₦airaland Forum

SIRTee15:
samiriyyun is a transliteration from the syriac language word for samaritans- shamraye. The two words are very close phonetically.

Hebrew- shomronim
Greek/syriac- samareia/shamraye
arabic- samirah/samiriyyun

samiriyyun is not originally arabic but a loan word from syriac.



I dont understand what u mean by above and how it's relayed to the anachronism problem of the smaritan.

I see you are unable to bring up a traceable reference to your claims outside your chatgpt session image.

Now, Gabriel Said Reynolds (Professor of Islamic Studies, Notre Dame) notes that the Qur’anic al-Samiri is “strange” because Samaritans did not exist at the time of Moses, making it unlikely that the Qur’an is reflecting Arabian knowledge of Samaritans; instead, it reflects a theological/narrative borrowing from Jewish polemics, not common Arab awareness.
(Reynolds, “The Qur’an and Its Biblical Subtext,” Routledge, 2010, p. 112–115).

Michael E. Pregill, The Golden Calf between Bible and Qur’an (OUP, 2020): argues that the Qur’an’s “al-Samiri” should not be understood historically, but as part of late antique polemical discourse. This implies that the Qur’anic audience did not need prior knowledge of Samaritans; the name functions symbolically.

W. Montgomery Watt, in Muhammad at Mecca (Oxford, 1953, p. 41), emphasizes that the range of Jewish and Christian knowledge accessible to pre-Islamic Arabs was very partial and selective. If Samaritans were unknown even in Byzantine discourse to most Christians, they would not have been known in Arabia.


So most information regarding pre-islamic Arabia familiarity with Samaritans are hypothetical and conjecture.

Allah did not call him the Samaritan people. He revealed the truth about a particular man, al-Samiri, who misled the Israelites back to a similitude of their previous Egyptian enslavers bull worship. Later historical developments which include the rise of the Samaritan sect caused some modern readers to confuse the two. The Qur’an, however, is precise; al-Samiri is a proper name or nisbah of one man in the time of Musa and Allah’s purpose was moral guidance, not ethnographic detail.

SIRTee15:
samiriyyun is a transliteration from the syriac language word for samaritans- shamraye. The two words are very close phonetically.

Hebrew- shomronim
Greek/syriac- samareia/shamraye
arabic- samirah/samiriyyun

samiriyyun is not originally arabic but a loan word from syriac.


I dont understand what u mean by above and how it's relayed to the anachronism problem of the smaritan.

Really now? Is what you generate from whatever AI discussion now qualified as valid proof that pre-islamic Arabians were familiar with the Samaritans?

SIRTee15:
Pre islamic Arabs call samaria al- samirah

Pre islamic Arabs call Samaritans al Samiri.

Both are transliteration from Syriac Christians Aramaic.

Now why would Allah use al Samiri as the person who built the golden calf when he knew people would confuse him with the Samaritan people.

Held you in much higher scholarship expertise

Gabrielshow24:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created Adam in His own image with His length of sixty cubits, and as He created him He told him to greet that group, and that was a party of angels sitting there, and listen to the response that they give him, for it would form his greeting and that of his offspring. He then went away and said: Peace be upon you! They (the angels) said: May there be peace upon you and the Mercy of Allah, and they made an addition of" Mercy of Allah". So he who would get into Paradise would get in the form of Adam, his length being sixty cubits, then the people who followed him continued to diminish in size up to this day. (Sahih Muslim, Book 040, Number 6809; cf. Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 74, Number 246)

Does this answer your question?
It seems you missed it, in your haste🥱. Clear your doubt and move on🤨

cc: lukuluku69

Another poorly understood and misconstrued position that the phrase in His image suggests or means a physical or even spiritual resemblance between Allah and Adam.

You think it fits with the propaganda you have in your books? No apologies it doesn't.

Gabrielshow24:
Always proofread whatever LLMs generate for you. What you wrote there are arsenals to me, they do not help you at all. You even made some straws highlighted above🥱.

As for [1], it seems you are shy guy. You are already aware that for him to prove Allah as the supposed high God he worshipped the stars, moon and sun🤨. Or did you forget that narrative? Do you need a refresher?😮‍💨

David is also depicted in your book(Hadith) contrary to your opinion that He went after Bathsheba 🥱. Why won't your scholars not go to the scriptures for information? When the supposed book that explains the scriptures doesn't explain anything 😅?—Surah10:37 “And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.“🥱

Pls tell me another lie. I will properly address this in the morning until then get your act together 😮‍💨. SMH😔

If indeed you aren't the one misled by your dependence on LLM and perhaps ignorant polemics propaganda present the exact narrative you refer to. Sorry attempt to depict knowledge yet terribly ignorant.

Perhaps if you understand the use of Arabic language you will be sad to know your confirmation is not blind, blank confirmation.

Hurry up and present more folly. Make more noise please.

Gabrielshow24:
🤣🤣🤣liefilled reply. Even with the assistance of LLM you still put yourself in contradictions.

🤨

To say that Muslim tradition just preserves the prophets to hide their inadequacies is not only unfair, but puts forth an important theological doctrine to rest. In the doctrine of Islamic orthodoxy, prophets are in fact human but they are protected from wilful mishandling or distortion of divine revelation (the doctrine of isma'), This cover does not constitute a kind of public relations operation to address human frailty, but to ensure the integrity of the revelation of something. If a prophet habitually lies or fabricates, that would be saying that the cornerstone of the revelation he allegedly received was in question.

To criticise Muslim narratives for white-washing simply because they do not contain some sensational anecdotes lumps together disparate typologies of source material.

The Qur'an is taken as the core scripture, while the tradition came to include many easily sensationalised storeys later added through isramiliyyat (Jewish or Christian folk-tales) or through sham storeys, weaken storeys, i.e. weak reliability). Contemporary Muslim scholarship treads carefully around such material not out of an unwillingness to accept but rather explicitly because the reliability of the accounts is suspect in terms of evidentiary value.

The particular examples that you cite represent a conflation of sources. The Qur'anic treatment of Abraham clearly states Abraham's rejection of the celestial entities moon, sun and stars rather than their worship. Thus, the claim that Abraham served the moon and stars either represents either a misinterpretation of the Qur'an, or is derived from extra-Qur'anic folk tradition.

Similarly, the case of Bathsheba and Uriah already firmly exists in the biblical source 2 Sam 11-12 and is therefore a concrete example where a prophet is pronouncing a serious sin. This conception turns the traditional claim that the biblical scripture always cleanses its prophets. Islamic sources simply leave that comparative episode out of the Qur'anic picture; if it occurs at all in Islamic literature, it usually occurs in the form of a later islets eruption of the legend (israliyat), the authority of which is itself problematic.

The rhetorical move you've identified to use, trawling out late and tenuous narratives while impugning the opposite side's as whitewashing, is less a serious rebuttal, and more a polemical effort. Hence if one were to pursue an ongoing argument, appeals to canonical authority, such as the Qur'an and sound hadith, or to comparison of an explicit biblical quotation, are absolutely necessary.

Moreover, one must not confuse the non-genuine folklore with the scriptural sources.

Gabrielshow24:
The bolded is false as I have outlined earlier, we find Ibrahim lying and serving idols🤦🏾‍♂️. We find David taking Bathsheba with supposed angels(in some accounts) or men scaling the ’prophet's’ palace🤨—how odd that a poor man got a rich man to follow him to scale the king's palace wall? —which by the way is an obvious adulteration of Nathan's parable. Need I say more? 🤨

Obviously, you tell such lies to people that don't know their left from their right. Aaron is a man that made mistakes and he expressed himself. God judged based on Moses' intercession and his involvement ( coerced and overwhelmed by the Israelites, which just assert that it wasn't from his heart) unlike someone whose ’lord is quick to fulfill the desires of his heart😮‍💨’. For his sake, his lord canceled adoption👀, he even said “allah gave me leave to marry her“(paraphrased).

We can see that while your book states one thing, ’prophets are flawless' it also contradicts itself by ’depicting prophets doing despicable things’—Need I say more?😔

Our book is free of such contradictions 😂 as from the beginning we have seen that Man is not perfect (flawless) and the prophets as well are not perfect(flawless). Only Jesus is without sin and flawless🤨, this claim is also copied by your Quran thereby throwing the rest👀 under the bus! Your also book affirms only two that the devil didn't touch(Mary and Jesus)😔—I wonder what this does to your sentiments 🥱.

Pls, tell me another lie.

You have a right to your misconstrued critical view of Islam but the Sacred Books of Islam do not state that the prophets were necessarily sinless; rather, they were human and chosen by God for prophetic missions. They were protected and guided by God, not because they were divine, but to be true to the message of the mission and the divine revelation. They may err or act out of worldly desires but are always corrected by God, and thus, do not violate the credibility and divine origin of what was expected of them.

This is different from the biblical conception of prophets, some of whom committed sins that shake the trust we can place in their prophecies. For instance, Abraham lied about Sarah being his sister, David was guilty of slaughtering a man by marrying his disobedient wife, and Aaron mistakenly became an idol worshipper. However, the Qur'an has Abraham physically breaking idols, David judging a dispute between two lamb owners a lesson on what fair justice entails, and Aaron being praised as innocent in another verse.

It is true that the Qur'an and authentic Hadith speak of the unique nature of Jesus and Mary in being saved from the temptation of Satan when born, but this does not make the Jesus and Mary infallible whereas other prophets of God non-infinitesimally sinless. It shows a particular honor given to Jesus and Mary by God, but denies being perfect for the sacred mission of prophethood given to them or to any prophet. If prophets were to disobey or sin freely as the biblical tradition would have it, then there is no point of having a revealed teaching. Without the miracles and protections, how can anybody trust a revealed teaching from the heavens? However, it is only the Qur'an that preserves the integrity of the prophets through divine protections while giving them human limitations. Therefore, the charge of contradiction is cleared, thus revealing the Islamic view as the more satisfying one.

Gabrielshow24:
It's not dumb, if you had read through the book you would have discovered that he was coerced. While it's not a justification for whatever he did. At least he had an argument for that, the same can't be said for your prophet who wasn't coerced but did all those despicable things from a supposed ’sharingan' free mind🤦🏾‍♂️.

Invariably, your Quran affirms this spin tale🥱 your QURAN will always refute your ’criticism' of the bible because it affirms it😅. pls tell us another lie. Your desperation to remain on this topic is comedic.

The ’spin tale’ clearly highlights his participation in the creation of the calf. As for the judgement, we can see clearly in those verses that Moses interceded for him, we can also see that it wasn't a voluntary act as he was overwhelmed by the Israelites. Tell me another lie🥱

Oh, tell what you think I missed.

You’ve just admitted Aaron did participate in the calf story whether coerced or not, the Bible still records him fashioning it (Exodus 32:4). Coercion doesn’t erase responsibility, it only exposes weakness in a prophet’s leadership. By contrast, the Qur’an protects prophets from such moral collapse Aaron declares I feared you would say I caused division among the Children of Israel (Qur’an 20:94), showing he resisted idolatry, not facilitated it.

As for the claim that the Qur’an affirms every biblical tale that’s false; the Qur’an repeatedly says it comes to confirm truth and expose corruption (Qur’an 5:48). So it is not desperation but a consistent correction: where the Bible blames prophets with sin, the Qur’an restores their true prophetic dignity.

The Bible portrays Aaron as failing, the Qur’an clears him.

Your Bible then questionably has God punish 3000 with death and spares Aaron. It doesn't add up but shows extreme injustice. Still feel it's simple for you to defend as coercion and intercession?

Gabrielshow24:
🤦🏾‍♂️He was called to the Lord's work but he had a lapse in judgement when confronted by the Israelites.

How this helps your Quranic claims is yet to be seen? 🤨
The above ties to the fact that he is a man, that experienced a lapse in judgement but God's mercy is enough for him. Not some perfect flawless being🤷.

Anything apart from this is not quality control but lies 🥱,the Quran wasn't aware of this for Mo just wrote down legends of tales and didn't properly understand anything 😮‍💨.

Keep justifying the unjustifiable.

Or you were fed these legends before hand. I didn't make the idol calf only cast the gold into the fire. Please to what end? What an excuse?

Furthermore the ordinary Israelites were punished as under Moses’ command, the Levites killed about 3,000 Israelites (Exod. 32:28). Nothing was done to Aaron who went as far as declaring the calf the God who brought out the Israelites from Egypt.

Isn't this dumb. What a spin tale.

Gabrielshow24:
🤨 Appealing to ignorance and personal incredulity doesn't help you. As it's affirmed he was a man that caved under pressure 😅, Moses under a different circumstance gave the Israelites ’divorce laws’, clearly highlighted by Jesus that it wasn't so from the beginning 👌.They both were men under God not perfect flawless beings.

If you find that impossible to reconcile with; that's your conundrum, not mine!

Moses permitting divorce under God’s allowance is not the same as Aaron building an idol. One is concession, the other is idolatry. So tell me how does the first high priest of Israel leading people into idol worship not shatter his role entirely?

Ohyoudidnt:
Reference for this please. I know you don't expect me to just take your words for this.

Are you trying to give the impression that there wasn't any form of moulded object worship around the Israelites in Egypt before this incident?

@Sirtee15 is all by your stating? Where is your proof?

Gabrielshow24:
What anomaly is there 🤷, if the mode of reports are different. One is first person 🤷hence the more reason why Aaron tried to tone down his involvement, visibly transferring blame to the Israelites. 🤨 What aspect of this don't you get? Is this the first time people have tried to transfer blame to someone or something else? Is it not prevalent now as it was then? It shows the characteristics of man which buttresses our point that He was a man chosen by God, not that “he was flawless“ 🥱.

Tell us another lie. You still don't get the Islamic dilemma 😅whichever way, you are still wrong. The bible from the very beginning highlights man's weakness. It didn't posit man was perfect or the prophets of God were flawless but rather affirmed the opposite.

It's seems this is your last resort. After failing to prove your Quranic claims, you have hinged your new strategy at discrediting the bible, claiming false representation of prophets😅. Which by the way, your SIN along with the hadiths depict some ’detailed' stories of the prophets. I asked your colleague, ste...rile-rope, before she decided to run away, “how Solomon came into existence when she implied David was portrayed perfect in your books?“🤨—A claim she couldn't substantiate by the way.

Pls, do better than this.

How is this a toning down? In both cases he collects the gold and casts them into fire?

The only difference is a claim in one not to have moulded the idol?

The very first high priest having this much involvement in actions towards idolatry? How?

TenQ:
Who told you that it is not enough to to touch the stone for sins of the sincere believer to be forgiven.

Isn't that the criteria?

You touch it with sincerity for your sins to be forgiven: is their any other requirement apart from this?

What did your prophet say will happen to those who touch the Blackstone?

Please present reports of people doing solely this and validation that this alone is enough.

TenQ:
I showed you clearly that the black stone atone for your sin when you touch it, didn't I?

It seems you somehow forgot!?

I have challenged you to now say based on the powers and importance you give to the stone why just going to touch it or kiss it isn't enough for ardents to your view of it's power.


You cannot answer as the stupidity of your premises are now laid out to you.

Well I will stick to my older resolves about you

TenQ:
OhYoudidnt and Honesttalk21

The identity of the Jihadist banning Truths and deleting them from the Nairaland platform is now known.

Is this your answer to my question emboldened here?

Ohyoudidnt:
Now you have clearly seen my response that the Blackstone neither absorbs sins or intercedes

You ignore my question on why not saying it is prayer that forgives sins not Allah or God or YHVH if you like. This personal name of God that Jesus never used. (Pardon the digression)

Could you tell what the grading for these hadiths say of them? Can you associate them with particular verses of the Qur'an?

Do you understand that touching or kissing the Black stone goes with the tradition or practice of pilgrimage?

Do you acknowledge it as an act of devotion practiced during Hajj or Umrah, which is often symbolic in nature?

You know it is fundamental that sinful actions should be compensated with sincere repentance and obedience to God's guidance.

Though the practice holds collective significance, it is not in itself a guarantee for sinners’ remission. Allah alone forgives, and those seeking forgiveness must be sincere, obey His directives, and embrace Islamic laws.


Kissing the stone is a good deed appealing to Allah potentially remitting past sins.

Let me ask you this based on your adherence to this hadith why don't people just go to the Kaaba, kiss or touch the stone alone and come back with assurance that their sins are forgiven?

Tell me.

Gabrielshow24:
You think this helps you.
One thing you failed to get is that we do not have such claims😅. Your ignorance filled prophet made such claims. So, this mental gymnastics to incorporate the bible doesn't do you any avail! It just shows that time and time again, no one could make sense of what the ’book that supposedly explains all things’ without ’knowledge’ of our book🥱.

You are very shy guy 🤣. Bickering about Aaron doesn't profit you either. It just highlights the historical discrepancies in your book. The bible recorded his direct speech(toned down version) and the general perspective—Using this as some kind of... proof🥱 is just desperation.

The claim is part of your SIN or you suddenly do not take them to be true? 🤨Pls, tell me another lie!

That's if I need any help.

I ain't bickering but clearly seeking a logical explanation of the anomaly there and you come up with a childish fraudulent excuse claim?

So early in what you call your book tells a lot about the foundation it's built on and the resulting structure called the Bible

Gabrielshow24:
Was there any argument that I asserted they were ’perfect as angels’?—A straw🤧. Your claim is that ’prophets are flawless’. Yet, on several occasions we find this claim refuted by the Quran🤨. The notable ones I have cited above which anyone can consult.

As for this: “No you should try a better polemic lie about prophet Muhammad pbuh or show exactly how your claim is true.“
It's a well known situation in Islam🤨, the infamous Satanic verses😅—Need I say more?

The setting apart doesn't mean they are flawless🤨, probably the same ideology that made your prophet to erroneously posit such! Like Jesus said, ’You worship what you do not know, while we worship what we know’. Lending this verse, I conclude that you speak of things you do not know, hence the perspicuous gaps in the book that allegedly “explains all things“. A book that doesn't explain things in detail and is neither clear😮‍💨.

Wow! You should slow down

My claim or the claim you make of or for me? Silly.

You've really taken Jesus' words out of context here as you do with the Qur'an and Hadith. You claim to lend it but know for a fact he was addressing the Samaritans or Jews, not Muslims from centuries later.

The Qur’an doesn’t present itself as a book for entertainment; it’s a straightforward guide to truth, worship, and salvation (16:89, 54:17). That’s what clarity is all about, not just a bunch of details.

By your logic, the Bible doesn’t hold up either: it skips over significant parts of Moses’ life, barely touches on Jesus’ early years, and presents conflicting stories about the crucifixion yet you don’t label it as unclear.

So, your argument kind of falls apart: the Qur’an is clear where it counts, and your critique ends up reflecting poorly on your own scripture.

Tell me what you have been misled or prefer to misinderstand about the satanic verses let's see how pliabel your mind really is.

While at it please represent a better description of your claimed excuse of Aaron maybe it will make better sense.

Gabrielshow24:
Was there any argument that I asserted they were ’perfect as angels’?—A straw🤧. Your claim is that ’prophets are flawless’. Yet, on several occasions we find this claim refuted by the Quran🤨. The notable ones I have cited above which anyone can consult.

As for this: “No you should try a better polemic lie about prophet Muhammad pbuh or show exactly how your claim is true.“
It's a well known situation in Islam🤨, the infamous Satanic verses😅—Need I say more?

The setting apart doesn't mean they are flawless🤨, probably the same ideology that made your prophet to erroneously posit such! Like Jesus said, ’You worship what you do not know, while we worship what we know’. Lending this verse, I conclude that you speak of things you do not know, hence the perspicuous gaps in the book that allegedly “explains all things“. A book that doesn't explain things in detail and is neither clear😮‍💨.

Wow! You should slow down

My claim or the claim you make of or for me? Silly.

You've really taken Jesus' words out of context here as you do with the Qur'an and Hadith. You claim to lend it but know for a fact he was addressing the Samaritans or Jews, not Muslims from centuries later.

The Qur’an doesn’t present itself as a book for entertainment; it’s a straightforward guide to truth, worship, and salvation (16:89, 54:17). That’s what clarity is all about, not just a bunch of details.

By your logic, the Bible doesn’t hold up either: it skips over significant parts of Moses’ life, barely touches on Jesus’ early years, and presents conflicting stories about the crucifixion yet you don’t label it as unclear.

So, your argument kind of falls apart: the Qur’an is clear where it counts, and your critique ends up reflecting poorly on your own scripture.

Tell me what you have been misled or prefer to misinderstand about the satanic verses let's see how pliabel your mind really is.

Gabrielshow24:
🤷You made such palaverous claims without addressing anything.

The bolded is a straw, I mentioned it that your book claims such. Pls, such cheap scripts do not work on me. You will have to do better!

Mo also committed the sin of shirk by imputing partners to God🤨(three daughters of All...ah). By the way,we do not claim prophets are flawless. We affirm they are humans and can make mistakes. One of such mistake from David is recorded in your Hadith 🤤, a direct self-refutation to SIN.

Pls, tell us another lie.

No you should try a better polemic lie about prophet Muhammad pbuh or show exactly how your claim is true.

Prophet's are not flawless angels. They may err but won't lie about God or corrupt revelation.

Does your Bible not tell you they are set apart from ordinary mankind or what do you feel this setting apart is about?

Gabrielshow24:
Simple reasoning should have pointed it to you, that the ’then they gave me the gold, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf" clause made by him was an attempt to tone down his participation🤨.

How this helps you, is another matter🤕.
Each book is responsible for its own proof, provide one for the Quran and stop flurrying around seeking for ’safe haven’.
In you bid to defend the impossible, we have arrived at Aaron after a long rigmaroling and circumlocution by you not to accept the inevitable!

Tell us how this aids you? I take your Jesus' mention as a deflection, an irrelevant one at this moment. It doesn't substantiate the claim, “prophets are inherently flawless“. The same claim that was dashed in the Quran when Mo posited that only two(Jesus and Mary) were not touched by Satan🤕, bear this in mind along with other materials I have cited earlier that refute your supposed irrefragable ’problem statement’.

Tone down his participation yet he was the one who threw their ornaments into the fire?

How? You take a bucket to the pond and dip it in but don't expect water to fill it?

You now remember that prophet's are inherently flawless but Aaron committed the most grievous sin by making what others will worship other than God? Do you make like idol worship was unknown before that time?

Gabrielshow24:
In your bid to cover up the errors in your book, you run to the bible for reference 🤷. I have repeated it several times now: “Every book is responsible for its proof“.

Aaron of course built the golden calf, the other account you so desperately allude to is excuse(from him) to reduce his involvement.
Have you given up on your previous claims?

Oh Jesus didn't carry your sins and die for your sake so you are free from them? Better clarify and express yourself, whatsoever you wrote here has no bearing on the subject matter🤷. I remember calling your previous write up a gar....b...le because of something similar.

You[your book included] are the one that made the claim that every prophet is flawless 😅. Which is dashed completely by a simple example🥱.

Pls, be more coherent and as usual tell me another lie!

Didn't the subject involve sin and the sinless one?

Is it outside your narrative that Jesus bore the sins of all and was crucified for them in order to reconcile mankind to God or isn't this himself?

I am not running to the Bible to cover up anything but get either understanding or show you the inconsistency in your narrative.

Exodus 32:4 reads He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.
And

Exodus 32:24 So I told them, ‘Whoever has any gold jewelry, take it off.’ Then they gave me the gold, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf!

Please explain to me in a way that I will understand how the latter is an excuse. What was the motive or intention of throwing into fire? Was he possessed or out of his senses? Why couldn't the excuse allure to more magic?
Then where in the Bible is this clearly shown to be an excuse.

SIRTee15:
Pre islamic Arabs call samaria al- samirah

Pre islamic Arabs call Samaritans al Samiri.

Both are transliteration from Syriac Christians Aramaic.

Now why would Allah use al Samiri as the person who built the golden calf when he knew people would confuse him with the Samaritan people.

Reference for this please. I know you don't expect me to just take your words for this.

Are you trying to give the impression that there wasn't any form of moulded object worship around the Israelites in Egypt before this incident?

TenQ:
Can you see how your people are deleting my posts!?

It is now even automatic!

Instill wonder how you can read your hadith in black and white with YELLOW highlights and come to an opposite conclusion.

Why do you choose to tell lies to yourself?


Sunan an-Nasa'i 2919
It was narrated from Abdullah bin Ubaid bin Umair that a man said: "O Abu abdur-Rahman, why do I only see you touching these two corners?" He said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Touching them erases sins.'And I head him say: 'whoever circumambulates seven times, it is like freeing a slave.'"

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 959
Ibn Ubaid bin Umair narrated from his father: "Ibn Umar was clinging on the two corners (in a manner that I had not seen any of the Companions of the Prophet doing) so I said: 'O Abu Abdur-Rahman! You are clinging on the two corners in a manner that I have not seen any of the Companions of the Prophet clining.' So he said: 'I do it because I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "Touching them atones for sins." And I heard him saying: "Whoever performs Tawaf around this House seven times and he keeps track of it, then it is as if he freed a slave." And I heard him saying: "One foot is not put down, nor another raised except that Allah removes a sin from him and records a good merit for him."

Now you have clearly seen my response that the Blackstone neither absorbs sins or intercedes

You ignore my question on why not saying it is prayer that forgives sins not Allah or God or YHVH if you like. This personal name of God that Jesus never used. (Pardon the digression)

Could you tell what the grading for these hadiths say of them? Can you associate them with particular verses of the Qur'an?

Do you understand that touching or kissing the Black stone goes with the tradition or practice of pilgrimage?

Do you acknowledge it as an act of devotion practiced during Hajj or Umrah, which is often symbolic in nature?

You know it is fundamental that sinful actions should be compensated with sincere repentance and obedience to God's guidance.

Though the practice holds collective significance, it is not in itself a guarantee for sinners’ remission. Allah alone forgives, and those seeking forgiveness must be sincere, obey His directives, and embrace Islamic laws.


Kissing the stone is a good deed appealing to Allah potentially remitting past sins.

Let me ask you this based on your adherence to this hadith why don't people just go to the Kaaba, kiss or touch the stone alone and come back with assurance that their sins are forgiven?

Sterope:
If you say so, once someone starts with Allah and Balckstone. I don't take them seriously.

Quite good. Though likely a waste but it's good to make some effort to correct misunderstanding and misinformation.

Sterope:
You must be whining TenQ that he is smarter than this.

Someone debating Blackstone and the meaning of Allah… in 2025.

They can’t see the magic of Hajj; millions of languages, cultures, and colours coming together as one. One religion, uniting the world. They can’t even imagine the foresight. It can only be God!

And Ramadan as well? The same story billions fasting across the globe.

The idea that Islam is dangerous came as a result of this level of discipline, fundamentals that can unite billions across the world...it is scary from a conspiracy perspective

Do you actually grasp the scale of this?

God be praised. Prophet Muhammad is the most influential man alive

Dorn with you TenQ, I would hate to go back and forth on the same thing. May God guide you alright!

No he seems quite smart except for his obsession with faulty conclusions.

TenQ:
Don't change the embarrassing topic
Does the stone absorb sins?
Does the stone intercede for Muslims?

Is the Blackstone is the right hand of Allah?


You said the black stone doesn't absorb sin nor intercede!?
Who taught you that?

On Forgiveness of sin on touching the Blackstone

Sunan an-Nasa'i 2919
It was narrated from Abdullah bin Ubaid bin Umair that a man said: "O Abu abdur-Rahman, why do I only see you touching these two corners?" He said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Touching them erases sins.' And I head him say: 'whoever circumambulates seven times, it is like freeing a slave.'"

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 959
Ibn Ubaid bin Umair narrated from his father:
"Ibn Umar was clinging on the two corners (in a manner that I had not seen any of the Companions of the Prophet doing) so I said: 'O Abu Abdur-Rahman! You are clinging on the two corners in a manner that I have not seen any of the Companions of the Prophet clining.' So he said: 'I do it because I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "Touching them atones for sins." And I heard him saying: "Whoever performs Tawaf around this House seven times and he keeps track of it, then it is as if he freed a slave." And I heard him saying: "One foot is not put down, nor another raised except that Allah removes a sin from him and records a good merit for him."


On intersession for you Muslims by the Blackstone

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 961
Ibn Abbas narrated that: The Messenger of Allah said about the (Black) Stone: "By Allah! Allah will raise it on the Day of Resurrection with two eyes by which it sees and a tongue that it speaks with, testifying to whoever touched it in truth."

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 961
Ibn Abbas narrated that: The Messenger of Allah said about the (Black) Stone: "By Allah! Allah will raise it on the Day of Resurrection with two eyes by which it sees and a tongue that it speaks with, testifying to whoever touched it in truth."


Oya, thank me for teaching you the real Islam.



Tell me if this is NOT idolatry?
An Idol is a physical representation of a Deity who perform some of the functions of the Deity!

Mangnimally ludicrous. Why not just say it's prayer that forgives sins.
Is it the prayer or the one who is prayed to that forgives?

You are trying too hard on terribly twisted understanding.

Didn't you see my response?

Ohyoudidnt:
So all the acts of kissing 'saints', clergy, family members amongst the Israelites are no longer gestures of affection? Or players that kiss medals or trophies are worshipping them?

No the Blackstone doesn't absorb sins or intercede.

Come on Tenq you are supposed to be smatter than this.

Anything about the Blackstone being at the right hand of God is fabrication.

Allah forgives minor sins as a reward for obedience and following the tradition of the prophet pbuh by performing wudu, praying salat, doing good deeds, touching the black stone. The forgiving is equated to erasing and no it's not the black stone that does this but Allah. Do you attempt to claim those who don't get to touch the Blackstone during pilgrimage or don't perform pilgrimage at all will not be forgiving their sins when they sincerely repent of them?


Major sins are not erased for sake of touching the black stone and require repentance.

The Stone is not divine; it is honored because Allah and His Messenger pbuh commanded honoring it.

PS: An idol can be anything that we love or prioritize more than God, including ideas, people, or even our own desires not just a physical representation of a deity.

TenQ:
Symbolic!?
Did you hear yourself!?
Symbolic for something that absorb sins?
Symbolic for something that intercede for Muslims?

Is the Blackstone is the right hand of Allah?


Tell me if this is NOT idolatry?
An Idol is a physical representation of a Deity who perform some of the functions of the Deity!

Muslims think that bad argument is an antidote for the heavy flaw in their theology

I see you don't know it's symbolism as a marker for the circumambulation of the Kaaba.

You really are typing before thought or it has been a very tiring day. If it is the latter take a rest first. I doubt naira land will disappear before you return.

TenQ:
So, why do your prophet kiss the Blackstone?
Why do you Muslims kiss the Blackstone?

Does the stone absorb sins?
Does the stone intercede for Muslims?

Is the Blackstone is the right hand of Allah?


Tell me if this is NOT idolatry?
An Idol is a physical representation of a Deity who perform some of the functions of the Deity!

So all the acts of kissing 'saints', clergy, family members amongst the Israelites are no longer gestures of affection? Or players that kiss medals or trophies are worshipping them?

No the Blackstone doesn't absorb sins or intercede.

Come on Tenq you are supposed to be smatter than this.

TenQ:
So, why do your prophet kiss the Blackstone?
Why do you Muslims kiss the Blackstone?

Does the stone absorb sins?
Does the stone intercede for Muslims?

Is the Blackstone is the right hand of Allah?


Tell me if this is NOT idolatry?
An Idol is a physical representation of a Deity who perform some of the functions of the Deity!

You should do better and show that the symbolic act of remembrance and Sunnah, not worship with the black stone for some not all Muslims is anything like the worshipping a Jesus who Christians assign divinity to.

It seems you confuse what worshipping another instead of God is. Which Muslim prays to the Blackstone or asks favours from it?

Gabrielshow24:
Cognitive dissonance in this gar...b...le you call speech.

This is a path...e...tic attempt to deflect from the inherent flawlessness of the prophets imputed unto them by Mo! This response is a straw that addresses nothing!

You can't defend the indefensible so you have relied on deflection😁. You should know, I will not let you escape that easily.

“Does the Qur'an tell you the sin of John the Baptist or he wasn't a prophet.“

This is laughable 😅as I have stated above it offers nothing to the subject matter. If I can provide one flaw from the prophets then it negates your book's claim🥱. I don't even need Yahya as Mohammed, Ibrahim (as cited above) are sufficient to dismiss such claims!

Pls, tell us another lie🥱.

Oh Jesus didn't carry your sins and die for your sake so you are free from them?

Nice to note this stand of yours.

Please remind us the subject matter of this thread and discussion.

Was it a favour to assign a sin you claim of Aaron to another? You see even the lies in Exodus are many. Did Aaron shape the golden calf as Exodus 32:4 Vs Exodus 32:24.

Did Aaron mold the calf or it magically emerged from the fire?

Gabrielshow24:
We are not concerned with your Quran's ’favor’ of assigning Aaron's sins to another—it shows unaccountability, a theme visible in Mo's life— We are concerned with facts! We know that Mo did this, so that others will believe he was not to be questioned and he was perfect🤨. Anyone can reject the truth doesn't mean they are right! All this was done so as to wield power!

Like you said, it's the personal designation of your prophet that caused such a blunder🥱 because he rejected the truth and embraced his falsehood. I suppose according to you that all the prophets were sinless and flawless😵‍💫.Still the Quran threw them all under the bus by asserting only Jesus was sinless(pure). It even threw Ibrahim under the bus by asserting he served false gods and even lied twice for the sake of Allah, justifying taqqiya 😂—Even absurd is making Allah push Ibrahim into idolatry 🤦🏾‍♂️.

We already know the type of model, your prophet was looking for 👀—those he could use to gain power for himself or confirm his false teachings. He knew the concept of ’prophet's being flawed’ will go against him and also he just didn't know that it was Aaron. He must have heard tales which he wrote down🥱ignorantly.

Pls, tell us another lie.

I see you rather focus on assigning the world's sins to Jesus so long they idolise and worship him. Please what's the most important thing to your faith?

Are all sins the same as idolatry?

Does the Qur'an tell you the sin of John the Baptist or he wasn't a prophet. Following your apologetic polemics I see.

Gabrielshow24:
I don't have to, it's already been done by thousands. Your very own scholars translated it as such 🤷.

So, this excuse of yours is an afterthought 🥱—damage control. Mr. Water scout👀, when you have solid, conclusive proof that this nisbah refers to a ’water scout’ or ’security man’👮 and not the literally obvious ’samaritan’. kindly, bring it here until then stop with the failed mental gymnastics... It's like a baby trying to build an app🥱... It's cute😅 but falls short on all grounds🙃.

Scholars? Not the Prophet or his companions? They expressly said so? Please educate me and point me to these verses to convince me you speak truth.

Do you deny that water was a problem for the Israelites during the exodus? Indeed I was making an analogy but in this light it really is plausible. Tell me otherwise.

Gabrielshow24:
😂Water scout? Some people's dependence on LLMs will be their own undoing😂. Pls, let me know why you made al-samari, “a water scout“?

Security watch 🤨? What was he watching over? Water? 😂😂 What an apologetic!

You didn't address anything as we all know al-samari was a man🤷. That's not our bone of contention, the title of that man is the contention! The man in the literal sense originates from ’samaria’👀.

All this mental gymnastics to suggest role still fails. Pls, stop with the lies. As for the italicized statement of yours🤨, better take it back, as we are very certain of many parallels found in the Jewish targums and talmuds that your prophet copied into his stories🥱.

What a sorry state. Can you establish from that Quran verses or any other verses there in that name originates from Samaria?

When you do go on to share.