-
Syedna Ghamidi & Baqarah 87
Qanoon itmam e hujjat entails that rusul are not killed; In baqarah 87( WHICH MENTIONS KILLING OF RUSUL BY JEWS), Ghamidi sahab take ‘ al rusul’ in general meaning not the terminological meaning. He further says that only 2 rusool came in banu-israel: moses and jesus.
1: What thing in the verse is compelling him to take russol in common, literal meaning and not in the terminological meaning in which ,say, jesus, moses and Muhammad are rusool. Is he relying on History here? Does that mean, apart from “word, composition of the sentence and context”- history , too, plays a role in Ghamidi Sahab’s tafseer?
-
5 Replies
-
Syedna Ghamidi & Baqarah 87
updated 11 hours, 42 minutes ago
2 Members
·
5
Replies
-
Please refer to his talk on this topic
-
-
my question is not about distinction b/w nabi and rusool. Rather in baqarah 87, does ghamidi sahab used Historical knowledge to interpret the word rusool. here rusool does not mean prophet in the terminological sense according to him.
-
The words in the Qur’an are used both in literal and technical meanings.the word rasul is used for the angels and nabi and technically for the Rasul who can’t be killed unless they complete their mission, and with them comes God’s judgement. You find the word Rasul, not nabi, on all the occasions where God’s judgement comes after the itmam ul.Hujjah of Rasul.
-
i understand that too; the question is how ghamidi sahab decided that in this verse of al baqarah rusool is not in technical meaning but in literal meaning?
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
