Deconstructing surat al-ikhlas and Neoplatonism, Gnosis and a word that have no meaning al-samad

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Mar 27, 2012 at 11:01

So you tell us our dear Amin your Allah says that he is one of so who are the other Gods? any guesses?

Now back to Neoplatonism the smart Jewish Rabbis knew very well the Greek logic and mind. Now for the readers not familiar with neoplatonism and gnosis (in the knowledge) what the gnostics were saying is that this word is a cosmic disaster with wars and famines and natural disasters and epidemics therefore the creator of this creation must be an evil and a poor creator that is not worth worshipping and in the case of the Christian gnostics it was the God of the OT that should be avoided and in the case of islam it was Allah that has to be avoided and was regarded as not worth worshiping! Gnostics view this creation as not their heavenly home and there must be a real God who is detached from this creation and he is the one that is worth worshipping and he sends his own "aeons" the likes of the Christ to inform them about the turth through knowledge of the real god of this universe and how one can they escape this poor creation and find the real God and to the gnostics salvation was not acheived through accepting the Christ in the case of Christianity or submission to Allah as in the case of islam but through knolwedge of the real god of this universe that is detached from this poor creation

So the jewish rabbis must have been telling Muhammad that your Allah is really this poor creator of this cosmic disaster and that he is not worth worshipping but again this was beyond Allah and his rasul

Now this time we move on to the strange word al-samad as in allahu al-samad الله الصمد

And notice that I left the word al-samad with out any translation

Well the word al-samad really has no meaning and here is what al-Tabari is saying وَاخْتَلَفَ أَهْل التَّأْوِيل فِي مَعْنَى الصَّمَد , and what he is saying here is that the masorites really disagreed about the meaning of the word al-samad or even how to read it

So we really have a problem about a word in a book that claims to be a book written in eloquent Arabic and it is a clear book so who is the liar here our dear Amin?

Well this does not stop al-Tabari from guessing and he provides the reader with not one but six very different readings of the word al-samad with isnads

1. Some say that it means he who is not hollow

2. Some others tell us that it means the one from whom nothing comes out

3. And others say it means he who was not begotten and did not beget

4. And others say that he is the Lord whose lordship reached the peak

5. And others say that he is the one that is the enduring one who does not disappear

6. Others say it means the Lord above whom there is nobody

What a disaster this means that the masorites had no clue about the meaning of this word

But wait then al-tabari at the conclusion of his exegesis of this strange word he tells us

^{فَاَلَّذِي هُوَ أَوْلَى بِتَأْوِيلِ الْكَلِمَة , الْمَعْنَى الْمَعْرُوف مِنْ كَلَام مَنْ نَزَلَ الْقُرْآن بِلِسَانِهِ ; وَلَوْ كَانَ حَدِي اِبْن بُرَيْدَة , عَنْ أَبِيهِ صَحِيحًا , كَانَ أَوْلَى الْأَقْوَال بِالصِّحَّةِ , لِأَنَّ رَسُول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَعْلَم بِمَا عَنَى اللَّه جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ , وَبِمَا أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْهِ}

So all of a sudden he selects one reading by a certain Ibn Burayda (he reads it as number one in the above) and case closed

For the readers this Quranic word al-samad has no meaning and anyone who tells you that he knows what it means is a liar

What a disaster

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".