Is allah the "proper noun" name of God?

[LittleLambofJesus]

Post # 36: This phrase: " allah guiding whom he will" don't you
find it a little ambiguous, would you like to put your eternal destiny in the
hands of a god who may or may not guide you on what looks like a passing whim?
Seeing the tafsir as understood by the earliest and respected imams,
categorically state that allah "Allah guides whom He wills and
misguides whom He wills. "
http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=6&tid=16262

Please read page 83 of Lane's lexicon in starting post, which states under
'allah' "originally ilaha or
ilaha"
The incriminating page 82 is highlighted again below:

He is also called "Adonay Y@hovih" in the Bible and what would be the Arabic for that btw?. [Oooops, I forgot, the Muslims don't read our OT/OC in the Bible]

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Ezkeiel 39:12 "For seven months the house of Israel will be burying Them, in order to Cleanse/purify the land. 13 "Indeed all the people of the land will be burying, and they will gain renown for it on the day that I am glorified," says 'Adonay Y@hovih.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

Yes, Allaah is an Ilaah, He is THE Ilaah, hence Allaah (al-Ilaah).

I suggest you have this argument with Islam_mullia, allah being contracted from al-ilah was never the argument I said Lane implied. You only prove whichever way you look at it the root ilah damns the god of islam. (I am well aware that the majority of modern muslims say allah is contracted from al-ilah, this is not what I am saying Lane says, but I am asking what the root of allah is)

I do not argue. One of my most favorite quotes is, "As for me, I know my religion. If you have lost yours then go and look for it."

assalaamu alaikum ukhti....yes you have a right not to argue but we do have a right to correct you.

All Arabic dictionaries or lexicons that exist agree the name Alllaah is NOT a contraction of the two Arabic words al-ilah, and do not support such a thing.

This is a western presumption based on linguistical play which is not supported by Arabic scholars. If you wish to for your deen to be influenced by kufar idea and ro follow their interpretation of your deen then that is between you and Alllaah azza wa jall.

If you will like for us to send you the references with photo copies of Arabic scholars lexicon entries to the word just send me a pm.

 

[ummuIsa]

assalaamu alaikum ukhti....yes you have a right not to argue but we do have a right to correct you.

All Arabic dictionaries or lexicons that exist agree the name Alllaah is NOT a contraction of the two Arabic words al-ilah, and do not support such a thing.

This is a western presumption based on linguistical play which is not supported by Arabic scholars. If you wish to for your deen to be influenced by kufar idea and ro follow their interpretation of your deen then that is between you and Alllaah azza wa jall.

If you will like for us to send you the references with photo copies of Arabic scholars lexicon entries to the word just send me a pm.

wa `alaykumus salaamu wa rahmatullaah-

Na`am, please do send them to me. If I am wrong, I stand corrected but I have taken this not from the kuffaar (as I do not take my Deen from them). This is what I have always been taught and I know that Allaah is His personal name but I was also taught that it comes from al-ilaah.

So please send me what you have so that I can look into it further insha'Allaah. Baarakallaahu feek.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

Is Allah then Yahweh? If not, then Christians and Jews do not worship the same God as Muslims.

For Muslims, yes Alllah is YHWH. Jews and Muslims are more in agreement that they worship the same G-d as Jews are allowed to pray in mosques likewise muslims can pray in Jewish synagogues, but both are not allowed to pray in Christian churches.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

For Muslims, yes Alllah is YHWH. Jews and Muslims are more in agreement that they worship the same G-d as Jews are allowed to pray in mosques likewise muslims can pray in Jewish synagogues, but both are not allowed to pray in Christian churches.

Then why don't Muslims call themselves Jews since Jesus was a "Jew"?

Mat 2:2 Saying 3004 , Where 4226 is 2076 he that is born 5088 King 935 of the Jews 2453? for 1063 we have seen 1492 his 846 star 792 in 1722 the east 395, and 2532 are come 2064 to worship 4352 him 846.

Rev 3:9 Behold 2400 , I will make 1325 them of 1537 the synagogue 4864 of Satan 4567, which 3588 say 3004 they 1438 are 1511 Jews 2453, and 2532 are 1526 not 3756, but 235 do lie 5574 ; behold 2400 , I will make 4160 them 846 to 2443 come 2240 and 2532 worship 4352 before 1799 thy 4675 feet 4228, and 2532 to know 1097 that 3754 I 1473 have loved 25 thee 4571.

 

[peaceful soul]

originally posted by Oxy2Hydr0

For Muslims, yes Alllah is YHWH.

This is not true just because you would like it to be. The origin of the two words are not from the same root and do not have the same meanings. Please show us a transliteration that proves this. Show us the derivative that is used in the translation that proves your case.

Jews and Muslims are more in agreement that they worship the same G-d as Jews are allowed to pray in mosques likewise muslims can pray in Jewish synagogues, but both are not allowed to pray in Christian churches.

That does not prove anything. You are sidestepping the issue by mentioning this.

 

[Islam_mulia]

wa `alaykumus salaamu wa rahmatullaah-

Na`am, please do send them to me. If I am wrong, I stand corrected but I have taken this not from the kuffaar (as I do not take my Deen from them). This is what I have always been taught and I know that Allaah is His personal name but I was also taught that it comes from al-ilaah.

So please send me what you have so that I can look into it further insha'Allaah. Baarakallaahu feek.

Please consider Brother Oxy's advise that Allah is not a contraction of al-ilaah. There is no proof whatsoever that is so and I've seen some [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]s use that argument to attack Allah and Islam.

 

[ummuIsa]

This is great, and I look forward to discussing various aspects of islam since
you claim you do not water down it's teachings, however I see an immediate
problem with your statement, this is what islam categorically says:

Quote:
Question:1- Why Does a Muslim has to Follow one particular
Imam?( Imam Hanaf, Imam malik, Imam Hambal, Imam shafaii), when
there is no rule as such, is not this the greatest biddah in muslims, which has
no base in islam, 2-also if one follows part of one imam and a part of another
imam what harm is there in that, as both say they r followers of Prophet(saws)
3-whom did the sahabh, the tabain, the tabe-tabain, follow as imam? pls answer
All the questions, sometimes you skip some of the questions.
Answer:
1. A muslim has to follow Shariah. If he is a mujtahid, ie. A
master in all the different fields of Islamic sciences then he will
follow Quran , Hadith, Ijmaa directly using his skills for deducing laws. If a
person does not possess these skills then he will have to follow one who
possesses these skills. On this there is Ijmaa (consensus) of the Ummah and is
backed up by Ayaat of the Quran and Ahadith.
2. If one picks and chooses from the mazhabs, then he will be
following his desires and no sooner does one follow his desires than he goes
astray. Only one who is well versed in Shariah, knows the implications of
picking and choosing. Each ruling is based on a broader general
principle and thus by picking and choosing one who be going against these
principles and would thus be contradicting himself. There is Ijmaa that a person
has to follow only one Mazhab.
3. Those Sahabah and tabieen who were not mujtahids would follow
those who were. This is proved in many narrations.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Ml. Hussein Kadodia
FATWA DEPT.
CHECKED & APPROVED: Ml. Imraan Vawda
http://islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=9953
Since you claim you follow no madzhab, do you not see that you are contradicting
what islam itself says?

No, I do not see that I am contradicting what Islaam says. To begin with knowledge is what Allaah Says, His Messenger says and/or the Companions agreed upon. This person's statement: "There is Ijmaa that a person
has to follow only one Mazhab" has no proof to back up what he is saying. Where are the verses or hadeeth or statements from the Companions who said this is so? He did correctly say that a Muslim must follow the Sharee'ah (Qur`aan & Sunnah like I said). Allaah Says: "Certainly, We have brought to them a Book (the Qur'aan) which We have explained in detail with knowledge, - a guidance and a mercy to a people who believe." [7:52] and, "And We have not sent down the Book (the Qur`aan) to you (O Muhammad sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam), except that you may explain clearly unto them those things in which they differ, and (as) a guidance and a mercy for a folk who believe." [16:64] These two verses show that knowledge springs from the Qur`aan (Allaah Himself) & the Sunnah (Muhammad, sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam)

As for following a particular madhhaab that means that you are following one particular person. This is dangerous because #1- we are followers of Muhammad, not men. #2- No one is infallible and if you stick to just one person, you are bound to follow that persons errors as well. As for the Imaams (of the madhhaabs) themselves, they all said that sometimes they are correct and sometimes incorrect but the Messenger is not. So when you come across something they said that is incorrect then you leave their saying for that of the Messenger. #3- There were no madhhaabs during the time of the Messenger and he did not introduce this so why is it necessary to follow one?? The bro. mentions that when a companion was seeking knowledge they always went to those companions who were the scholars amongst them in that area (i.e. Qur`aan, hadeeth, fiqh, etc.) They didn't stick to just one person either.

This phrase: " allah guiding whom he will" don't you
find it a little ambiguous, would you like to put your eternal destiny in the
hands of a god who may or may not guide you on what looks like a passing whim?
Seeing the tafsir as understood by the earliest and respected imams,
categorically state that allah "Allah guides whom He wills and
misguides whom He wills. "

[URL="http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=6&tid=16262"]http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=6&tid=16262[/URL]

Seeing that Tafsir.com is no longer in service and has been gone for months, I cannot check what is at this link. However, I just came across another site with ibn Kathir (thank goodness) and if you tell me what I should be looking for I will look it up, Allaah willing.

No, I do not see Allaah quidance or misguidance as ambiguous at all. Him being the Creator and knowing everything and everyone knows full well who He feels deserves to be guided and who doesn't.

This is where a lexicon comes in handy, as it traces the very root of a word and
it's offshoots.

Yes, I know and I have one but its not Lane's.

No need to be pedantic, this is not the thrust of my argument, I have stated
several times the root of 'ilah' and
'allah' are the same. The heart of my argument is why
Lane says allah is "originally ilaha or ilaaha" and on
the preceding page gives the definition of ilah as " an object of worship to
whom takes it as such...a pagan diety,... a new moon...
the great serpent, as it was an object of worship of the ancient
arabs" . To all intense and purposes ilaha is the
root/source/origin of allah, this is what Lane implied when under allah he says
"originally ilaha or ilaaha"

Wasn't trying to be. You said it a couple of times so I thought this is really what you thought. Anyway, I'm sorry, but I still don't get your point. If ilaah means a god and we know that a god can be made out of anything, then money would be an ilaah, women would be an ilaah, sun , moon, etc. That Is why I explained that the meaning of laa ilaaha illa Allaah is that none deserves to be worshipped except Allaah. The pagan `Arabs believed in Allaah, Himself, also along with their false gods. This is why Allaah said that those false gods should not be worshipped but Allaah alone. If I'm still missing it I'm sorry but I really just don't see how you can equate one with the other. BTW, from your understanding, are you saying that Christian & Jewish `arabs who call on Allaah are also worshipping a moon, serpent, oak tree, etc (and I seek refuge with Allaah)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by UmmIsa
Allaah is Allaah's personal name.

I fail to see how an objective individual can come to such a conclusion,
for the one damning reason arabic was still being developed
several years after the death of it's prophet, 600 years after
Christ, and over 5 millenias after judaism. To claim the entire biblical
history of the pentateuch, the torah, the new testament, and apocryphra
eliminated this "true name" of God, is a conspiracy
on a monumental scale, or the alternative is to admit the god of
islam is not the same as the God in the bible.

As I stated above the pagan `arabs called Allaah, Allaah. They knew Him as such. Allaah Says: "And verily, if you ask them: "Who created the heavens and the earth?" Surely, they will say: "Allaah (has created them)." Say: "Tell me then, the things that you invoke besides Allaah, if Allaah intended some harm for me, could they remove His harm, or if He (Allaah) intended some mercy for me, could they withhold His Mercy?" Say : "Sufficient for me is Allaah; in Him those who trust (i.e. believers) must put their trust." [39:38]

I never said the word Allaah was used in the Bible (when the various Books were being revealed). We're talking about two different languages so why would you even make that statement; what does one have to do with the other?

As far as the Allaah being different from the God in the Bible I agree & disagree. I said in another post, I believe that the God that the Muslims and the Jews worship is the same and that the ones that the Christians worship is different because you all (most denominations) worship a man (Jesus). But whether He is worshipped or not accepted or not, He is still EVERYBODY'S God and Lord.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UmmIsa
He has many attributes and is known by many names so that the
believers may get to know and understand him but His name is Allaah. Both words,
ilaah & Allaah, comes from the root word alaha.

This is where you need to back up what you alledge with a lexicon.
My argument has nothing to do with al-ilaah/ilah (that is a seperate argument on
it's own merits). I am simply interested in the origins of the word allah. Lane's lexicon like many classic lexicons start with the roots first, and their offshoots.
Lane has traced allah to "originally ilaha or ilaaha" and
cites five sources who say this; for someone who has openly admitted to not
having read Lane's lexicon on the origins of the word
'allah'. Don't you find it a little strange to be
issuing verdicts on something you openly admit to not having read?

Firstly, I do not give verdicts, that is left up to scholars. I have a Hans-Wehr and in it Allaah and ilaah are listed under the root alaha.

I do not know the 'origin' of Allaah. All I know is that He is God and He was recognized as the God but they thought he needed some intercessors so thats where the idols came in at. However, since you brought it up and I don't know the answer I have taken it to someone who has knowledge and when they get back to me, I will get back to you.

 

[Islam_mulia]

I have seen too many posts from Liberate, yet Liberate refused to reply to my post beloe, especially point No. 3:

I will try to be short and straight to the point:

1. Liberate used Edward Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon (see the OP) and claimed the lexicon "stands alone as a classic masterpiece, simply for it's meticulous precision done over a 34 year period".


2. The same Edward Lane Lexicon claimed in page 83 that the word 'Allah' is a proper noun (Liberate even underlined this).


3. Edward Lane wrote in page 83 that the word 'Allah' is not derived or is it originally 'ilaha' or 'ilaaha'. Liberate, pls explain this.

 

[Exegete12]

wa `alaykumus salaamu wa rahmatullaah-

Na`am, please do send them to me. If I am wrong, I stand corrected but I have taken this not from the kuffaar (as I do not take my Deen from them). This is what I have always been taught and I know that Allaah is His personal name but I was also taught that it comes from al-ilaah.

So please send me what you have so that I can look into it further insha'Allaah. Baarakallaahu feek.

Allah is a title, a generic term for God.

Just like car is a generic term for a vehicle.

Yahweh, Adonai is His correct NAME.

Just like a car can be a Chevrlet or Porsche, that is its name, whereas car is what it is.

Hope this helps with your understanding.

 

[Exegete12]

For Muslims, yes Alllah is YHWH. Jews and Muslims are more in agreement that they worship the same G-d as Jews are allowed to pray in mosques likewise muslims can pray in Jewish synagogues, but both are not allowed to pray in Christian churches.

Well if Allah is Yahweh, how do you differ from being a Jew? ... considering Muslims still follow the law and not the Christian law of grace.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by ummuIsa
wa `alaykumus salaamu wa rahmatullaah-

Na`am, please do send them to me. If I am wrong, I stand corrected but I have taken this not from the kuffaar (as I do not take my Deen from them). This is what I have always been taught and I know that Allaah is His personal name but I was also taught that it comes from al-ilaah.

So please send me what you have so that I can look into it further insha'Allaah. Baarakallaahu feek.

Well if Allah is Yahweh, how do you differ from being a Jew? ... considering Muslims still follow the law and not the Christian law of grace.

That is what I asked them earlier.

Then why don't Muslims call themselves Jews since Jesus was a "Jew"?

Ioudaios/Jew/s (Strong's 2453) occurs 196 times in 187 verses: Page 1, verses 1 - 25
Iesous/Jesus (Strong's 2424) occurs 975 times in 935 verses:

Mat 2:2 Saying 3004 , Where 4226 is 2076 he that is born 5088 King 935 of the Jews 2453? for 1063 we have seen 1492 his 846 star 792 in 1722 the east 395, and 2532 are come 2064 to worship 4352 him 846.

Rev 3:9 Behold 2400 , I will make 1325 them of 1537 the synagogue 4864 of Satan 4567, which 3588 say 3004 they 1438 are 1511 Jews 2453, and 2532 are 1526 not 3756, but 235 do lie 5574 ; behold 2400 , I will make 4160 them 846 to 2443 come 2240 and 2532 worship 4352 before 1799 thy 4675 feet 4228, and 2532 to know 1097 that 3754 I 1473 have loved 25 thee 4571.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

For Muslims, yes Alllah is YHWH.

This is not true just because you would like it to be. The origin of the two words are not from the same root and do not have the same meanings. Please show us a transliteration that proves this. Show us the derivative that is used in the translation that proves your case.

The questioner from what I understood was not speaking about the etymology of the words whereas my answer to AlHannah was related to theological acceptance, not etymology.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

No need to be pedantic, this is not the thrust of my argument, I have stated
several times the root of 'ilah' and
'allah' are the same. The heart of my argument is why
Lane says allah is "originally ilaha or ilaaha" and on
the preceding page gives the definition of ilah as " an object of worship to
whom takes it as such...a pagan diety,... a new moon...
the great serpent, as it was an object of worship of the ancient
arabs" . To all intense and purposes ilaha is the
root/source/origin of allah, this is what Lane implied when under allah he says
"originally ilaha or ilaaha"

Now I am going to show people how misleading of a person you are. This is a photo copy of E.W. Lanes Lexicon; The intro starts from the right :




As everyone can see Lane is quoting other sources( Lth, Msb, K ) stating "OR it is originally ilaah" on line 12 and 13 of the begining. Lane does not make a stament of fact to which Liberate is falsely propagating about Lane.

As everyone continues to read the rest of Lanes work he quotes other sources that refute the al-ilah contraction theory.

Bellow is also a photo of Abdul Mannan Omar's Lexical Dictionary of the Quran in quote of Lane and other scholars :

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No need to be pedantic, this is not the thrust of my argument, I have stated
several times the root of 'ilah' and
'allah' are the same. The heart of my argument is why
Lane says allah is "originally ilaha or ilaaha" and on
the preceding page gives the definition of ilah as " an object of worship to
whom takes it as such...a pagan diety,... a new moon...
the great serpent, as it was an object of worship of the ancient
arabs" . To all intense and purposes ilaha is the
root/source/origin of allah, this is what Lane implied when under allah he says
"originally ilaha or ilaaha"

The questioner from what I understood was not speaking about the etymology of the words whereas my answer to AlHannah was related to theological acceptance, not etymology.

What would the Arabic be for "Adonai J@hovih"? The reason I ask is that the Muslims and Jews both worship the same LORD GOD in the Bible correct?

http://www.christianforums.com/t4203824-question-for-jews-on-new-translation.html

Matt 23:32 "Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' [guilt.] 33 "Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of the gehenna?

Ezkeiel 39:12 "For seven months the house of Israel will be burying Them, in order to Cleanse/purify the land. 13 "Indeed all the people of the land will be burying, and they will gain renown for it on the day that I am glorified," says the 'Adonay Y@hovih.

Eze 39:13 Yea, all the people 05971 of the land 0776 shall bury 06912 [them]; and it shall be to them a renown 08034 the day 03117 that I shall be glorified 03513 , saith 05002 the Lord 0136 GOD 03069.

'Adonay (Strong's 0136) occurs 434 times in 419 verses:
Y@hovih (Strong's 03069) occurs 305 times in 295 verses:

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

What would the Arabic be for "Adonai J@hovih"?

You cannot translate that into Arabic word for word to make a phrase or title, it would make no sense. but below are the Arabic equivalent and cognate

Adonai ~ Rabb (Arabic equivalent)

YHWH ~ Yuhyee or Al-Hayya (Arabic cognate)

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

I have a Hans-Wehr and in it Allaah and ilaah are listed under the root alaha.

Also ukhti read the preface introduction of Hans-Wehr. All words under roots does not mean it is derived from such a root. Such words are placed under such roots to be easily found for linguistical purposes

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

Allah is a title, a generic term for God.

Perhaps you need to look at the very very large display of major references of QUALIFIED Arabic scholars in my previous posts.

The name Alllah is not a title, it is a proper noun/name in the Arabic language. Now do you mind backing up your statement with qualified Arabic scholar sources ?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Perhaps you need to look at the very very large display of major references of QUALIFIED Arabic scholars in my previous posts.

The name Alllah is not a title, it is a proper noun in the Arabic language. Now do you mind backing up your statement with qualified Arabic scholar sources ?

Hi. "Jesus/Savior Christ/anointed" is also a "title" as was Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob/Esau [twins] etc.
I prefer the "LORD" for the creator and "Lord" for "Jesus".

Btw, have you had any luck convincing the Jews that Jesus did come to them?

(NKJV) Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His Temple, Even the Messenger of the Covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming," Says the LORD of hosts.

 

[Oxy2Hydr0]

Well if Allah is Yahweh, how do you differ from being a Jew? ... considering Muslims still follow the law and not the Christian law of grace.

That is what I asked them earlier.

Then why don't Muslims call themselves Jews since Jesus was a "Jew"?

Because we believe that Muhammad is the prophetic messenger of G-d and we follow the Quran that abrogated the Torah and all that was revealed before it.