CHAPTER 9
CONVICTION NO. 4
“DIVINE MESSENGERS' NAMES
DO NOT SIGNIFY REAL PERSONS,
BUT ONLY ATTRIBUTES”
The Messenger of Muslims, Mohammad, and other exalted Messengers do not represent the names of some particular entities, personalities or physical beings. Their names, in reality, have the status of GENERIC TEMPLATES. (Meaning: Particular patterns or frames made of metal, plastic or paper). Every name is not the name of a human being, but is the name of an attribute, for example:-
- Mohammad is the name of every person who is praised.
- - - - -
In this context, literal meanings of the Messengers' names have been quoted from Lexicons, and protracted discussions have been held on the pages of the forum in a loud and presumptuous manner. The much-emphasized pretext was the negation of personality cults. And the viewpoint presented was to prove that whosoever, whenever, would come up to those attributes, they will be known with the name of that attribute.
Kindly note for proof the copy/paste of the Blog pages dated 8th June, 2011:-
“NOOH :- A man how calls in a repeated way with anxiety and whole heartedly.
IBRAHIM:- It is driven from “ABRAHA” means who talk with arguments and evidences.
ISMAIL:- It is derived from “ ASMAA” .A man with a good repute in a society(Ismail with the same weight of mekail)
ISHAQ:- Sahaq is the quality of a person who convince the opponent by repeatedly arguing (Ashaq al Qalb means a soft hearted man) SAHAQ to grinde.
YAAQOOB:- A good successor (jan nashin), Al aqoob means who follow the foot steps.
YOUSUF:- tawassaf al baerah( a camel with a new hair grown after dropping old ones) Or apparent a fine material after pealing it out.A MAN UP LFTED (DEVELOPED) FROM THE DOWN TRODDEN TO THE ELIET STATUS.
MUSA:- A man who routs out the false hoods from the society (erazor is called musa because it remove the hairs out of skin).
MASIEH:- To know the sense of this attribute plz see the MASHA in the verse, where, "Wamsaho be ruoosikum wa Arjulokum" has been elaborated by Dr. Qamarzaman in Haqeeqat –e-salat.
MOHAMMAD:- Praise worthy (a man with the good qualities) WITH SIFAAT AL HAMIDAH
ZAKARIYA = A wide visionary man who always remember the Allah;s message intensively.
3) The characters, Noh,Ibraheem, Muses, Eisa, Mohammad are not the physical personalities, rather the attributes written in
Alkitab, their stories (qases) are the generic templates, to seek the guidance from this eternal message in each era."
(Dear Readers, after the unparalleled idiocy above, the gentleman very fastidiously announces like this:-)
“4) We condemn the orthodox translation based on myth and man written history. We relay on the translation purely based on lexicon, relevant context and tasreef al ayat. Date 8.6.2011.”
I hope the Readers would kindly ignore the amateurish style and childish mistakes of this piece of writing from the Aastana pages. But, apart from that, first of all we take note of another stage of the same secular/atheistic AGENDA consisting of making the Messengers' personalities fade to obsolescence. Secondly, we note that, throughout the length of human history, no identical stupefying venture has ever been undertaken aiming to obliterate the Messengers real personalities from the Holy Scriptures, and to portray them as a single attribute symbol, because:-
- It serves to show every Messenger with only a single attribute, which is revealed "after having to explore‟ his name's literal meaning from lexicons. Is that possible?
- If, at all, Messengers can be taken for symbols of attributes, shouldn't then every Messenger be a combination of the highest human attributes, rather than having only one of them?
- Should we stop regarding a Messenger as a divine emissary of the highest and most evolved conscious status? Should we just take him for an abstract symbol or template of a single attribute?
- Are real personalities not not required for imparting divine teachings to humans? Do the real personalities create some
kind of hindrance in the way of eternal guidance?
- Can the eternal guidance only be delivered by symbols or templates of attributes?
- Has any one ever achieved the status of a Messenger by being cast through these patterns or generic templates, and thus becoming universally famous, or not?
- If not, as it is not evident from the history, then what benefit was derived by the Aastana team by concocting the insane theory of “generic templates”?
- Didn‟t they actually plan to engender a mental state of chaos and confusion about Messengers through this theory?
- Didn‟t they gain a lot in terms of advancement of their special AGENDA of materialism, through their regrettable strategy of distortion of Messengers‟ personalities?
- Should we all now start believing that whoever “calls in a repeated way with anxiety and whole heartedly" is the Prophet “NOAH?"
- Whoever ―talks with arguments and evidences' is ABRAHAM?
- Whoever “follows the footsteps beautifully” is “JACOB”? automatically “JOSEPH”?
- Whoever “acquires a fine surface after peeling off” is
- Whoever “routs out the false hoods from the society with an eraser", is the Prophet Moses?
- Whoever could remove sufferings or undertake a good survey, is the Prophet Jesus?
- Whoever is too much praised, he is Prophet Mohammad?
Dear Readers, it really is a sad state of affairs. The above is inevitably the best possible interpretation of “generic templates." It just can't be defined in any other terms except the above. It is not only a sheer contempt of human intellect, but also a grave insult to the inspiring personalities of the divine Messengers. Notwithstanding the tragedy, let us see how the learned translator congratulates his close companion for delivering the above edict, which met his criterion of competence fully:-
―Dear……..,assalam-o-alaik,
Let me accept this fact today that you are well ahead of me. you have answered the question so nicely and comprehencively
that nothing is left to be added . Thanks .
Dr Qamar Zaman . 10.6.2011‖
By all accounts, the purpose behind this regrettable AGENDA is to erase from the Muslim heart the unconditional and irretrievable love and attachment with the exalted person of Mohammad Rasool-Allah, by declaring his personality as of no consequence. Under this ulterior motive, he is given the image of a conceptual character or an attributive symbol, which some genius had adopted to serve his own purpose. This conviction, as can easily be seen, makes it a proper judicial case under “contempt of Rasool” Act.
The copy/paste above proves that the learned translator has not only seconded and appreciated those two/three people who have fully endorsed this theory of his, but also declared them superior to him in the field of "knowledge‟. Superior they truly were – in making a bold proclamation thereof – while the learned translator had till then kept his conviction concealed from the public. The corresponding discussion is on record at the forum Blog. It is up to the Readers to decide as to whether an attribute or an abstract value can at all be meaningful without a living and real personality radiating it through his physical presence. And whether in the absence of an existing personality as a guide and leader, an attribute alone as a symbol, can be or can't be followed? Can the Kingdom of God be established without the presence of a physical leader or a living authority? Can the acquisition of a goal under the guidance of a leader be symbolized as personality worship? Isn't the presence of a particular person, as a symbol of obedience, an important requisite?
Perhaps, in learned translator's unique state of mind, it may be news for him that, in this mundane world, not only the Messengers, but every human being is invariably named by his parents after one or the other attribute. Nevertheless, to identify a human by trying to find the lexical meaning of his name, is but a proof of mental imbalance, more than of any other physical disorder. A Name is always the medium to identify a person. The theory of finding out its literal meanings can only be invented under the implications of an AGENDA, not in the healthy state of mind. The learned translator can pick up his own name as an example, and try to find out his own self from lexicons through his unique philosophy. I'm sure he won't get much except mental depravity and deterioration of intellect. I beg your pardon.