TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: Link on March 11, 2017, 03:28:12 PM
-
One of the best features of Quran is that it paraphrases words that can be interpreted one way or another, but together with all verses about the same subject, it clarifies the meaning.
One of these instances is Zakariya's prayer. Just as Quran paraphrases or summarizes Musa's prayer with respect to Aeron so there is no room for misinterpretation.
Zakariya in one place is asking for "pure/good offspring". In another place, it shows he feared those who would inherit him and so grant him a heir. That would inherit him and inherit from the family of Jacob.
Together this shows, that, heir here refers to offspring, otherwise, Zakariya knew he would be succeeded by Jesus eventually who was foretold.
He knew Jesus would succeed him in knowledge. So inheriting here cannot mean with respect to knowledge.
His fear of those would inherit after him, shows, that people would inherit him, but he feared how they would act with respect to Islam and claiming inheriting his leadership.
This shows beyond doubt that Prophets are inherited.
-
Who inherited Jesus(AS)?
-
This shows beyond doubt that Prophets are inherited.
If you want to prove something beyond doubt, do a proper research like this one:
http://www.twelvershia.net/detailed-research-on-prophetic-inheritance/
or this one:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/the-decisive-word-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophet-muhammadsaw/
-
Who inherited Jesus(AS)?
There is sense of inheritance that you are right, has nothing to do with biology, but these verses have to do with the one related to blood relatives.
The prayer of Zakariya is paraphrased differently, and interpret one another. Fatima interpretation is the one that makes sense.
-
Who inherited Jesus(AS)?
There is sense of inheritance that you are right, has nothing to do with biology, but these verses have to do with the one related to blood relatives.
The prayer of Zakariya is paraphrased differently, and interpret one another. Fatima interpretation is the one that makes sense.
You keep contradicting yourself.
So you admit the case of Jesus (AS) does not fit into your concept of families inheriting prophets.
Your reply was a very confusing attempt to escape explaining this situation.
For me this is enough.
-
We read in Quran:
“And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself an heir/successor. Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You].” (Maryam 5-6).
In these verses of Quran we see that Zakariya(ra) asked for a successor to inherit him, which implies, to inherit like a successor not as a biological heir.
Ali al-Kaya al-Harrasi (450-504) states:
فطلب من الله تعالى ولداً يقوم بالدين بعده, فيرثه النبوة, ويرث من آل يعقوب, ولا يجوز أن يهتم بالدعاء هذا الاهتمام, ومراده أن يورثه المال, فإن ذلك مباين لطريقة الأنبياء, ولأنه جمع وراثته إلى وراثة آل يعقوب, ومعلوم أن ولد زكريا لا يرثهم
So he asked Allah most high for a son to take his place in religion, he’d inherit his prophet-hood and he’d inherit from the family of Ya`qoub. It is not permissible that he’d be so desperate in his Du`a’ if his intention was to inherit money, this opposes the way of prophets, also what proves our point is that he combined his inheritance with that of the family of Ya`qoub although it is known that his son is not entiteled to inherit (wealth) from them.( AHKAM AL-QUR’AN LIL-KAYA AL-HARRASI)
We read in Quran:
Yarithunee wayarithu min ali yaAAqooba
Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob.(Quran 19:6).
Here the conjuction “wa(And)” denotes that the inheritance from Zakariya(as) and from the family of Yaqoob(Jacob) would be the same. If it was something else, then it must be questioned that why didn’t Zakariya(as) inherit it from the family of Yaqoob? The correct view is that, Zakariya(as) had also inherited the same from family of Yaqoob(as), which is Prophethood, Thus the correct interpretation of the verse, “inherits me and inherits the family of Ya`qub” is that, ‘Inherits my prophet-hood and the prophet-hood of the family of Ya`qub, and he would be a Prophet like his forefathers were Prophets’.
As we showed that the inheritance from Zakariya(as) and the family of Jacob(as) would be the same, then it cannot be material inheritance for both, since Yahya(son of Zakariya) couldn’t have inherited the material wealth of the family of Yaqoob(as), which could only be inherited by their near relations and not by Yahya(as). It is against the law of inheritance for distant relations to receive any part of inheritance in the presence of close relatives.
Secondly, Zakariya(as) made the supplication for a successor not a biological heir. We read in Quran:
Wa-innee khiftu almawaliya min wara-ee wakanati imraatee AAaqiran fahab lee min ladunka waliyyan
“Lo! I fear my kinsfolk after me, since my wife is barren. Oh, give me from Thy presence a successor”
Al-Qur’an, Surah 19, Ayah 5, translated by Pickthal
Zakariya asked his Lord for a successor to succeed him in prophet-hood. Zakariya being the pious prophet that he is, wished for Allah to grant him a successor to support him and carry on his teachings, he also asked God to honor him and favor him by keeping the prophet-hood within his lineage.
And the Prophethood was never inherited by all of the sons of Prophet Yaqub(as), but only by his successor, who was his son. So the other children of Yaqub(as) has no relevance in this case, since Prophethood was inherited only by successor of Yaqub(as) not by all the biological heirs of Yaqub(as).
Mufti Mohammad Shafi Uthmani explains the same, stating:
In the verse after (Yarithunee/ Who will inherit me) the addition of the words (wayarithu min ali yaAAqooba/and inherit from the family of Jacob) confirms the view that here material inheritance is not implied because the son of Zakariyyah(i.e Yahya) could not have inherited the material wealth of the family of Yaqoub(as), which could only be inherited by their near relations, not by Yahya(as). It is against the law of inheritance for distant relations to receive any part of inheritance in the presence of close relatives. (Tafseer Maarif ul Quran).
Zakariya’s son is not entitled to inherit the material possessions of the entire family of Ya`qoub, they died long ago and according to laws of inheritance he can only inherit from his own fathers not the whole family of Ya`qoub. We ask the following question: Was the house of Ya`qoub famous for anything so that Allah may mention them?
Yes they were. The house of Ya`qoub was a house of prophet-hood and wisdom, having a rightly guided prophet among them is what set them apart and made them unique, thus the meaning here is that his son carried on the prophet-hood and knowledge of this blessed man Ya`qoub.
Concluding that this is an inheritance of prophet-hood and religious leadership not material possessions, otherwise he wouldn’t have mentioned the house of Ya`qoub which is a house of prophet-hood.
WHAT DID YAHYA RECEIVE FROM ZAKARIYA?
To prove through the Qur’anic context that what Yahya(son of Zakariiya) received was authority and knowledge, we quote what Allah told Yahya(as) in the next verse:
{O Yahya hold fast to the scripture with determination and we have given him the (authority of) judgment while still a boy} [19:12]
From the verse we see Yahya(as) was given the scripture, meaning the mastery of its teachings and the wisdom to guide others through it, Yahya(as) was also given when still a boy the ability to rule between people and judge.
Also if Zakariya(as) was so worried about the inheritance of money from the family of Ya`qoub then why would Allah grant him a son who wouldn’t have kids such as Yahya? And Yahya was never married, so does this mean all wealth from Zakariya and the family of Ya`qoub was lost? Not at all, for Yahya ruled and spread the message then died without a son but was succeeded by `Isa (as).
Taken from:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/7-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-seven-2/
-
Who inherited Jesus(AS)?
There is sense of inheritance that you are right, has nothing to do with biology, but these verses have to do with the one related to blood relatives.
The prayer of Zakariya is paraphrased differently, and interpret one another. Fatima interpretation is the one that makes sense.
You keep contradicting yourself.
So you admit the case of Jesus (AS) does not fit into your concept of families inheriting prophets.
Your reply was a very confusing attempt to escape explaining this situation.
For me this is enough.
Jesus was the 12th Captain of the covenant of Moses in Bani-Israel. He is part of the chosen family of Moses/Aeron/David/Imran.
-
Another verses tells us Zakariya words paraphrased in a different way "O God grant me pure offspring".
-
Who inherited Jesus(AS)?
There is sense of inheritance that you are right, has nothing to do with biology, but these verses have to do with the one related to blood relatives.
The prayer of Zakariya is paraphrased differently, and interpret one another. Fatima interpretation is the one that makes sense.
You keep contradicting yourself.
So you admit the case of Jesus (AS) does not fit into your concept of families inheriting prophets.
Your reply was a very confusing attempt to escape explaining this situation.
For me this is enough.
Jesus was the 12th Captain of the covenant of Moses in Bani-Israel. He is part of the chosen family of Moses/Aeron/David/Imran.
This does not answer who succeeded & inherited Jesus(AS).
-
Another verses tells us Zakariya words paraphrased in a different way "O God grant me pure offspring".
if you read reply#5 you will see the incorrectness in your arguments. The whole base is wrong.
-
He was the last to have physical presence in Bani-Israel. Then Elyas took the Imammate station, without physical appearance to Bani-Israel, rather he was hidden. Elyas was a Messenger that God either brought up to heaven or hid on earth. No one knows where that whirlwind took him from people of the book. But Elyas was the 2nd of those who testifed to Jesus. The first was Yahya who was apparent. Then it was Elyas who came back but was hidden.
This explains the two peculiar orders and places Elyas is mentioned in.
Who inherited Elyas Imammate? Mohammad Al-Mustafa.
The witness of the witness of humanity, and the witness from Bani-Israel, Elyas, confirmed him and testified to him.
Elyas was the Imam of the upright Hanifs in the inward world, till Mohammad was entrusted with the position. Then Ali. Then Hassan. Then Hussain...etc.
-
He was the last to have physical presence in Bani-Israel. Then Elyas took the Imammate station, without physical appearance to Bani-Israel, rather he was hidden. Elyas was a Messenger that God either brought up to heaven or hid on earth. No one knows where that whirlwind took him from people of the book. But Elyas was the 2nd of those who testifed to Jesus. The first was Yahya who was apparent. Then it was Elyas who came back but was hidden.
This explains the two peculiar orders and places Elyas is mentioned in.
Who inherited Elyas Imammate? Mohammad Al-Mustafa.
The witness of the witness of humanity, and the witness from Bani-Israel, Elyas, confirmed him and testified to him.
Elyas was the Imam of the upright Hanifs in the inward world, till Mohammad was entrusted with the position. Then Ali. Then Hassan. Then Hussain...etc.
I diverged off topic.
To get back on the topic, who inherited from Jesus(AS)?
-
He was the last to have physical presence in Bani-Israel. Then Elyas took the Imammate station, without physical appearance to Bani-Israel, rather he was hidden. Elyas was a Messenger that God either brought up to heaven or hid on earth. No one knows where that whirlwind took him from people of the book. But Elyas was the 2nd of those who testifed to Jesus. The first was Yahya who was apparent. Then it was Elyas who came back but was hidden.
This explains the two peculiar orders and places Elyas is mentioned in.
Who inherited Elyas Imammate? Mohammad Al-Mustafa.
The witness of the witness of humanity, and the witness from Bani-Israel, Elyas, confirmed him and testified to him.
Elyas was the Imam of the upright Hanifs in the inward world, till Mohammad was entrusted with the position. Then Ali. Then Hassan. Then Hussain...etc.
Clutching at straws is not a good habbbit. Try to back your answers with authentic proofs, not theories or views of random people. Until then know that your whole argument have fallen.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
I still don't see any refutation to points raised in reply 5.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Oh now there is two types of inheritance going on.
Goalposts keep changing.
So the inheritance is no longer just family/household. Nor is the purity applied to just family/household.
Shi'ism insists on the purity & inheritance both being conjoined with the family/household of a prophet.
Clearly this is a flawed assertion as you yourself can see.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Oh now there is two types of inheritance going on.
Goalposts keep changing.
So the inheritance is no longer just family/household. Nor is the purity applied to just family/household.
Shi'ism insists on the purity & inheritance both being conjoined with the family/household of a prophet.
Clearly this is a flawed assertion as you yourself can see.
This is actually true. It's not flawed. It's repeated through out Quran for example "and remainder of what the family of Moses and family of Aeron have left, the Angels bearing it...".
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Oh now there is two types of inheritance going on.
Goalposts keep changing.
So the inheritance is no longer just family/household. Nor is the purity applied to just family/household.
Shi'ism insists on the purity & inheritance both being conjoined with the family/household of a prophet.
Clearly this is a flawed assertion as you yourself can see.
This is actually true. It's not flawed. It's repeated through out Quran for example "and remainder of what the family of Moses and family of Aeron have left, the Angels bearing it...".
So who fully inherited Jesus(AS) both via the blood & pure components?
Its not a trick question. I just want to clarify your belief im this matter.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Oh now there is two types of inheritance going on.
Goalposts keep changing.
So the inheritance is no longer just family/household. Nor is the purity applied to just family/household.
Shi'ism insists on the purity & inheritance both being conjoined with the family/household of a prophet.
Clearly this is a flawed assertion as you yourself can see.
This is actually true. It's not flawed. It's repeated through out Quran for example "and remainder of what the family of Moses and family of Aeron have left, the Angels bearing it...".
So who fully inherited Jesus(AS) both via the blood & pure components?
Its not a trick question. I just want to clarify your belief im this matter.
I don't believe anyone did in that sense, just as I believe no will for Imam Mahdi. Jesus was the 12th Captain associated with the covenant of Bani-Israel but there is one missing issue which is he was a witness so long as he was among them. "And Zakariya, and Yahya, and Jesus, and Elyas".
Zakariya -> Yahya -> Isa - >Elyas (Elyas comes back and takes mantle of Imammate).
Although many hadiths say Simon inherited Jesus, I believe that contradicts Quran in more ways then one.
wa salam.
-
Ok, so people don't get into binary thinking.
There is two inheritance going on.
To fully inherit Zakariya, there is blood component, and then the "pure" "chosen" component.
This is paraphrased differently in different ways. Again, if it was purely "the chosen pure" component, then Zakariya would not fear what his relatives would do, nor would he ask for offspring, Jesus for example can inherit from him, and there would be no fear.
But if it was purely material inheritance, there would be no need to mention purity with regards to his offspring, which implies it's a chosen human.
The fact is he was going to be inherited spiritually with regards to his leadership and knowledge, no matter what.
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Oh now there is two types of inheritance going on.
Goalposts keep changing.
So the inheritance is no longer just family/household. Nor is the purity applied to just family/household.
Shi'ism insists on the purity & inheritance both being conjoined with the family/household of a prophet.
Clearly this is a flawed assertion as you yourself can see.
This is actually true. It's not flawed. It's repeated through out Quran for example "and remainder of what the family of Moses and family of Aeron have left, the Angels bearing it...".
So who fully inherited Jesus(AS) both via the blood & pure components?
Its not a trick question. I just want to clarify your belief im this matter.
I don't believe anyone did in that sense, just as I believe no will for Imam Mahdi. Jesus was the 12th Captain associated with the covenant of Bani-Israel but there is one missing issue which is he was a witness so long as he was among them. "And Zakariya, and Yahya, and Jesus, and Elyas".
Zakariya -> Yahya -> Isa - >Elyas (Elyas comes back and takes mantle of Imammate).
Although many hadiths say Simon inherited Jesus, I believe that contradicts Quran in more ways then one.
wa salam.
You say you believe no one did inherit Isa (AS) in the sense of complete inheritance i.e both blood & purity.
*scratches head*
-
You say you believe no one did inherit Isa (AS) in the sense of complete inheritance i.e both blood & purity.
*scratches head*
I'm scratching my head too...
-
What he was asking was specifically, that be inherited both in the sense a son would inherit from him, and in a sense a pure soul would inherit from him and take the mantle of leadership.
Isma`eel ibn `Umar bin Katheer (700-774) stated:
لا أنه خشي من وراثتهم له ماله، فإن النبي أعظم منزلة وأجل قدراً من أن يشفق على ماله إلى ما هذا حده، وأن يأنف من وراثة عصباته له، ويسأل أن يكون له ولد ليحوز ميراثه دونهم
He(Zakariyyah) did not fear their inheritance of his money, as the prophets are much greater in rank and virtue than to care for the leftovers of this world and to be this upset that their relatives are going to inherit some money not his son.(TAFSEER IBN KATHEER).
Ala’-ul-Deen `Ali bin Muhammad al-Khazin (725) stated:
الأولى أن يحمل على ميراث غير المال لأن الأنبياء لم يرثوا المال وإنما يورثون العلم، ويبعد عن زكريا وهو نبي من الأنبياء أن يشفق على ماله أن يرثه بنو عمه، وإنما خاف أن يضيع بنو عمه دين الله ويغيروا أحكامه، وذلك لما أن شاهد من بني إسرائيل تبديل الدين وقتل الأنبياء. فسأل ربه ولداً صالحاً يأمنه على أمته ويرث نبوته وعلمه لئلا يضيع وهذا قول ابن عباس
It is more worthy to interpret this as the inheritance of anything aside from money, because prophets never gave money as inheritance only knowledge, it is unlikely that a prophet of God such as Zakariya would feel sadness for the fate of his money if his cousins were to inherit it. He only feared that they might lose the religion of Allah and corrupt its laws, this is based on what he had seen from Bani Isra’eel who altered religions and killed prophets. He thus asked his Lord for a righteous son to entrust the nation to him and to inherit his prophet-hood and knowledge so they may not be lost, this is the saying of ibn `Abbas.( LUBAB-UL-TA’WEEL LIL-KHAZIN
Zakariya asked his Lord for a successor to succeed him in prophet-hood. Zakariya being the pious prophet that he is, wished for Allah to grant him a successor to support him and carry on his teachings, he also asked God to honor him and favor him by keeping the prophet-hood within his lineage.
If you still argue zakariya(as) feared even for his material possession from his relatives then read this Shia hadeeth:
حدثنا أحمد بن زياد بن جعفر الهمداني رضي الله عنه قال حدثنا علي بن إبراهيم بن هاشم عن الريان بن الصلت قال سمعت الرضا عليه السلام يقول ما بعث الله عز وجل نبيا الا بتحريم الخمر وان يقر له بان الله يفعل ما يشاء وأن يكون في تراثه الكندر
Ahmad ibn Ziyad ibn Ja’far al-Hamadani – may God be pleased with him – narrated that Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashem quoted on the authority of his father, on the authority of al-Ryan ibn al-Salt that he had heard Al-Reza (s) say, “All the Prophets which the Honorable the Exalted God sent, forbade wine and confessed that God would do whatever He wills. The Prophets (s) would leave behind ‘al-Kondor (chewing gum) as inheritance (implying that they would leave nothing behind).”[Uyun Akhbar al-Reza, Chapter 30, page 630]
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
I did. You never replied.
OP states prophets are inherited, yet you stopped at Isa(AS).
I asked who inherited Isa(AS). You said no one did under your definition of complete inheritance.
You see how you contradicted yourself?
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
I did. You never replied.
OP states prophets are inherited, yet you stopped at Isa(AS).
I asked who inherited Isa(AS). You said no one did under your definition of complete inheritance.
You see how you contradicted yourself?
The Quran says that the Messengers had offsprings and wives(13:38)...I guess you have refuted Quran as well!
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
I did. You never replied.
OP states prophets are inherited, yet you stopped at Isa(AS).
I asked who inherited Isa(AS). You said no one did under your definition of complete inheritance.
You see how you contradicted yourself?
The Quran says that the Messengers had offsprings and wives(13:38)...I guess you have refuted Quran as well!
It does not say every prophet had wives & offspring without any exceptions.
Now you would have to concede not all prophets are inherited by both blood & purity. You already acknowledged this in regards to Isa(AS) & ended up refuting yourself.
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
I did. You never replied.
OP states prophets are inherited, yet you stopped at Isa(AS).
I asked who inherited Isa(AS). You said no one did under your definition of complete inheritance.
You see how you contradicted yourself?
The Quran says that the Messengers had offsprings and wives(13:38)...I guess you have refuted Quran as well!
It does not say every prophet had wives & offspring without any exceptions.
Now you would have to concede not all prophets are inherited by both blood & purity. You already acknowledged this in regards to Isa(AS) & ended up refuting yourself.
Where did I say "without exceptions"?
All I have to prove to prove Fatima is right is to prove a Prophet was inherited.
And I showed the prayer of Zakariya is paraphrased differently in Quran that the different paraphrases interpret one another.
No one has addressed that.
-
Anyone willing to address the op argument, they are welcome to.
I did. You never replied.
OP states prophets are inherited, yet you stopped at Isa(AS).
I asked who inherited Isa(AS). You said no one did under your definition of complete inheritance.
You see how you contradicted yourself?
The Quran says that the Messengers had offsprings and wives(13:38)...I guess you have refuted Quran as well!
It does not say every prophet had wives & offspring without any exceptions.
Now you would have to concede not all prophets are inherited by both blood & purity. You already acknowledged this in regards to Isa(AS) & ended up refuting yourself.
Where did I say "without exceptions"?
All I have to prove to prove Fatima is right is to prove a Prophet was inherited.
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
-
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
Abu Baker claimed all Prophets don't inherit. The claim obviously meant without exception as he was applying it to Mohammad and Fatima not inheriting from him.
Fatima quoted some verses...and upon investigation, we find her interpretation is correct. All she has to do is show a Prophet is inherited and the claim of Abu Baker is shown false.
I've shown that her interpretation of those verses she quoted is corrected when we see other places where Zakariya is paraphrased!
The verses show what is meant by each and that is the nature of the Quran, nothing in it can't be solved by itself, it clarifies which interpretation is correct through chaining it's verses together!
-
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
Abu Baker claimed all Prophets don't inherit. The claim obviously meant without exception as he was applying it to Mohammad and Fatima not inheriting from him.
Fatima quoted some verses...and upon investigation, we find her interpretation is correct. All she has to do is show a Prophet is inherited and the claim of Abu Baker is shown false.
I've shown that her interpretation of those verses she quoted is corrected when we see other places where Zakariya is paraphrased!
The verses show what is meant by each and that is the nature of the Quran, nothing in it can't be solved by itself, it clarifies which interpretation is correct through chaining it's verses together!
Where is it shown that a prophet was materially inherited by his family?
Show me an explicit proof please. Not some long winded philosophical attempted formula.
-
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
Abu Baker claimed all Prophets don't inherit. The claim obviously meant without exception as he was applying it to Mohammad and Fatima not inheriting from him.
Fatima quoted some verses...and upon investigation, we find her interpretation is correct. All she has to do is show a Prophet is inherited and the claim of Abu Baker is shown false.
I've shown that her interpretation of those verses she quoted is corrected when we see other places where Zakariya is paraphrased!
The verses show what is meant by each and that is the nature of the Quran, nothing in it can't be solved by itself, it clarifies which interpretation is correct through chaining it's verses together!
Where is it shown that a prophet was materially inherited by his family?
Show me an explicit proof please. Not some long winded philosophical attempted formula.
I already showed explicit proof. If looking at two paraphrases in Quran is a long-winded philosophical formula to you, then you ought to begin to love that kind of stuff and not avoid it.
-
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
Abu Baker claimed all Prophets don't inherit. The claim obviously meant without exception as he was applying it to Mohammad and Fatima not inheriting from him.
Fatima quoted some verses...and upon investigation, we find her interpretation is correct. All she has to do is show a Prophet is inherited and the claim of Abu Baker is shown false.
I've shown that her interpretation of those verses she quoted is corrected when we see other places where Zakariya is paraphrased!
The verses show what is meant by each and that is the nature of the Quran, nothing in it can't be solved by itself, it clarifies which interpretation is correct through chaining it's verses together!
Where is it shown that a prophet was materially inherited by his family?
Show me an explicit proof please. Not some long winded philosophical attempted formula.
I already showed explicit proof. If looking at two paraphrases in Quran is a long-winded philosophical formula to you, then you ought to begin to love that kind of stuff and not avoid it.
Two paraphrases?
This isn't a puzzle.
I said EXPLICIT.
-
Thats just nonsensical.
Its like a person saying saying the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had no father and to prove it they just have to prove a prophet never had a father (like Isa AS).
Your posts get stranger by the day.
Abu Baker claimed all Prophets don't inherit. The claim obviously meant without exception as he was applying it to Mohammad and Fatima not inheriting from him.
Fatima quoted some verses...and upon investigation, we find her interpretation is correct. All she has to do is show a Prophet is inherited and the claim of Abu Baker is shown false.
I've shown that her interpretation of those verses she quoted is corrected when we see other places where Zakariya is paraphrased!
The verses show what is meant by each and that is the nature of the Quran, nothing in it can't be solved by itself, it clarifies which interpretation is correct through chaining it's verses together!
Where is it shown that a prophet was materially inherited by his family?
Show me an explicit proof please. Not some long winded philosophical attempted formula.
I already showed explicit proof. If looking at two paraphrases in Quran is a long-winded philosophical formula to you, then you ought to begin to love that kind of stuff and not avoid it.
Two paraphrases?
This isn't a puzzle.
I said EXPLICIT.
Paraphrasing is good way to show what God knows what Zakariya meant in his prayer.
And one verse shows him saying "grant me pure offspring" and the other instance is the long one in Suratal Maryam.
Together they show the proper meaning to both places.
Too bad Quran protects it's own interpretations for you guys. Fatima has been proven right through Quran. You can call it puzzles but to me it's nothing but wisdom and beauty from God that he protects all the meanings in Quran through Quran.
-
Well we have established there is nothing explicit in regards to families inheriting prophets materially.
-
Well we have established there is nothing explicit in regards to families inheriting prophets materially.
What is the point of having a Surah, if all you take is explicit verses. They may as well not be linked, since how they are linked are implicit messages.
And why paraphrase the same conversation differently if we are not suppose to look at both instances!
God's curse is upon those who come with opposition to the family of Mohammad!