Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: The True Testimony

Offline Reader Questions

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
    • View Profile
The True Testimony
« on: October 04, 2012, 12:14:22 PM »
Dear Brother
After reading the article below on your site,  I have some questions about the following passage.
"Having noted the above, claiming a shahadaha (testimony) in the traditional manner (There is no diety but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God - Arabic: La illaha illala muhammad-a-rasullallah) is perfectly acceptable in that the testimony is absolutely true from a Quran's perspective even though it does not appear in one collective form in the Quran,"

 The traditional manner of the shahada is: There is no deity but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God - (Arabic: La illaha illala muhammad-a-rasullallah)
But is it not logically wrong in present days for a Muslim to say Muhammad is the messenger of God, because he's  not anymore between us and the right way should be Muhammad was the messenger of God?
And is it not an offense to God in the most important testimony of a Muslim to put the name of Muhammad, because we cannot associate nothing with God? Is it not that God is sufficient for a Muslim?
Please do forgive me if the letter is not well written in English, that's because i'm a Portuguese speaking person.
Best regards

Offline Joseph Islam

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1843
    • View Profile
    • The Quran and its Message
Re: The True Testimony
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2012, 12:18:16 PM »
Salamun Alaikum,

The concept of 'association with God' is a reference to associating something in worship with God or to make partners in His authority. By having a mere name in a sentence does not mean that one is necessarily worshipping the name or the entity behind the name. It is about intent.

For example, if I said - "There is no God but Him, and He created me" does not mean that the 'me' is now the object of co-worship or is being used as a partner in God's authority merely because it appears in the same line of text.

Indeed, the Prophet is not alive today, but again, if the sentence is being used with the view to present a doctrine that he is alive and present, then the intention and such usage is clearly wrong. [1] But if the sentence is not being cited with such an intention, then one would question any contentions against it.

I hope that helps, God willing


'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act' 
George Orwell