “أَنزَلْنَاهُ” is a pronoun of “الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ” (the book of clear understanding) mentioned in the previous verse 12:1. The Quranic phrase “لَّعَلَّكُمْ” is falsely translated throughout the Quran to mean “you may be” or “perhaps you” to make God’s statements uncertain and unsure. Whereas, God’s words are perfect, true and final without any doubt (لاَ رَيْبَ) and no such uncertainties like ‘may be’ or ‘perhaps’ are found in God’s statements. However, this phrase “لَّعَلَّكُمْ” is a true combination of preposition “لَّ” to mean “for/to/in order to” + “عَلَّ” a derivative of root word “علل” to mean ‘explain’, ‘justify’, ‘reasoning’, ‘vindicate’, ‘make clear’, ‘rationalize’, ‘encourage’, ‘boost’, ‘urge’, “press for and ‘furnish’. Whereas, “كُمْ” is not ‘you’ but ‘your’ because it is not a subjective but an objective plural pronoun of second person to correctly mean “your” So, the phrase “لَّعَلَّكُمْ” correctly means: for your reasoning, for your explanation, for your explanation, for your clarification, to encourage your, to boost your and press for your etc.
“إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ” (43:3) while Our manufactured that’s Quran/a compilation of an Arabic to explain your intellectuals/wise men/who have sense of understanding.
Pronoun “هُ” of “جَعَلْنَاهُ” to mean “that’s” again refers “وَالْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ” of previous verse 43:2.
“وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ حُكْمًا عَرَبِيًّا” (13:37) and thus Our revelation that’s an order of an Arabic.
Pronoun “هُ” at the end of “أَنزَلْنَاهُ” to mean “that’s” refers “الْكِتَابَ يَفْرَحُونَ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ” of the previous verse 13:36.
“وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا” (20:113) and thus Our revelation that’s a Quran/a compilation of an Arabic.
“وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا” (42:7) and thus Our inspiration towards yourself of a Quran/ a compilation of an Arabic.
“قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا” (39:28) a Quran/a compilation of an Arabic.
“وَهَٰذَا لِسَانٌ عَرَبِيٌّ مُبِينٌ” (16:103) and this is a language of an Arabic of a clear understanding.
“بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُبِينٍ” (26:195) with a language of an Arabic of clear understanding.
“كِتَابٌ فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ” (41:3) A book of plain details/simple explanations of His verses of a Quran/a compilation of an Arabic for people who understand.
The preposition “هُ” at the end of “آيَاتُهُ” refers “تَنْزِيلٌ مِّنَ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ” (revelation from God referred by His title الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ) of the previous verse 41:2
The aforementioned verses of the Quran clearly say that the Quran was revealed in the same Arabic which is known or understood by Arab nation or Arab people (عَرَبِيًّا لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ) 41:3.
So, in the light of the above verses 41:2 and 41:3 those evils are liars who falsely claim that Quranic Arabic is different to standard Arabic.
In the verse 41:44 Allah Himself gives an authentic reason of making Quran in standard Arabic “وَلَوْجَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا أَعْجَمِيًّا لَّقَالُوا لَوْلَا فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ أَأَعْجَمِيٌّ وَعَرَبِيٌّ” (41:44) Had it made by Us a Quran of foreign language (other than standard Arabic), they would have said they were not made clear its verses of what of foreign or of Arabic? (Correct translation)
However, when Allah’s revealed Quran was kept aside and “Mohammeden Religion” was invented approximately 4 generations after Prophet’s told death the “Arabic Rasool” or “Arabic Messenger” was falsely inserted in the interpretation of the above verse 41:44. Whereas, the phrase “آيَاتُهُ أَأَعْجَمِيٌّ وَعَرَبِيٌّ” of this verse 41:44 clearly mentions “its verses of Arabic or non-Arabic language” but it is still translated and explained in brackets to mean “Arabic Rasool” or “Arabic Messenger” instead of “Arabic language”. These non-God fearing deviated nonsense scholars and their blind followers never ponder upon the revealed Arabic words of this verse in which Allah did not reveal any word of Rasool or messenger but they understood Rasool or Messenger on the basis of the literature of “Mohammeden Religion” invented between 8th and 9th centuries. This is the evidence of their pagan intension of inserting the cult of personality in the fake translations of the Quran without having any slightest fear of God in committing a serious sin by making false additions in God’s words which should be kept pure without adding any lies to them. However, they still call themselves Muslims who have been distorting Allah’s statements just to satisfy their nonsense pagan beliefs! Are they really Muslims?
They are actually those “الَّذِينَ جَعَلُوا الْقُرْآنَ عِضِينَ” (15:91), who have made the Quran bitten.
Therefore, against all above mentioned statements of Allah the Quran is not taken in generally accredited, commonly known and worldwide recognised true Arabic language but as an unknown, falsely invented, unrecognized, unapproved, other than standard Arabic language which is unauthentic, fake and nowhere used except in the false Islamic literature, fake exegesis and fabricated translation of the Quran.
So, this is not Allah’s Quran what we are told by our deviated scholars and their evil disciples, who have been preaching lies in the name of the Quran.
Hence, according to the accredited true Arabic language all Arabic phrases of adjectives – nouns and nouns – nouns or pronoun etc. coming next to each other without having any conjunctive article between their terms are linked with each other only by their default possessive conjunction “of” without taking into account any Nunation (تنوین) or any case marker on any term of these phrases. Nunation (double vowel marker) or case markers do not affect the core meaning of any Arabic word but they were only made to determine the position, function and use of nouns coming in the clauses of speech of the scripture and never used in standard Arabic. Nunation (double vowel markers) or case markers are used in basic Arabic booklets (قاعدۃ) designed to learn basic Arabic to understand the dialect of the Quran. Although, Nunation (double vowel markers) or case markers have become part of the Quranic grammar invented to understand and interpret the Quran but in the standard grammar they are limited to nouns only and the said case marker system is not an active part of standard Arabic grammar nor is it taught or acknowledged in world class Arabic teaching universities or standard Arabic institutions except Islamic institutions. This is because case markers are not standard but vary from area to area and person to person as they are based on dialect or speaking style. However, according to the case markers based additional part of the said grammar recognizes Nunation (double vowel marker) or Tanween as a sign of an indefinite noun (الاسم النکرۃ) as seen in the lesson 23 of Al Madinah Arabic Books of grammar and in the other similar recognised books of grammar. Therefore, if we accept the said rules of Nunation (تنوین) and the case marker system then the words in question “مُّحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun), “مُّحَمَّدً” (muhammadan) and “مُّحَمَّدٍ” (muhammadin) are not proper, specified, definite or personal nouns because of having Nunation or Tanween on them. Hence, if this Nonation or Tanween is correct then these words “مُّحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun), “مُّحَمَّدً” (muhammadan) and “مُّحَمَّدٍ” (muhammadin) are certainly indefinite adjectives or passive participles of Arabic root word “حمد” to mean to be praised, praiseworthy, commendable, to be commanded, to be acclaimed, to be complimented, to be recommended, to be glorified, to be elevated, to be greeted, to be welcomed, to be defined rosary or highly and to be admired etc. However, if we don’t accept that the said Quranic words “مُّحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun), “مُّحَمَّدً” (muhammadan) and “مُّحَمَّدٍ” (muhammadin) are unspecified indefinite adjectives or passive participles then we will have to remove all post revelation added case markers from the words of the Quran and correctly understand the Quranic words within their columns or contexts and according to their functional formations as we are also urged in the verse 73:4 of the Qurans “وَرَتِّلِ الْقُرْآنَ تَرْتِيلًا”‘And columned the Quran, a context form of grammatical style of understanding (word to word correct translation 73:4). It simply means that the Quran was columned in its context and formed in grammatical style to understand it within its context.
The word رَتِّلِ means ‘made in context’ or ‘columned’ and تَرْتِيلًا means a formation of تجوید or found in تجوید, which is known as word to word gradual grammatical progression of understanding within the context. The Arabic word “ترتیل” is a synonym of Arabic word “تجوید” to mean having gradual grammatical progress within the contexts or columns of Quranic speech to understand or translating the Quran in its true spirit.
Therefore, to drill the correct meaning of Quranic words we will have to look at them carefully within their context contrary to the method of “تصریف آیات” (cross examining the words with out of context verses) which was invented to smoothen and balance the lies invented in the translation of all verses of the whole Quran so that no one can catch the evils who invent lies on Allah.
Hence, to determine whether Tanween (تنوین) was correctly used with the word “مُّحَمَّدٌ” and to reach its correct meaning in the verse 48:29 “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ” we need to follow its context from the verse 48:27 “قَدْ صَدَقَ اللَّهُ رَسُولَهُ الرُّؤْيَا” in which “قَدْ” is the past perfect participle of perfect verbs and used to mean ‘always’ or ‘ever’ with all imperfect verbs. Whereas, “صَدَقَ” is the past verb to mean ‘validated’, ‘endorsed’, ‘authenticated’, ‘sanctioned’, ‘subscribed’, ‘consented to’, ‘confirmed’. “اللَّهُ” Arabic title of God. In the correct grammatical formation of Arabic sentences the subject comes after the verb contrary to English grammar in which verb comes after the subject. So, “قَدْ صَدَقَ اللَّهُ” correctly means “God always had confirmed/validated/ sanctioned”. The next phrase “رَسُولَهُ” correctly means “His message/His words” in which suffixed “هُ” is the possessive pronoun of the subject God in its objective form to mean “His”. The next word “الرُّؤْيَا” is the definite noun (الاسم المعرفة) to mean ‘the revelation’, ‘the vision’, ‘the scope’, ‘the compliance’, ‘the blandishment’ but this Arabic word “الرُّؤْيَا” has been replaced in the translation with the Persian word “رویا” to mean “dream”. Thus, in the translation they invented “the dream of Rasool” just to make Rasool a human being who sees dreams and eventually Prophet Muhammad was made Allah’s Rasool, who saw the dream. Whereas, in Arabic language “حلم” is called dream and Arabic word “الاحلام” is usually used in the similar phrases where a dream is supposed to be mentioned in a sentence but in some rare cases another Arabic word “مَنَام” is used which solely refers to a sleeping dream or seeing a dream while asleep. Hence, the phrase “dream girl” is written and said “فتاة الاحلام” in Arabic language and “دختر رویایی” (Dukhtar-e- Royai) in Persian language. Likewise, a dream girl is called “فتاة حلم” in Arabic and “یک دختر رویا” (yak dukhtar-e- Roya) in Persian language in which Persian word “رویا” (Roya) is the same which was replaced with Quranic word of Arabic language “الرُّؤْيَا” in the translation of the Quran given by evil scholars who purposely destroyed Allah’s statement and invented that Rasool is the Prophet (pbuh) who was an Arabic by birth but used to saw Persian’s dream.
Therefore, the words of the verse 48:27 “قَدْ صَدَقَ اللَّهُ رَسُولَهُ الرُّؤْيَا” correctly means “God had always validated/sanctioned His message of the revelation”
NB: in accordance with the standard Arabic grammar a built in default possessive conjunctive “of” is compulsory between the pronoun “هُ” attached with “رَسُولَهُ” and its forthcoming noun “الرُّؤْيَا” because no other article is coming in between this pronoun “هُ” and noun “الرُّؤْيَا” phrase.
Hence, the verse 48:27 starts from the validation and certification of Allah’s message.
The next verse 48:28 “هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَى وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا” is developing the same context of sent message of God (أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ) with instruction or guidance (بِالْهُدَى) and the right compliance of liability (وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ) for His manifestation over the total liability compliance (عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ) and satisfying/substituting/making up/fulfilling/serving/supplying (وَكَفَى) by a certification of God (بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا).
NB: sufficient, enough and plenty etc. are meaning of Persian word “کافی” falsely brought in the translation of the Quran to hide the actual message of Allah. Also a default possessive conjunctive “of” is compulsory between two nouns “بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا” to mean with a certification of God.
So, keeping in view the above explained context the opening phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the next verse 48:29 “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔” certainly does not contain the word “مُّحَمَّدٌ” as a nominative, proper or definite noun but is clearly an indefinite noun defining the next terms “رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” being an adjective. Moreover, in accordance with the correct Arabic grammar the built in injunctive “of” will be used between all three terms “مُّحَمَّدٌ”, “رَّسُولُ” and “اللَّهِ” of this phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” to correctly understood “Muhammad of Rasool of Allah” truly means: “be praised of message of God” or “be commended of message of God” etc.
Hence, the verse 48:29 is actually saying “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔”
“Commended of God’s message and the adhering/compliant with it causes deep stress/crucial dilemma/intently toughness on the ungrateful concealers…”
“الَّذِينَ” is the definite noun to mean “the adherence to”. If preposition with (مَعَ) to be used with the ‘adherence’ then it becomes ‘comply with’ as seen in the phrases like ‘adherence with law’ (legal term) or adherence with preventive medication’ (medical term), which is basically being faithful to or sticking to etc. to mean ‘comply with’. “الَّذِينَ” is also taken as a subject pronoun to mean “who, whom, which” etc. but not everywhere as seen in the misleading translation of the whole Quran. This is because according to rule the noun of subject is necessary to come before the pronouns of subject, which is ignored in the sheep practice of falsely using “الَّذِينَ” to mean “who, whom, which” etc. in the translation of the Quran without the relevant subject. Therefore, “لذین” is used to mean “complying with” rather than “adhering to” as adherence is a noun not a verb. The correct form is “adherence to”. This is because the verb to adhere is transitive, such as adherence to Medication in the sentences like “Drugs don’t work on patients who don’t take them”. Hence, adherence to (or compliance with) a medication regimen is generally defined as the extent to which patients take medications as prescribed by their health care providers. So, in the same care providing sense God is the best care provider but God’s Drugs don’t work on those who don’t take them. Quran also uses similar phrases of public care through His message such as “شِفَاءٌ لِلنَّاسِ” (16:69), “وَيَشْفِ صُدُورَ قَوْمٍ مُؤْمِنِينَ” (9:14), “فَهُوَ يَشْفِينِ” (26:80) and “وَشِفَاءٌ لِمَا فِي الصُّدُورِ” (10:57) in which “شِفَاءٌ” is actually God’s care, which He provides through His message and we are urged to accept His instruction and caring message “آمَنُوا هُدًى وَشِفَاءٌ” (41:44) and adhere to it and comply with what is revealed from the Quran “وَنُنَزِّلُ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ مَا هُوَ شِفَاءٌ وَرَحْمَةٌ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ” (17:82).
But in “Mohammeden Religion” God’s caring message is taken to mean “healing qualities of honey” produced from the belly of the bee. This is because they were all traders of honey, camphor and myrrh who founded this religion in 8th century and used the name of the Quran to get their religion recognized and accepted as the Religion of Islam through which they have also promoted their trade and dogma. However, the Quran has nothing to do with this religion and its fake literature in which they falsely translate the Quranic words “وَأَوْحَى رَبُّكَ إِلَى النَّحْلِ” and “يَخْرُجُ مِن بُطُونِهَا شَرَابٌ مُّخْتَلِفٌ أَلْوَانُهُ فِيهِ شِفَاءٌ لِّلنَّاسِ” of verses 16:68 and 16:69, and invent that God sends His revelation to the Bee who produces honey from her stomach in which there is healing for people. Whereas, the word “نِحْلَةً” a derivative of the same root word “نحل” also used in the verses 4:4 and translated to mean “dowries” and “free gift of marriage”. The “Bee” and “dowries” or “free gift of marriage” are completely two different things even their species and classifications are different.
Furthermore, “بطن” of “بُطُونِهَا” in the verse 16:69 is taken to mean “her stomach” and invent homey coming from the ‘stomach’ of the ‘Bee’ but the phrase “بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ” of the verse 48:24 in which the same word “بطن” has been used is translated to mean “border”, “midst”, “valley”, “interior” and “area”. Whereas, Border, Valley, Midst and Interior are completely different to “Stomach”.
If “النَّحْل” of the verse 16:68 is “the Bee” then why don’t they translate “نِحْلَةً” of the verse 4:4 to mean a “female Bee” and if “بُطُونِهَا” of the verse 16:69 is taken to mean “her stomachs” why don’t they take “بِبَطْنِ مَكَّةَ” of the verse 48:24 to mean “with Makkah’s stomach”?
When you ask them these questions, especially with the reference of their so called method of “تصریف آیات” in which they pick a word from one verse and match its meaning in other verses of the whole Quran, they have nothing better to say but that the Quran was actually revealed in the metaphorical language that’s why anybody can take any meaning of Quranic words on the basis of their logic and intellect. If this was the case then what was the need for God to send revelations one after another to the world. Surely the intellectual philosophers were always there who could have told people everything that God has been telling through His revelations?
Therefore, “النَّحْلِ” of the supposed verse of honey is just a made up ‘Bee’ invented and grown by infidels in the fake translation of the verse 16:68 to hide the real message of the Quran which was actually sent to the Prophet.
This is because their confused minds do not accept the clear Arabic words of the Quran but they still argue with you on the basis of their fake knowledge given by their infidel scholars. Instead of wholeheartedly accepting the true words of the Quran they defend their false beliefs and make thousands of baseless excuses borrowed from here and there, and discard Quranic words.
If you look at the words “وَأَوْحَى رَبُّكَ إِلَى النَّحْلِ أَنِ اتَّخِذِي” of 16:68 and compare them with the words “وَأُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ” of the verse 9:19 you will automatically know that the verse 16:68 is not talking about revealing or inspiring the Bee to make honey in her stomach but in fact “وَأُوحِيَ” And what is being inspired/revealed “إِلَيَّ” is commissioning/is about/is consigning to “هَٰذَا” this “الْقُرْآنُ” the Quran. So, inspiration was sent to commission God’s message only, which was never sent to other than man species 12:109, 16:43, 21:7 (وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِم).
Had they correctly translated “رِجَالاً” to mean man species, mankind, human being they would not have dared to bring the so called “Bee” in the verse 16:68, as a recipient of God’s message but they have destroyed the whole message of the Quran because of their false beliefs.
What about this statement of the verse 6:106 “اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَبِّكَ” is it not similar to the statement “وَأَوْحَى رَبُّكَ إِلَى النَّحْلِ أَنِ اتَّخِذِي” of the verse 16:68 of so called honey Bee?
The only difference between the two statements is that the verse 6:106 “اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَبِّكَ” is urging to obey what is being inspired to yourself from your Lord. Whereas, the verse 16:68 “وَأَوْحَى رَبُّكَ إِلَى النَّحْلِ أَنِ اتَّخِذِي” is informing us about what is being inspired or revealed from your Lord to the Nakhil who is, that is or which is of taken out, chosen, selected or held.
The derivatives of the same root of the word “اتَّخِذِي” of the verse 16:68 have been used in the Quran for both the Prophets and the Scriptures. Therefore, an independent research article is required to determine whether “النَّحْلِ” was the prophet or God’s message, which is falsely translated to mean “the Bee” as the same infidels have translated “نَاقَةُ اللّهِ” to mean Allah’s “she-camel” or “God’s female camel” in the fake translation of the verse (7:73). Their blind followers do not pay their attention to the words “هَـذِهِ نَاقَةُ اللّهِ لَكُمْ آيَةً فَذَرُوهَا” 7:73 in which “آيَةً فَذَرُوهَا” is making it clear that its verses are valuable. Therefore, the text of this verse 7:73 is self-evident that “نَاقَةُ اللّهِ” is not a Persian camel but God’s revelation.
Despite all this, if you tell them the truth mentioned in the Quran they use their ever ready weapon of Fatwa and put false charges of blasphemy against you. Whereas, in fact they should have themselves been charged with committing blasphemy by calling “the Bee” to the exalted prophet to whom God’s caring revelation was sent. Also, they should be charged with the crime of persuading diabetic patients to commit suicide by taking honey regularly as it is mentioned Persian “شفا” in the Arabic Quran to mean healing of everything. A charge of harming and killing uncountable innocent people by their fake translation of these verses 16:68 and 16:69 must be imposed on them due to which generations of innocent people have died of diabetes and suffering from this severe disease, and most of them refuse medical advice of not taking honey in diabetes.
Therefore, the verse 48:29 “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔” is actually calling “الْكُفَّارِ” to those infidels who have been concealing commended message of God and inventing lies on God by amending His revealed words which cause deep stress on them.
Hence, “أَشِدَّاءُ” means intensity, stressed, heavy, dilemma, plight, troublesome, forcefulness; intenseness, tight, tension, radiant, intent, intently shocking, become crucial, become critical, deadlock, tough, tighten.
Anyway, coming back to the phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of this verse 48:29, we have studied the rule that two terms of definite or indefinite nouns or adjective nouns are linked with each other by means of conjunctive “of”, if no article comes between them. If you look at Yousuf Ali’s translation of the verse 41:41 you will find for yourself that two formation wise similar to “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ” indefinite terms “كِتَابٌ عَزِيزٌ” have been translated by Yousuf Ali to mean “Book of exalted power”. As seen in the following translation: “وَإِنَّهُ لَكِتَابٌ عَزِيزٌ” (41:41) And indeed it is a Book of exalted power. (Yousuf Ali).
If “كِتَابٌ عَزِيزٌ” is translated with built in conjunctive preposition “of” to mean “Book of exalted power” why don’t they correctly translate “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ” to mean “Muhammad of Rasool” or “Muhammad’s Rasool” using the same conjunctive preposition “of” or apostrophe (‘s) between “مُّحَمَّدٌ” and “رَّسُولُ” ???. This is because their dogma of “Mohammedi Religion” does not allow them to bring the true translation of the Quran and they don’t want to know that Rasool and Prophet are two separate things and they belong to two separate species in which Rasool is the message of Allah and Prophet is human being who possesses Allah’s Rasool in the shape of a scripture, which is God’s communication, God’s revelation or sent message of God to the relevant Prophet.
Apart from the above mentioned Quranic phrases and grammatical rules the following sentences of standard Arabic are also telling us the truth that the Quranic phrase “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” is falsely translated to mean “Muhammad is Allah’s messenger” because in such sentences using “هو” is essential to indicate that something is that which is mentioned in the next term of noun. As seen in the following sentences of grammatically correct standard Arabic:
Faisal is a teacher of the school “فيصل هو معلم المدرسة”
Faisal is a son of Saud “فيصل هو ابن سعود”
Faisal is the son of al-Saud “فيصل هو ابن السعود”
Faisal is the reader of the Quran “فيصل هوالقارئ القرآن”
Muhammad is the Prophet of God “محمد هو نبي الله”
Had Allah wanted to say “Muhammad is a messenger of Allah” at least the words “مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ” of the verse 48:29 would have been “محمد هو رسول الله”
As seen in the grammatical formation of the following Arabic sentences:
“جبرائيل هو رسول الله” and “عيسى هو رسول الله” etc.
NB: correct Arabic sentences means grammatically correct to read but taking “رسول” to mean a messenger is not correct even in the correct Arabic sentences because of their false dogma.
Also, the followers of Mohammedi Religion are generally called “Mohammeden” to correctly mean “of Mohammed” or “Mohammed’s” but in Arabic this sound “Muhammadan” (مُّحَمَّدً) which is created by directly adding Fat-ha Nunation (تنوین فتحه) on the letter “د” of “محمد” or said “محمّدي” which is again a noun of subject such as the subject of Arab “عرب+ی= عربی” means “of Arab” or subject of Yemen “یمن+ی= یمنی” means “of Yemen” etc. Therefore, meaning wise “مُّحَمَّدً” (Muhammadan) and “محمّدي” (Muhammadi) are same. However, in standard Arabic the word “محمّدي” (Muhammadi) is also taken to mean “of praised” and “مَحْمَدَة” is taken to mean “commendable act”, “laudable deed” and “praiseworthy action” but these adjective derivatives are not mentioned in any Quranic dictionary because these dictionaries are compiled by Islamic scholars who purposely take all such derivatives as a proper noun Muhammad (pbuh) to derive false translation of those Quranic verses in which the word “muhammad” has been used as an adjective or passive participle of root word “حمد”.
Now, I am coming towards the word “مُحَمَّدٌ” used in the verse 3:144.
If you pay your attention to the words “قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ سُنَنٌ” of the verse 3:137 “Always had been running/existing from before yours practice” (correct translation) in which the indefinite noun “سُنَنٌ” means a practice, a procedure or a method. Nunation (تنوین) on the word “سُنَنٌ” makes it a normal practice, a normal procedure or just a normal method which was already going on (قَدْ خَلَتْ). The next verse 3:138 makes this unspecified, common and always running practice of Allah, in the words: “هَـذَا بَيَانٌ لِّلنَّاسِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةٌ لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ” “this is a prescribed statement for the people and instruction/guidance and a preachment/sermon/lecture for the firm believers” (correct translation)
“مَوْعِظَةٌ” is an active participle of popular Arabic word “وعظ” to correctly mean preachment/sermon/ lecture. The verses 3:139, 3:140, 3:141, 3:142 and 3:143 are typical Quranic statements to encourage people and persuade them to come towards Allah’s message by making them realized their positive goals, their struggles, their achievements, their rewards, their death and their wishes to die as a martyr and the verse 3:144 resumes the same context of God’s message (رَسُولٌ).
Hence, the verse 3:138 confirms that already running practice “سُنَنٌ” mentioned in the previous verse 3:137 is Allah’s on going and nonstop practice of sending His message comprises of instructions, guidance and preaching lectures or sermons for people.
Now, if you look at the words “قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ” of the verse, in question, 3:144, the same thing is being explained in this verse which is: “it had already been running from before of its specified transmission/ dispatch (correct translation). The pronoun “ه” came with “قَبْلِهِ” to mean “its” is actually a pronoun of “رَسُولٌ” mentioned earlier in the same verse 3:144, which is a product of “الرُّسُلُ” according to its formation as explained earlier in this article and in many of my other articles on Rasool. Hence, the product of the transmission or download (الرُّسُلُ) can’t be a human being in the shape of any Prophet but in fact a transmitted or downloaded message. So, the words “قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ” of the verse 3:144 are truly talking about God’s ever running practice of sending messages before this message, the Quran. Hence, there is no confusion that “رَسُولٌ” means Allah’s message as proven from the above explained context of this verse 3:144. In the opening words “وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ” of the same verse 3:144 the word “مُحَمَّدٌ” is coming with Nunation or Tanween which is making “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) an unspecified indefinite noun of Arabic root word “حمد”. Therefore, according to the rule this word “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) is not a proper personal noun “Muhammad” but an adjective or passive participle of “حمد”, which has been used with “إِلاَّ” to define highly praiseworthy to God’s message (رَسُولٌ) only, and the presence of negating “مَا” before this adjective “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) making it clear that nothing else is praiseworthy except God’s message (وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ). Hence, the correct translation of the words “وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ” of the verse 3:144 is as follows: “And no praiseworthy except a message, always had been running from before its specified transmission” (100% word to word correct translation).
NB: don’t get confused from the further words “مَّاتَ” and “قُتِلَ” of this verse 3:144 because Arabic word “مَّاتَ” is derived from “مت” a synonym of “مَدّ” correctly means: expand, extend, spread, stretch, grade, reduce (as seen in reducing a road etc.), cause to go round continuously, move from place to place freely, to circularize, send circulars to or make something longer or larger, make flat, even smooth, to make level, even, uniform, spread through every part etc. Whereas, Arabic word “قُتِلَ” correctly means: alleviate, ease, mitigate, soothe, dilute. However, kill, slain, murder, butchering, slaughtering etc. are the meaning of Persian word “قتل” which does not fit in the verses of the Quran in the translation of which Arabic word “قتل” and its derivatives have been replaced with its phonetically similar Persian word “قتل” by Manichean pagans to mean kill, to kill their enemies in the name of Allah’s orders. Whereas, in proper and pure Arabic the word “ذبح” has been used since pre-Islam to mean killing, slain, murdering, butchering and slaughtering etc. However, in the current Manichean Islam “ذبح” has become limited to sacrifice or inhumanly cutting animals for the production of Halal meat in which their blood is strained slowly following the pagan way of sacrificing animals in which they used to leave the animals giving a cut on their jugular vein to keep their deities happy by running animal’s blood for longer time. This inhuman cruel method of producing Halal meat is nowhere mentioned in the Quran but according to our pagan scholars and their blind ignorant followers this meat becomes germ free and healthy if blood is drained slowly till the last drop of animals blood no matter how painful is it for the slaughtering animals but we enjoy having this cruelly produced meat in the name of Halal Zabiha of pagans.
Now, I am coming to the verse 33:40 which has been made extremely controversial in its fake translation in which the Iranian followers of their prophet Mani have not only brought Mani’s famous historical concept of declaring himself a seal of the prophets as a last and the final prophet but their associates Arab pagans also preserved their paganism for good by falsely closing the door of prophethood and by falsely making Rasool (God’s message) to Prophet so that the enemy of their paganism, i.e. the Quran is kept aside and falsely invented sayings of the Prophet are obeyed in the name of obeying Rasool, which was actually obeying God’s message revealed in the Quran.
“مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا” – (33:40)
According to the grammar “مَّا” is negative because it is coming before the perfect verb “كَانَ” to mean “was”, “instituted”, and the past verb of “be”. The word “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) is an unspecified indefinite noun because of having Tanween or Nunation on it. Therefore, according to the rule “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) is an indefinite adjective or passive participle of “حمد” to mean “praiseworthy” or “commended”. The next word “أَبَا” is derived from the Arabic root word “ء ب ب” to correctly mean: pasture, provision, range, field, provision of livestock, providing, cater, plan, arrangement, outline, groundwork, administer, guidance, organize, control, authority, charge, directing, upkeep, living, plantation, farmstead, enclosure, grange, crop, reap, run, direct, plot, patch, tillage, mead, remittance, livelihood, set up, lay out, term, heading, auspicious, opportune, advantageous, worth, holding, realm, synonym of “شَأن” domain, field, issue, matter, sphere, subject, topic, synonym of “صِنْف” category, class, grade, group, kind, range, sort, type, variety, section, caption, appropriate line, allocation.
Interestingly, the same word “أَبًّا” came in the verse “وَفَاكِهَةً وَأَبًّا” (80:31) but no one translated this “أَبًّا” to mean “father” in the mainstream translation of the above verse 80:31. This is because Persian replacement does not fit everywhere in the Quran but those blinds who emphasize on “تصریف آیات” (matching words across all verses) even they could not match this word “أَبًّا” in both verses 80:31 and 33:40, which we are studying. This is because they are not honest and fully prisoners of their Manichean pagan beliefs. Had they honestly looked at both verses keeping aside their false understanding of the Quran they would not have interpreted “أَبًّا” to mean father. Furthermore, majority of them knows that in Persian and Urdu a father is called “أَبًّا” (Abba) but in Arabic a father is called “ابو” (Abu). I am sure followers of Abu Hanifa and followers of Hadith of Abu Huraira don’t need to remind that father is called Abu (ابو) in Arabic. However, Quranists are different to others they probably logically think that Allah Who made the whole Quran in Arabic He did not know how to write “father” in Arabic or perhaps He forgot that He was writing His Quran in Arabic and used Persian “أَبًّا” (Abba) instead of Arabic “ابو” (Abu). Alternatively, if we believe that Allah never forgets and He is already highly knowledgeable, and He has made His Quran in pure Arabic language then we will have to accept the truth that this word “أَبًّا” (Abba) is of pure Arabic and not the Persian father. Hence, the Quran has nothing to do with this Persian ‘father’ but takes its correct meaning from its actual Arabic root as mentioned above.
The next word “أَحَدٍ” means ‘any one’ “مِّن” who, whosoever, from etc. The phrase “رِّجَالِكُمْ” is the combination of كُمْ+رِّجَالِ in which “كُمْ” is a second person plural objective pronoun to mean “your”, i.e. the addressees including Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as he was the first addressees on whom the whole Quran was revealed and there is no word in this verse which excludes Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from falling in the same pronoun “كُمْ” of addressees. Therefore, with the pronoun “كُمْ” the same thing was said to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as well which was told to all others. Whereas, the word “رِّجَالِ” has been heavily misused in the translation of the whole Quran because of the false dogma. Let alone the traditional scholars even the so called intellectual Quranists have purposely destroyed the actual statements of the Quran with the fake interpretation of this word “رِّجَالِ” such as their misleading interpretations of verses 12:109, 16:43 and 21:7 (وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِم).
Since Arabic language was formed from its mother language Hebrew and even Arabic alphabet “ابجد” came from Hebrew Abjad (alphabet) therefore, the roots of Arabic words also came from Hebrew language due to which the words of all earlier scriptures of Sematic languages including the Arabic Quran are linked with each other for correct understanding of message of God. Likewise, Arabic word “رجل” also came from Hebrew letters “Resh” (ר), “Gimel” (ג) and “Lamed” (ל), which are “Ra” (ر), “Jim” (ج) and “Lam” (ل) in Arabic language and their product, i.e. root word “رجل” (RJL) directly came in Arabic from Hebrew word “רגל” (RJL –رجل) in the same meaning as it is used in Hebrew to mean “foot” or “leg”. Hence, in Arabic language this word “رجل” is correctly used to mean “leg” and similar to the grammatical formation of all other Arabic active participles its active participle is made by adding “alif” in the consonants of “رجل”, to produced “رجال” correctly means “having legs” or ‘who have legs’, which is formally used to mean “man species” and informally said “man” not to mean “males” only but “man” to mean the whole “mankind” or all human beings. Therefore, taking this Arabic word “رجال” to mean just “males” or “men” is not only wrong but absurd as well because both men and women have legs. Hence, since pre-Islam this Arabic word “رجال” has been used in Arab culture to mean “man species”, “mankind”, and informally “man” not to mean males only but human being or “man” as an abbreviation of “man species”, which is still used in the same meaning in Arabic literature. However, instead of correctly taking “رجال” in the translation of the Quran from its root to mean “mankind”, “man species” or “human being” it is falsely translated to mean “male” or “men” only. This is because the correct meaning of “رجال” does not fit in our false dogma, which we want to bring in the translation of the Quran by all means no matter even if Allah’s statement is destroyed but our false dogma should stand still. Furthermore, wow to the method of “تصریف آیات” (cross word engineering) which balances all lies invented in the translation of the whole Quran.
Hence, the phrase “رِّجَالِكُمْ” of the verse 33:40 correctly means “your man species”. However, a sensible person always laughs at the nonsense and absurd translation of these words “مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ” of this verse 33:40 to mean: “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men”.
Do all fathers have men only? What about women? Don’t women have fathers or do they really come without father?
Those nonsense who believe that God has revealed such an absurd and out of sense statement they don’t ponder upon their false beliefs and never realize that God does not say anything which does not fit in with the ground reality and universal facts.
Therefore, “مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ” correctly means: No one was defined praiseworthy/acclaimed of category from your mankind.
NB: default built in conjunctive “of” will automatically come between the both terms when we translate “مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا”.
Now, we will have to carefully look into the context of the above verse 33:40 to correctly determine what or who is defined as “acclaimed” or “praiseworthy” (مُحَمَّدٌ – muhammadun).
The first verse 33:1 “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ اتَّقِ اللَّهَ” of this Chapter 33 Surah Al-Ahzab urges the Prophet (pbuh) to stick with God or to have firm faith in God. The next verse 33:2 urges the Prophet (pbuh) to follow what is being inspired (revealed) on yourself from your Sustainer/Lord “وَاتَّبِعْ مَا يُوحَى إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ”. The next verse 33:3 says “وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ” and rely on God “وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا” and be benefitted/served/satisfied/fulfilled/contended with God’s advocate/ representative.
Who was this advocate or representative of God (وَكِيلًا) along with Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who was urges to be contended with???
Was not it Rasool (God’s message) which was sent to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Prophet was urged to follow this revelation???
The verse 33:4 “مَّا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِرَجُلٍ مِّن قَلْبَيْنِ فِي جَوْفِهِ” is actually telling us that God did not make for a human of fallen/displaced in its hollow grove/empty housing“وَمَا جَعَلَ أَزْوَاجَكُمُ اللَّائِ” and neither made your partners the idle/work-shy/indolent/lethargic/dull/lack of interest/lack of attention/lack of care/voided/displeasure/heartless/coldhearted/naïve.
However, evils have changed Allah’s words in the translation to absurdly mean “God did not make two hearts in a man”, inventing “man” from “رَجُلٍ” which is an undefined noun used as an informal of ‘man species’ or ‘mankind, which includes both men and women, and “قَلْبَيْنِ” correctly means who are overthrown, fallen down, dislodged, toppled, collapsed, drop, deposed, displaced, supplanted, dethroned, undermined etc.
However, the actual statement of this verse 33:4 has been destroyed to justify a shameful Hadith made up to defame the Prophet (pbuh) in which one of the most embarrassing events in the life of prophet Muhammad was invented, which was Prophet’s marriage to his adopted son’s former wife, Zaynab bint Jash.
Zaynab had married Zayd, the freed slave of Prophet Muhammad’s first wife, Khadijah, whom Muhammad (pbuh) adopted as his son. According to the so called Islamic literature, Muhammad (pbuh) had ventured to see his adopted son, Zayd, at his house. Upon arriving, he found Zaynab unveiled and was enamored by her beauty. As he departed, Muhammad (pbuh) made some comments which she heard and, when her husband returned, told him what had transpired. After Zayd heard that Muhammad (pbuh) had made some comments about his wife’s beauty, he went to his adoptive father Muhammad (pbuh) and told him that he would divorce his wife Zaynab bint Jash so he could marry her if this is what Muhammad (pbuh) desired. Muhammad (pbuh) refused and encouraged his adopted son to remain with his wife. Subsequently, Zayd divorced his wife and Muhammad (pbuh) was commanded by Allah to then marry Zaynab, his adopted son’s divorcee.
Therefore, our all evil translators did not translate the Quran but invented lies on Allah and His Prophet. Both Quranist and traditional scholars have been making us fools and committing blasphemy through their evil literature of Islam and false translations of the Quran to establish that prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had adulterous desires for a married woman, which then caused her husband to divorce her, giving Muhammad (pbuh) the opportunity to marry her.
However, in the verses 33:2 and 33:3 after urging prophet to follow Allah’s revelation and rely on Allah, the context typically moved towards the practical implementation of Allah’s instructions Who did not make us un attached and put us in a dry hollow cave nor did he make our partners idle, naïve, cold or uncaring and in the same verse 33:4 it was urged to keep our relations on their appropriate place. The next verse 33:5 “ادْعُوهُمْ لِآبَائِهِمْ هُوَ أَقْسَطُ عِندَ اللَّهِ” urges to call them with due respect proportionated or commensurate by God. “آبَائِ” means self-respect, deserve to be respected and pride, and “أَقْسَطُ” means proportional justification. Further words of this verse 33:5 are telling us these people are our siblings and helping hands in the walk of our life but to bring in the Quran the shameful and embarrassing fake account of Zaynab bint Jash, our evil scholars invented “to call them with their true fathers names” so that they can falsely prove that “Zayd bin Harithah” was not Prophet Muhammad’s own son that’s why Prophet married his wife.
The next verse 33:6 brings back the statement of giving pride and respect to your relations with reference to Allah’s Book “كِتَابِ اللَّهِ” which is the actual context of Allah’s message. The next verse 33:7 denotes the contractual education of the earlier Prophets with reference to the education of earlier Prophets Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus, who were held righteous for their truthfulness whereas, unfaithful concealers counted liable for intent torment. After this factual statement of verse 33:8, the next verses 33:9, 33:10 and 33:11, encouraging us to ponder upon Allah’s blessing and His help in the mentioned difficult situations in which they were tested. The verse 33:12 comes back to the context of His message “رَسُولُهُ” which is taken by hypocrites nothing but delusion. The verse 33:13 portrays their excuses of refraining from Allah’s charter. Verses 33:14 and 33:15 describes their weak faith and false promises, and 33:16 makes them clear that their refrain from Allah’s message will not give them any benefit in their short life. Next verse 33:17 making it clear that no one can save them from God’s blessing or torment and in 33:18 God mentions that He knows obstructionists, who are acquisitive selfish and will not see you when you are in trouble 33:19 and they will get away from you 33:20. Whereas, the next verse 33:21 comes back to Allah’s message (رَسُولِ اللَّهِ) which is called an index of benefaction (أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ) instituted a pleasing expectation from God (لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ). The next verse 33:22 says “وَلَمَّا رَأَى الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الْأَحْزَابَ قَالُوا هَذَا مَا وَعَدَنَا اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَصَدَقَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ” and what was being observed/recognized by the blocks of firm believers, they said this is what God and His message’s promise us and God and His message are true. The next verse 33:23 further extends the previous stamen “مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ” in which people from the firm believers truly confirm what obligations/commitments concluded by Allah towards them. However, in the mainstream false translation the word “رِجَالٌ” is as usual translated to mean “men” without even thinking that “الْمُؤْمِنِينَ” includes both men and women and “رِجَالٌ” has been informally used to mean people as an active participle of “having legs”. This is because the evils have made the lies consistent and smooth throughout the translation of the whole Quran.
The verses 33:24, 33:25, 33:26 and 33:27 are telling about recompensing the righteous for accepting the truth and harsh repulse to the ungrateful concealers, and their consequences and effects on their life. The verse 33:28 is advising partners of the Prophet “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ” and the next verse 33:29 comes back to the context of Allah’s message with the advice of “وَإِن كُنتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ” making turn/spin towards Allah and His message for good reward. The next verse 33:30 actually recommends torment of twine, i.e. both involved man and woman even if Prophet’s wife found committing obscenity or abomination but our pagan scholars invented double sentence for wife of Prophet and saved men from having any sentence! “يَا نِسَاءَ النَّبِيِّ مَن يَأْتِ مِنكُنَّ بِفَاحِشَةٍ مُّبَيِّنَةٍ يُضَاعَفْ لَهَا الْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ” O women of the Prophet who comes from being with obscenity/abomination for its stated/input/dictum twain the torment of paired (correct translation).
The next verse 33:31 comes back to the context of Allah’s message and encourages those with multiple rewards who are compliant with God and His message. “وَمَن يَقْنُتْ مِنكُنَّ لِلَّهِ وَرَسُولِه”. The verse 33:32 urges women of the Prophet and the next verse 33:33 urge to be together in sequence or in order of given constitution, charter or shelter “وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ” and don’t be grabber of attire of the earlier ignorance “وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَى” and don’t be climber of rock of the earlier ignorance/and don’t be groomer of habit of the earlier ignorance/and don’t be holder of array of the earlier ignorance/and don’t be elevator of inlay of earlier ignorance/and don’t fit the outfit of earlier ignorance “وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ” and keep up the attachment and be introducer of the disbursement and be obedient of God and His message. The next verse 33:34 “وَاذْكُرْنَ مَا يُتْلَى فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ مِنْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ” and keep noting what is mentioned in instituted charters/constitutions of verses of God. In the context of Allah’s message this verse makes “بُيُوتِ” clear that it is not house made of any building material but structure of constitutions and charter consisted of Allah’s verses. The next verse 33:35 urges all men and women individually to keep noted God’s saying and the verse 33:36 comes back to the context of message “قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ” referring to decision of Allah and Allah’s message. This is the same “قَضَى” the phrase of which “قُضِيَتِ الصَّلَاةُ” of the verse 62:10 is falsely translated to mean “Finished Juma Prayer” as seen in the false translation of “فَإِذَا قُضِيَتِ الصَّلَاةُ فَانتَشِرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ” to mean “when prayer is finished disperse in the earth”. If this translation of the verse 62:10 is correct then why don’t they translate “قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ” (33:36) to mean: “Allah and Allah’s Rasool have finished”???
In the false translation of the next verse 33:37 both the pagan traditional as well as the so called Quranist evils again brought the embarrassing fake story of Zayd’s wife Zaynab bint Jash. The unspecified (النکرۃ) noun “زَيْدٌ” with Nunation (تنوین) is itself an evidence that “زَيْدٌ” is not the name of “Zayd bin Harithah” and it conjugates with “قَضَى” to mean “excessive decision” but evil eyes always ignore linguistic rules and grammatical formation of Quranic words when they invent lies on Allah and His Prophet (pbuh). Furthermore, how do they translate these words “وَطَرًا زَوَّجْنَاكَهَا” of this verse 33:37 to mean “Zaid divorced his wife, We gave her to you in marriage”???
Whereas, “وَطَرًا” is actually a derivative of the same proto root of “طائر” the noun of ‘bird’ and verb of ‘fly high’, ‘rise’ and ‘raise’ but in the Islamic literature and in the fake interpretation of the Quran it is falsely taken to mean “divorce”. Also the phrase “زَوَّجْنَا” is the combination of نَا+زَوَّجْ in which “نَا” is a first person plural OBJECTIVE pronoun correctly means “our/us” and “زَوَّجْ” not necessarily means marriage but ‘brace’, ‘couple with’, ‘join’, ‘combine’ and ‘unite’ with something, and “کَهَا” is an interjection. However, if we take “زَوَّجْ” to mean marriage or wife then “زَوَّجْنَا” means ‘our marriage’ or ‘our wife’ as the phrase “زَوَّجْنَا” cannot be translated to mean “we get someone married” because neither “نَا” is a subjective pronoun to mean “we” nor is “زَوَّجْ” an active participle or performer of something. Hence, this verse 33:37 is actually emphasizing on ‘raising and joining Allah’s message’ Therefore, only grammatical formation of Arabic words gives correct understanding of a sentence and this is not the case that one can automatically assume marriage by looking at the word “زَوَّجْ”, take “نَا” to mean “we”, and invent that ‘we got someone marriage’ or ‘we gave someone’s hand in marriage to someone’. However, evil ignorant people play with Allah’s words thinking that Quran is not in any grammatical form and without even knowing Arabic language they teach us Arabic Quran.
The next verse 33:38 clearly makes difference between the Prophet and Allah’s message which has been running since before and made worthy of high value (قَدَرًا مَّقْدُورًا)
“مَّا كَانَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ مِنْ حَرَجٍ فِيمَا فَرَضَ اللَّهُ لَهُ سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ وَكَانَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قَدَرًا مَّقْدُورًا” (33:38)
“Not was on the Prophet from persist in what God imposed/made obligatory for him, God’s practice was inbound freely from before and instituted Order of God of a high prestigious value” (word to word correct translation 33:38)
The next verse 33:39 “الَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَالَاتِ اللَّهِ وَيَخْشَوْنَهُ وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا”
They are those who preach/convey messages of God and ensemble/ accumulate Him and do not ensemble/accumulate anyone except God and serving by an honorable/noble/esteemed of God (word to word correct translation 33:37)
“حَسِيبًا” correctly means: an honorable, a noble, an esteemed, a highborn, of noble origin. In fact “حسب” (Hsb) means: figure out, in virtue of, be of noble descent, be of noble family and noble design. Also, in linguistics the word “حسیب” (haseeb) is the direct object of verb “حَسَبَ” (hasaba) in contrast with subject, i.e. “حسیب” is the noun of something which has already gone through the action of the verb “حَسَبَ” (hasaba), i.e. already figure out or configured. In other words the noun “حسیب” is not the noun of doer of “حَسَبَ” (hasaba) but in fact is made after having done the action of “حَسَبَ” (hasaba). Hence, all translations of “حسیب” to mean ‘ACCOUNTANT’ or ‘TO ACCOUNT’ invented in the translation of the Quran are technically wrong. Arabic language and the Quran use the same word “حسب” (Hsb) to figure out and to configure something. Therefore, according to its correct grammatical formation the word “حَسِيبًا” is one which has been formed, made, designed or figured out after applying the action of “حَسَبَ” (hasaba). However, this is the same “حسب” which has been used in the Quran to mean nobility, honorability and praiseworthiness of Allah and His advocate (الْوَكِيلُ), i.e. His message (رَسُولُهُ) “حَسْبُنَا اللَّهُ وَنِعْمَ الْوَكِيلُ وَقَالُوا” (3:173), And they said our Allah’s honour and the advocate of the excellence (correct translation), “وَقَالُوا حَسْبُنَا اللَّهُ سَيُؤْتِينَا اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ وَرَسُولُهُ” (9:59), And they said our God’s honour Intact our God from His precedence/favoured and His Message (correct translation)
In the verse 8:64 even the Prophet was told “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ حَسْبُكَ اللَّهُ وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَكَ” O who is the Prophet Honour your God and which is your cause to be obeyed. This is because “إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ حَسِيبًا” (4:86) that Allah has been the Honourable authority over everything (correct translation) and it is said in the verse “حَسْبِيَ اللَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ عَلَيْهِ تَوَكَّلْتُ” (9:129) Honourable God not a deity but is on His Authority/Entrustment (correct translation).
Furthermore, the phrase of Allah’s Honour throughout the Quran, such as “حَسْبَكَ اللَّهُ” (8:62), “قُلْ حَسْبِيَ اللَّهُ” (39:38), “اللَّهِ فَهُوَ حَسْبُهُ” (65:3) etc. are denoting Allah’s Nobility, Respect, Esteem and Honour, which is not different to His honourable Message “فَلَا تَحْسَبَنَّ اللَّهَ مُخْلِفَ وَعْدِهِ رُسُلَهُ” (14:47). Also the verse 18:40 is making us clear that “حُسْبَانًا”, i.e. noble, respectable and honourable is a message sent from the sky “وَيُرْسِلَ عَلَيْهَا حُسْبَانًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ” (18:40).
So, the context of the verse in question 33:40 is giving Honour and praising to Allah’s message as seen in the above mentioned true overview of all verses from 33:1 to 33:39.
Therefore, the word “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) of the verse 33:40 which is already an unspecified adjective because of its Nunation (تنوین) has also been proven from the context that this is not the name of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but a praising adjective used in the verse 33:40 to define God’s honourable Message.
Hence, the words of the verse 33:40 “مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ” correctly means: No one was defined praiseworthy/acclaimed of category from your men species.
The word to word analysis of further clause “وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا” of this verse 33:40 is as under:
The Arabic word “لَكِن” is actually an interposing expression of speech (به عنوان مثال) and also used to “pause” or “delay” or “separation” or “division” in a speech as seen from its noun “لكْنَةٌ”. Hence, as an interpose or “به عنوان مثال” this Arabic word “لَكِن” is interposing or intervening in the subject (عنوان) ‘Praiseworthy’ and its subsequent speech, and shifts or gets separated the subject (عنوان) ‘Praiseworthy’ from “أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ” to the phrase “رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ” of the next clause of speech to mean ‘elucidated/expressed/pointed out/annotated message of Allah is praiseworthy’. However, “لَكِن” correctly means: expressed, reflected, remarked, interposed, illustrated, interjected, noted, pointed out, affirmed, annotated, marked up, subscribed, pitched in, pronounced, asserted, commentated, concluded, construed, elucidated, explicated, expound, mention something barbarously or bluntly, on the other hand, on the contrary, though other than and yet.
However, to hide the actual message of God “yet” of Arabic interpose “لَكِن” has been falsely made “but” in the translation of the whole Quran, which is again a Persian invention in Arabic language because the word “لیکن” (lekin) is used to mean “but” in Persia and its influenced languages such as Urdu and Hindi.
The next phrase “رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ” correctly means “message of Allah” or “God’s message” as its grammatical formation has been already explained in this article.
The next word “خَاتَمَ” is an active participle or performer of the action of the root word “ختم” as seen in the common grammatical formation of Arabic active participles such as “عابد” from “عبد”, “ذاھد” from “ذھد” or “ناصح” from “نصح” etc. To reach the correct meaning of “خَاتَمَ” we must keep in mind the fact that if “عابد” cannot be “عبد”, “ذاھد” cannot be “ذھد” and an advisor “ناصح” cannot be “نصح” or advice likewise “خَاتَمَ” cannot become “ختم”. However, to determine the correct use of this active participle “خَاتَمَ” the correct meaning of Arabic root word “ختم” are as follows: achieving something successfully, badging something, designing, to ripe something, prestigiousness, perfection, distinction, determining status of something, standing with something, valuing something, prominence, importance, pre-eminence, eminence, street credibility, merit,
caring out, implementation, performance, effecting or effectiveness of something, arranging the affairs of something, distinguishing mark to prove excellence and verb, noun and gerund to impress, and a seal or stamp used as authentication, cachet, impression, imprint, make or leave a fingerprint, rubber stamp, authentication seal, signature, official endorsement, official or corporate badging, marking and marked (مختوم).
The Arabic term “ختم الشركة” is used to mean ‘Company Seal’ or ‘Company Stamp’, “ختم التاريخ” is used to mean ‘Date Stamp’ and “ختم بنك” is used to mean ‘Bank Stamp’. Arabic phrase “قرار مختوم” is a legal term to mean ‘Sealed Verdict’, “عقد مختوم” is taken to mean ‘Sealed Contract’, “عسل مختوم” means ‘Ripe Honey’ and “مُخَتَّم” is taken to mean ‘Trier’ (a body responsible for investigating and deciding a case judicially, such as “the jury is the trier of fact”).
However, to hide the true message of the above verse 33:40 this Arabic word “ختم” (Khtam) has been replaced, throughout the translation of the Quran, with its phonetically similar Persian words “ختم” (Khatam) and its Persian noun “اختتام” (Ikhtitam), and on the basis of the meaning of Persian words “ختم” (Khatam) and “اختتام” (Ikhtitam) the Arabic words “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” of the verse 33:40 have been falsely translated to mean “last and final seal of the prophets”, “end, final, conclusion and last of the prophets” and “the last prophet”. This Persian word “ختم” (Khatam) is used to mean ‘end of something’ in Persian and its influenced languages Urdu and Hindi but Arabic being a Semitic language is totally different to Persian, Hindi or Urdu.
Hence, being an active participle of Arabic root “ختم” (Khtm) the word “خَاتَمَ” of the above verse 33:40 correctly means: achiever, riper, carer, implementer, performer, effecter, influencer, arranger of the affairs, distinguisher, marker to prove excellence, impresser, agent of authentication seal or authentication stamp, designer, perfectionner, cachet, impression, imprinter, maker or leaver a fingerprint, rubber stamp, authentication seal, signature, official endorser, official or corporate badge, marker, prestige, status, stature, accreditor, credibility, certifier, culture, splendor, authorizer, degree, classifier, order, privilege, hierarchy, confirmation, insignia, permit.
The next word “النَّبِيِّينَ” is plural of the Prophet. The phrase “وَكَانَ اللَّهُ” means “and God has instituted”, “بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا” everything with having knowledge.
Now, we have reached the correct translation of the verse 33:40, which is as under:
“مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا” – (33:40)
No one was defined praiseworthy a plantation range from your mankind other than message of God and certifying stamp/endorsing seal/hierarchy/signing badge of the prophets and God has instituted everything with having knowledge” (word to word correct translation 33:40)
Hence, according to the linguistic rules, in the above verse 33:40 “رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ”, .i.e. Allah’s message has been called “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” to mean: certifying stamp, endorser, hierarchy and prestigious badge of the Prophets (pbut), which has also been proven from the forthcoming verse 33:45 of the same context “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا” O who is the Prophet that is of Our dispatched communication of yours, a certifying proof/witness bearer and a missionary and a sign/forerunner/model/pattern (word to word correct translation of 33:45)
“شَاهِدًا” is an active participle or doer of “شھد” to mean a bearer of witness, a certifier and a certified proof of the Prophet (النَّبِيُّ), which is Allah’s post or sent message (أَرْسَلْنَاكَ). However, the second person singular objective pronoun “كَ” or “أَرْسَلْنَاكَ” has been misused in the translation to mean “you” due to the evil cult of personality God’s message has been kept aside and replaced with the prophet. Had our evil scholars taken this objective pronoun “كَ” in its correct meaning “your/yours” they would not have invented a totally false translation of the Quran but when the same pronoun “كَ” comes in the phrases like “رَبّْكَ” these evils correctly translate it to mean “your Lord” so that no one can catch their perversion.
Anyway, the phrase “شَاهِدًا”, of the above verse 33:45 used for Allah’s message sent to the Prophet, itself certify the correct meaning of the phrase “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” of the verse 33:40 to mean certifying stamp, bearer of sign and a witness of the Prophets, which is a divine body over and above the Prophets but in the shape of God’s commandments called “رسول” in the Quran. Hence, a “Rasool”, i.e. Allah’s message is a sign, certifier, badge, sign and a stamp of the Prophets (خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ), which is also called a witness, evidence, proof or certificate of the Prophets (شَاهِدًا). The same “Rasool”, i.e. Allah’s message is also a mission (مُبَشِّرًا) of the Prophets and a forerunner, announcer, prototype, model, exemplar and a pattern (نَذِيرًا) of the Prophets, which was given to each and every Prophet. Hence, according to the Quran no Prophet comes without his “Rasool” (given message), which is to be obeyed by Prophet as well as people. However, to deviate from Allah’s order of obeying His message (رسول) the Manichean pagans and their evil disciple so called Muslim scholars fabricated that Rasool (رسول) is the Prophet and all functionary attributes “خَاتَمَ”, “شَاهِدًا”, “مُبَشِّرًا” and “نَذِيرًا” of Allah’s message (رسول) were falsely diverted to the Prophet and then under the cover of personality, character and practice of the Prophet they brought back their false dogma and pagan beliefs to obey them in the name of Allah’s orders to obey Allah and His Prophet. Since then the deviated Quranists and evil traditionalists have been obeying all evils and inventing lies in the name of Allah.
There is no doubt that the Prophets (PBUT) were the most exalted, most respectable, most blessed and the most righteous people in the world, who received and commissioned God’s commandments and did their level best for the welfare of mankind, and spent their precious life for humanity, peace and social justice and put mankind to the right track. We salute them for their remarkable work and God greets them with His never ending blessing but handful evils have been trying to snatch their God given exalted ‘status’, ‘prestigious certification’ honourable badge, praiseworthy sign and acclaimed stamp (خَاتَمَ).
Such as the words of the verses 2:143 “وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا” and 22:78 “هَٰذَا لِيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ شَهِيدًا” there are so many verses in the Quran, which make it clear that Allah’s message (Rasool) has been made your certificate/witness.
“إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا” (48:8) While Our dispatched communication of yours is a certifying proof/witness bearer and a missionary and a sign/forerunner/model/pattern (word to word correct translation of 48:8)
“لِمَ تَكْفُرُونَ بِآيَاتِ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ شَهِيدٌ عَلَىٰ مَا تَعْمَلُونَ” (3:98). For what reason do they hide signs of Allah and they have no knowledge over Allah’s certificate.
“إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدًا” (4:33). That God has instituted a certificate over everything.
“وَأَرْسَلْنَاكَ لِلنَّاسِ رَسُولًا وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا” (4:79). And Our dispatched communication of yours is a message for people and served with God’s certificate.
“بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ” (5:44) Inclusive care to be done from Allah’s book and instituted on its certificates.
“قُلْ كَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ شَهِيدًا” (29:52) Said, a certificate served by Allah is my absolute notice/clear understanding and your absolute notice/ clear understanding (100% correct translation)
However, the following mainstream translation of the above verse 29:52 “Say: “Enough is Allah for a witness between me and you” (Yousuf Ali & others) looks good but is totally fake in which they have sneakily concealed Allah’s words to bring their evil cult in the translation of the Quran.
If you pay your attention to the phrases “بَيْنِي” and “وَبَيْنَكُمْ” of this verse 29:52, you will find for yourself how these evils made us fools by giving us a totally false translation. This is because “بَيْنِي” is the combination of ي + بَيْنِ in which “ي” is the first person singular objective pronoun to mean “MY” and “بَيْنَكُمْ” is the combination of كُمْ+ بَيْنَ in which “كُمْ” is a second person plural objective pronoun to mean “YOUR”. Even, if we replace Arabic word “بَيْن” with its phonetically similar Persian word “بین” as our evil scholars did and falsely translated this Arabic word “بَيْن” to mean “between” then again “between my” and “between your” do not make any linguistic sense and a question will arise ‘what is ‘between my’ and what is ‘between your’???
To make their distortion logical they falsely replace “MY” with “me” and “YOUR” with you and invented a fake translation of the words “بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ” to mean “between you and me”. Whereas, Arabic word “بَيِّن” correctly means: absolute, apparent, plain, clearly noticed, understood, seeming to have a particular feeling, visible, present, very clear, evident, obvious, definite, fully expressed, conspicuous, comprehensible, expressing, easy to understand, easy to notice, noteworthy, remarkable, easily seen, recognized, simple, worth noticing, exceptional, not ambiguous, definite, unmistakable, undoubted, can be seen by the eye, that can be perceived or ascertained, final and irrevocable.
The popular Arabic noun “بائِن” is derived from the same root and used as a term of Islamic Sharia “طَلاَقٌ بائِن” to mean “absolute divorce”, “final divorce” or “irrevocable divorce”. Hence, when they want to break the relation of a married couple they pass their evil verdict that “طَلاَقٌ بائِن” (final or irrevocable divorce) has been happened between husband and wife after saying three “Talaq” (divorce), which is an absolute, full and final irrevocable divorce and the couple or divorcees husband and wife cannot live together anymore without divorcee wife having raped by a third person in the name of “Halal”. If a third person rapist is not available or if someone finds it embarrassing or difficult to ask a friend or known or unknown person to rape his wife then again no problem and no worries as Halala service is also discretely provided under the same roof of the Sharia institution which issues the absolute divorce. I haven’t seen my Madrassa fellows and colleagues since I left them for my outside Madrassa career but I still remember that all big Madrassas namely Jamia so and so (جامعہ ۔ ۔ ۔یه) used to have permanent rooms booked in 5 star luxurious hotels to cope with Halala emergencies of regular rape with cash.
Anyways, if “بائِن” is used outside the Quran to its absolutely correct meaning then what is the problem in correctly translating “بَيِّن” in the translation of the Quran whilst both “بائِن” and “بَيِّن” are derived out of the same Arabic root?
Furthermore, the word “بَيِّنَاتٍ” is the plural of the same word “بَيِّن” which we are discussing with reference to the above verse 29:52 the actual statement of which has been distorted in the translation to reject Allah’s system of making Rasool (message) a certifying stamp and a certificate of the Prophet and the obedience of Allah’s message (Rasool).
Hence, in the verse “وَلَقَدْ أَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ” (2:99) the word “بَيِّنَاتٍ” a plural of “بَيِّن” is definitely not a Persian “بین” to mean “BETWEEN” but ‘absolute noteworthy, absolute noticeable and clear understanding’ of “آيَاتٍ” (verses). Likewise, “بَيِّنَاتٍ” in the verse 24:1 “وَأَنْزَلْنَا فِيهَا آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ” is not “BETWEEN” but ‘absolute noteworthy, absolute noticeable and clear understanding’ of “آيَاتٍ” (verses). The plural of “بَيِّن”, i.e. “بَيِّنَاتٍ” is also not coming to mean “BETWEEN” in the verse 2:159 “مَا أَنْزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ” (2:159) but absolute noteworthy, absolute noticeable and of clear understanding’ and the guidance (وَالْهُدَىٰ). In the verse 58:5 “وَقَدْ أَنْزَلْنَا آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ” The same plural of “بَيِّن”, i.e. “بَيِّنَاتٍ” is not coming to mean “BETWEEN” but Allah said “And our revelation is always verses of absolute noteworthy/clear understanding (58:5)
The verse 2:285 “آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ رَبِّهِ” hammers the last nail in the coffins of those pagans who don’t believe that “الرَّسُولُ” (the Rasool) is Allah’s message.
“آمَنَ” is the command verb (imperative) in which God orders us including the addressee Prophet (pbuh) to accept and believe, “الرَّسُولُ” the message, “بِمَا” inclusive/whatever/including/all “أُنْزِلَ” caused to send down/ caused to reveal/revelation (elative noun like “اکبر”) “إِلَيْهِ” upon/on/at/to him, in which a third person singular objective pronoun “هِ” clearly refers to a single person on whom the message was revealed, who is obviously the Prophet alone but to make “الرَّسُولُ” to the Prophet (pbuh) our evil scholars falsely translated “آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْهِ” to mean “The Messenger believeth in what hath been revealed to him/ The messenger believes in what has been revealed to him”.
Whereas, the correct translation of these word “آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ رَبِّهِ” should be: Believe the message whatever cause to send down/reveal to him from his Lord/Sustainer (word to word correct translation)
Likewise, God orders to be obeyed what God causes to reveal “اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ” (31:21).
“ذَٰلِكَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ أَنْزَلَهُ إِلَيْكُمْ” (65:5). That is Order of God caused Him to send down/reveal towards yourself (correct translation)
“وَمَا نَتَنَزَّلُ إِلَّا بِأَمْرِ رَبِّكَ” (19:64). And nothing is revealed/sent down but with Order of your Lord (correct translation)
“قَدْ أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكُمْ ذِكْرًا” (65:10) God always causes to reveal/send down a notation/memorandum (correct translation).
As we have seen in the in depth overview of verses 33:1 to 33:40 that the verse 33:40 falls in the context of God’s message which was praised in the verse 33:38 with the words “ قَدَرًا مَّقْدُورًا”, highly prestigious and highly valuable. In the verse 33:38 we have also seen that the nobility, esteem and honour was given only to the message of God with the word “حَسِيبًا” as the word “حسیب” holds Nobility, Respect, Esteem and Honour. Then in the verse 33:40 the same message of God which is honoured with an indefinite noun (adjective) “مُحَمَّدٌ ” to mean praiseworthy, acclaimed and as an epithet meaning the “praised one”.
The next verse 33:41 extends the same context of praising God’s message and those who have accepted God’s message they are urged “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ ذِكْرًا كَثِيرًا” O those who have accepted belief they keep noted God’s memorandum quite well (word to word correct translation).
However, to keep us away from the true understanding of the Quran, This Quranic word “ذِكْرً” (Zikr) has been made viral to mean chanting Allah’s name verbally, recalling or reminding God on fingers and on beads and it was made Allah’s worship to be carried out day and night. However, like other Quranic words, this Arabic word “ذِكْرً” has also been replaced with phonetically similar Persian word “ذکر” (Zikar) means memory and its Persian noun “تذکرہ” (Tazkara) means story, tail, talk about something or mentioning someone.
I remember when I was living in Saudi Arabia, I used to collect my “تذکرۃ” (tazkarah) from government travel control office for my Jeddah to Riyadh and Taif to Riyadh official tours, and every year two free “تذکرۃ” for international flights were also given to all government officials for holidays or going back to their homeland if they were foreigners. So, practically Arabic word “تذکرۃ” means ‘official note’ or ‘ticket’, which is not a ‘reminder’, ‘recall’ or even not a ‘mention’ but ‘a valid note of certain value’ or a ‘guaranteed acceptable memo’ or a ‘memorandum’. If you check with any Arab travel agent you will find for yourself that a ticket is still called “تذکرۃ” (Tazkarah) in Arabic but when they come to the Quran they take it to its false meaning given by Persian Manichean Imams whose aim was to sabotage the statements of God in the interpretation of the Quran.
The following verse of the Quran 65:10 itself defines what “ذِكْرً” (Zikar) is: “قَدْ أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكُمْ ذِكْرًا” God always causes to reveal/send down a notation/memorandum/consigner to yourself (correct translation 65:10).
The above verse 65:10 explains two key factors in the light of which we really need to rectify our non-Quranic false dogma coming from generations:
- The formation of the phrase “قَدْ أَنْزَلَاللَّهُ” makes it clear that God’s revelation never stops. This is because in accordance with the correct linguistic rules the particle “قَدْ” coming before a past verb makes the whole speech in the past perfect tense in which “قَدْ” is taken as a past participle to mean ‘HAD’ with the hint of continuation of relevant action from the past and instead of simple past this type of sentence is actually considered as ‘past perfect continuous’ tense in which “قَدْ” is actually seen to mean “EVER HAD BEEN”. However, if “قَدْ” comes before imperfect verb (present or imperative verbs) or verbal noun the speech is considered ‘ever running’ and “قَدْ” is translated to mean ‘ALWAYS’ or ‘EVER’. Hence, in the phrase “قَدْ أَنْزَلَ” the word “أَنْزَلَ” is not a regular past or perfect verb but an ‘Elative’ noun having an action of its verb, such as “کَبَرَ” (kabara) is the past verb of magnifying something or making something bigger but its popular verbal noun “اکبر” is at the same time a noun to mean bigger or biggest and also an imperative verb to mean ‘cause to make bigger’ or ‘cause to magnify’ and the formation of rest of the words in a speech is determined to take such word as an ‘Elative nouns’ or simply ‘imperative verbs’. However, “أَنْزَلَ” is such a verb which is always falsely taken to mean ‘perfect verb’ or ‘past verb’ in the translation of the whole Quran. This is because in front of our pagan beliefs we don’t care what Allah is telling us in the Quran but following our false tradition we have to reveal the Quran in Ramadhan and by all means we have to put a permanent ban on coming down any further revelation of God.
Therefore, those vigilant people who really want to know Allah’s true statements revealed in the Quran they should follow the standard and recognised Arabic verb forms format to derive the correct translation of Quranic words otherwise they are not learning the Quran which was revealed by Allah in commonly spoken plain Arabic but learning the false beliefs of our scholars which they have sneakily embedded in their false translation of Allah’s verses. Anyway, in standard Arabic grammar, if “کَتَبَ” (kataba) is a default past or perfect verb, “یکتب” (yaktub) is the present (imperfect) verb and “اَکتْب” (aktub) is an imperative or command verb of 4th form of Arabic verb forms. Likewise “نَزَلَ” (nazala) is a default past or perfect verb, “یَنزِلِ” (yanzila) is the present (imperfect) verb and “انزِلَ” (anzila) is an imperative or command verb of 4th form of Arabic verb forms. But in the translation of the whole Quran deviated evils take “أَنْزَلَ” to mean past (perfect) verb because their false beliefs are crashed down to the earth instantly, if they correctly translate “أَنْزَلَ”. So, these pagan evils do not preach the Quran but their non-Quranic evil beliefs.
- In the same verse 65:10 the object “إِلَيْكُمْ” is coming in the combination with second person plural pronoun “كُمْ”. Therefore, “أَنْزَلَ” is truly telling us that revelations comes to many people, which is “قَدْ أَنْزَلَاللَّهُ” ever and always a continuous action of God, and “ذِكْرًا” is a revealed notation or revealed memorandum of God, which is again a message or a Rasool of Allah.
Hence, after praising the revelation or message in the verse 33:40, the next verse 33:41 urges us to keep noting well this exalted memorandum and the next verse 33:42 “وَسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا” And it is dropped/threaded/floated betimes and an original (correct translation)
“سَبِّحُو” correctly means: be traced, drip, be dropped (like a drop of a liquid on a surface), material that is threaded with others, be drained, descend, dot by dot, bit by bit, in bits, distill, be moved on the surface or be floated, “هُ” at the end of “سَبِّحُوهُ” is actually referring to “ذِكْرًا كَثِيرًا” of previous verse, as its pronoun. Whereas, “بُكْرَةً” means: betimes, early, in good time, after a short interval of time, tackle something, reel, spool, dwindle, bobbin, structure or arrangement of parts, a pulley or windlass with its ropes and hooks. “أَصِيلًا” correctly means ‘an original’ form of something, which is derived from “أصل” means origin. However, this verse 33:42 “وَسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا” is falsely translated to mean: And glorify Him day and night. Although this mainstream fake translation looks too good in the sense of Praising God day and night but here in this verse God did not say this. Also “سَبِّحُو” is not a command or imperative verb which is supposed to be used as an order of doing something. Why did they invent this too good to be true type fake translation of the actual Arabic text if this verse 33:42?
Because they knew that no one will ever dare to go against their fake translation And glorify Him day and night but on the other hand in their exegesis and especially in Urdu translations they sneakily replaced “سَبِّحُو” with Persian “تسبیح” (tasbeeh) and brought in Islam a pure polytheist ritual of Latin prayer ‘Paternoster’ in which polytheists used to do their ‘Father’s Prayer’ on the “set of rosary beads“. Arab pagans also used to glorify their deities by chanting and praying on the ‘set of rosary beads’. Although, this is a tradition of ancient Roman Catholic Church, who used to pray their Latin Lord on the “set of rosary beads” but all polytheists use this “set of rosary beads” in the worship of their gods and it is also seen on the heads and hanging in the necks of Hindu’s gods and in Buddha’s idols. This is the same “set of rosary beads” which is seen in polytheist Manichean’s hands, in Parsies (Old Iranian religion) and Zoroastrian’s hands and in worship of Chines. The same “set of rosary beads” are seen in the hands of so called Arab Muslims and eventually came to rest of the so called Muslims hands as their pagan legacy. Interestingly, this is the most manufactured and most selling product of China imported and sold in Makkah and Madina and bulk buying product of Hajis (Islamic pilgrims) and Yatris (Hindu pilgrims). Hence, this “set of rosary beads” is a symbol and an ever ready instrumental tool of idol worship which has been used to glorify pagan deities and polytheist gods. But those evils who have mad God a lifeless deity in the false translations of the Quran they also brought in the Quran their pagan legacy the “set of rosary beads” and since they have invented the fake translation of the Quran they have been working on the mission of making the whole world pagan by preaching their paganism and converting them in to the pagan religion.
They are those pagans who have been disturbing the whole world including the system of God but they don’t want to be disturbed till the so called last day of the world. This is the reason why they have displayed a “DON’T DISTURB” sign board “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” by amending God’s words revealed in the Quran and falsely made us believe that no one will ever come to commission God’s orders and truth will never reveal to anyone.
Hence, this is the truth that: “قَدْ أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكُمْ ذِكْرًا” God always causes to reveal His memorandum to yourself (65:10), “وَسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا” And it is dropped/threaded/floated betimes and an original (33:42).
“هُوَ الَّذِي يُصَلِّي عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَلَائِكَتُهُ لِيُخْرِجَكُم مِّنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَى النُّورِ وَكَانَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ رَحِيمًا” (33:43)
Which is arrived on yourself and its holders, to take yourself out of the murkiness to the light and instituted with those who have firm faith of a forbearing care (word to word correct translation 33:43)
“هُوَ الَّذِي” is not “He Who” but “الَّذِي” is the pronoun of subject “ذکر”, memorandum of God, message of God and notation of God which is being discussed in all aforementioned verses. Hence, according to the correct grammatical rules “الَّذِي” as a pronoun of someone or God will be used only if someone’s name or God is clearly mentioned as a subject in the previous statement, otherwise “الَّذِي” will be considered the subjective pronoun of what is being discussed in the previous statement and “هُوَ” will work as an helping verb to mean “is”. Whereas, “مَلَائِكَتُهُ” is a derivative of “م ل ک” (Mem – Lam – Kaf), a root of property, holding property and it also refers to someone who hold some property or properties. Therefore, “مَلَائِكَتُهُ” are those who hold specific properties of something or holders of something or in hold of something or someone. An unspecified or indefinite noun “رَحِيمًا” does not refer to God but the subject of “ر ح م” (Ra – Ha – Mem) or one who have already gone under “رحم”, i.e. care or forbearing. Also, according to the linguistic rules the default conjunction “of” will also come in the translation of both terms of the phrase “بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ رَحِيمًا”.
“تَحِيَّتُهُمْ يَوْمَ يَلْقَوْنَهُ سَلَامٌ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ أَجْرًا كَرِيْمًا” (33:44)
Their corresponding/glad reception day prompts them its dignity/ harmony/gratification/relief and promise/fix for them an obliging decent reward (word to word correct translation 33:44)
The phrase “تَحِيَّتُهُمْ” is the combination of third person plural objective pronoun “هُمْ” to mean their/them and “تَحِيَّتُ” is a continuous tense to mean: corresponding, owning greeting and respect.
The noun “تَحِيَّة” is used in Arabic to mean: correspond, cheer, greeting, regards, kind wishes, compliments, welcome, to show honor, respect, the act or an instance of greeting or receiving a person, idea, or something gladly or a glad reception.
“يَوْمَ” actually refers to a period of time but generally taken to mean a ‘day’.
The phrase “يَلْقَوْنَهُ” is a combination of subject pronoun “هُ” which refers the subject “ذکر”, i.e. memorandum or message of God being discussed from previous verses and “يَلْقَوْن” is a product of the Arabic root word “لقن” correctly means: dictate to say words for someone else, to write it down, to tell someone exactly what they must do or how they must behave, to give lessons, coaching, educating, teaching, inspiring telling and prompting etc. The popular Arabic word “تَلْقِين” (Talqeen) is also a derivative of the same root “لقن” (LQN). Our so called scholars who do us “تَلْقِين” (Talqeen) day and night of what is right and what is wrong. Our parents instruct us, make us realize and they make us understand right or wrong and even a common person knows the correct meaning of “تَلْقِين” which is widely used to mean: giving instructions, preaching, briefing something, loading, cuing, initiating, prompting, dictation, instruction, teaching, getting someone realized, understand, apprehend and perceive. However, to hide God’s message the evils falsely translate it to mean “will meet” or “meet”. In fact God sends His people and His message to “تَلْقِين” (Talqeen) them but they do not accept God’s “تَلْقِين” against their false dogma and pagan beliefs.
During the 8th century the Arabic word “سَلَام” (Salaam) has been falsely converted in to a fake political and military stunt of “PEACE” to justify military actions against political oppositions and to carry on invasions in the name of the “RELIGION OF PEACE”. It was the time when religion “Islam” was found and defined to mean a ‘Religion of Peace’, and was made viral by state authorities. We don’t have any proof or credible historical evidence which can show us that Religion of Islam was ever existed before or even in the holy time of holy Prophet (pbuh). Also, the Quran does not use ‘Islam’ to mean any new religion or any ‘Religion of Peace. Islamic history was written backdated during the 8th and 9th centuries, about 4 generations after the told death of the Prophet (pbuh), when the rulers of Islamic Caliphate hired their own favoured writers to create a back dated history of Religion Islam. To support their newly made religion and to justify the late written history of religion Islam a bulk series of Islamic literature was also invented and completely turned it around the cult of personality of Mohammed keeping aside the actual message of God. Whereas, a true credible history is always written by independent contemporary writers who personally observe the events without relying on any chain of narrators and events collectors.
Why is it that we don’t have any independent documented history of the Religion of Islam since the time of the Prophet (pbuh) if we have the span of recorded history from roughly 5,000 years, around the 30th century BC with the disputed outline that Chinese writings are 7000 – 8000 years old and the writings of Mesolithic era are of 10,000 years old Middle Stone Age existed between the Paleolithic Period (Old Stone Age) and the Neolithic Period (New Stone Age)???
This question will open up new chapters of research and will lead the true researchers to find the concealed truth about the Religion of Islam, when it was actually founded and who found it quite after the revelation of the Quran.
However, the correct meaning of “سَلَامٌ ” (salaam) and “اسلام” (Islam) are: state of freedom, harmony, friendship, dignity, moderation, contentment, ease, easiness, assurance, balance, equilibrium, evenness, self-control, stability, tranquility, confidence, tranquility, tune, understanding, unison, consonance, concordance, comity, concert, chime, amity, relief, relaxation, comfort, enjoyment, prosperity, leisure, satisfaction, gratification, happiness, security, serenity, lack of difficulty, salutation, greeting, like -mindedness, empathy and goodwill.
“أَعَدَّ” means added up, calculated, set up, composed, promised, count down and “أَعَدَّ” is also a synonym of Arabic word “جَهَّزَ” to mean equip, outfit, providing, fixed, brace, stand by mount or things, plan, render, restore, rig, set. The derivative the same word “جَهَّزَ”, is called “جہیز” (Jahez) in Indian subcontinent and used to mean “dowry”, a property or wealth transferred to the groom from the parents of a bride. The derivative “جهاز” (Jahaz) of the same word “جَهَّزَ” is still used by Arabs to mean ‘equipment’.
The word “أَجْرًا” means a salary, a hire, a lease, an honorarium, a remuneration, a reward, a recompense, a wage, a rate, a charge and a fee. Whereas, “كَرِيْمًا” means valuable, favourable, generous, eminent, obliging, gracious, openhanded, bounteous, grand and decent.
Hence, the above explained in depth overview of the first 45 verses of Surah Al Ahzab Quranic Chapter 33 proves that the verse in question 33:40 certainly falls in the context of God’s revelation. Therefore, the word “مُحَمَّدٌ” (muhammadun) of the verse 33:40 is not a personal name of anyone but rather is an unspecified indefinite noun, which has been used to praise God’s message.
There is one more verse of the Quran in which the word “مُحَمَّدٍ” (muhammadin) has been used with Nunation of “کسرۃ تنوین” (Tanween Kasra), which makes it an unspecified indefinite noun of genitive case. This is the verse 47:2 of Surah Muhammad Chapter 47, the Arabic text of which itself rejects its fake translations on technical grounds.
When we carefully examine the formation of the relevant words “وَآمَنُوا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ” of this verse 47:2 we will find in the light of grammar that article “عَلَى” (ala) coming with indefinite noun or adjective is not a preposition but is actually an ‘Exponent’ “كلمة الأس او الدليل” which comes with an adjective to express an increase, rising, more and more rapid and increase in the growth rate. The exponential value of speech cannot be ignored, omitted or replaced because an exponent is the functional constant of a language in the same way as exponential constant is an important mathematical constant of ‘an exponential curve’ to express the numerical vales.
Hence, Functional Exponent is used in a language for communicative purpose we have for speaking, the reason why we say or write something. These functions are also called situational language because the situation or context in which they are used is very important to understand.
In fact the Quran has been revealed in standard spoken Functional Language which is never really understood or correctly translated until after applying correct linguistic rules on the phrases of the Quran but those who translate Quran they have no slightest knowledge of its language nor do they have in depth knowledge of Arabic grammar. They might have not heard about ‘functional exponents’. This is the reason why they always take them as a preposition (حرف جر) throughout the translations of the Quran. Moreover, to hide their impotence they reject Arabic grammar and use their nonsense suppositions and crap conjectures in the translation of highly academic statements of the Quran. Wherever, they get confused they use a totally blind method of “تصریف آیات” in which they blindly fit the supposed meaning of Quranic words in all verses in which the relevant word appears and invent their understanding of Quranic verses without even looking at their context and functional formations of Arabic text of the Quran. Then they start preaching their invented lies calling it a highly academic and absolute logical translation of the Quran. If they are told the correct meaning of any word of the Quran with reference to some particular Quranic verse they instantly jump to another verse which contains the same word and start an argument that the correct meaning given to them does not fit in that particular verse. If the correct translation of that particular verse is given to them they move to another verse containing the same word and start their usual mourning that your meaning of such and such word does not fit in such and such verses and they never stop referring verses one after another, and eventually they come back to square one. This is because they don’t want to understand the Quranic verses in their contexts as they are habitual of doing a blind reading of the Quran similar to those who open Quran, keep moving their finger on each and every word along the lines and read “Bismillah” on each single word of every line and finish the whole Quran with Bismillah. Majority of those who can’t read the Quran complete the reading of whole Quran many times in a year using the same Bismillah method.
Anyway, “عَلَى” comes with adjectives as an exponent to mean: spreading, growing, expanding, ascending, augmenting, integrating, entire and overall.
The usage of “عَلَى” can be seen on the following link or screen shots taken from easily accessible Arabic – English dictionary.
In the above link and the screenshots you can find many other noun adjective phrases with “عَلَى” on which “عَلَى” is not taken to mean “on”, “upon”, “unto” or “over” as it is always wrongly translated by our scholars without looking at its conjugation with the adhering words of Arabic text of Quranic verses.
Hence the words “بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ” of the verse 47:2 correctly means “Whatever sent down/revealed allover/entirely acclaimed/praiseworthy and is the truth from their Lord” (word to word correct translation 47:2)
NB: In the above verse there is no way of taking “هُوَ” to mean “it” but to mean “is” because it is coming before the definite noun and due to genitive case of “مُحَمَّدٍ”.
False Translation: “the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad – for it is the Truth from their Lord” (Yousuf Ali and others)
The correct translation is always straightforward, easy and simple to understand without any linguistic twist and turn, which is the beauty of the Quran.
However, our scholars and their disciples falsely claim that Quran cannot be translated truly. This is because they have no knowledge of the Quran nor do they want to refrain from bringing into Quran their pagan dogma.
Moreover, taking Arabic text of the Quran metaphorically rather than literally has been widely practiced in mainstream Islam since thousands of years and we are not learning Quran in the translation except the false beliefs of our evil scholars.
Those who are habitual of rejecting the true statements of the Quran may argue against the aforementioned correct translation on the basis of the name of this chapter 47, which is Surah Muhammad as it will probably look odd to them as to why the name Muhammad (pbuh) is not used in the statements of this Surah if the Surah’s name is already Muhammad (pbuh). They should know that these names of Surah’s were not given by Allah nor did the Prophet (pbuh) give these name which were given to the chapters of the Quran quite after Prophet’s death and most of the names are quite misleading and differ from what is stated in these Surahs (Chapters).
Also, using name as an adjective could raise an argument but the reality is the other way round because names are chosen from the adjectives.
However, in all major languages including Arabic the same words (names or adjectives) are used in the regular sentences and people differentiate them quite well from grammatical structures of both written and spoken statements.
Hence, to bring in the Quran their pagan dogma these evils deliberately destroy God’s statements revealed in the Quran and falsely interpret the Arabic text of the Quran in whatever meaning. For example in the verse 26:210 Quran says: “وَمَا تَنَزَّلَتْ بِهِ الشَّيَاطِينُ” And nothing is revealed by Satans but contrary to God’s words our evil scholars have invented “قصہ غرانیق” (story of interceding high rising cranes) in Islamic history and Hadith, and falsely proven it in the translation of the Quran and in their exegesis. According to their lies when Allah revealed Surah Al Najam 53 to Muhammad (pbuh) up to the verses “أَفَرَأَيْتُمُ اللَّاتَ وَالْعُزَّى” (53:19) Have you thought about al-Lat and al-Uzza, and “وَمَنَاةَ الثَّالِثَةَ الْأُخْرَى” (53:20) And Manat, the third, the other. Satan has revealed following Satanic verses from his side:
“تلك الغرانيق العلى” These are the exalted intermediary cranes (53:21 was originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature), and
“وإن شفاعتهنّ لتُرتجى” Whose intercession is to be hoped for (53:22 was originally revealed by Satan as mentioned in the Islamic literature).
They accused Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that he could not differentiate between God’s revelation and Satan’s revelation, and read Satanic verses in front of people. Then angel Jibrael had replaced the satanic verses with the following verses of God as seen in today’s Quran:
“أَلَكُمُ الذَّكَرُ وَلَهُ الْأُنثَى” (53:21) Are yours the males and His the females?
“تِلْكَ إِذًا قِسْمَةٌ ضِيزَى” (53:22) That indeed is an unfair division!
However, the verse 26:210 of the Quran “وَمَا تَنَزَّلَتْ بِهِ الشَّيَاطِينُ” And nothing is revealed by Satans proving all of them liars who have been inventing lies on Allah and on the ever exalted Prophet (pbuh).
Though, it is sad that they are not charged with any blasphemy act and no one issues any Fatwa against them.
However, whatever has been explained in the correct grammatical analysis and true translation of Quranic verses quoted in this article is the truth mentioned in the Quran for those who believe in the words of God. What is fabricated in the translations of the Quran is all lie invented by evils and has nothing to do with the words of God revealed in the Quran.