Dawoodi Bohra Forum

anajmi,

You must rein this drama in a bit.

36:12 Wa kul shay ahsaynahu fi imam mubeen
78:29 Wa kul shay ahsaynahu kitaaban

First verse explicitly states everything is vested in clear Imam. The second uses adverb kitaaban, which states the mode of vesting everything. It could be writing, but also could be reckoning, or simply counting. Thus you cannot equate "imam mubeen", a noun with adverb "kitaaban".

My turn to be perverse.

114:1 Kul a'oodhoobi rabbi an-naas
113:1 Kul a'oodhoobi rabbi al-falak

Hence an-naas (mankind) = al-falak (dawn)!! Really?

anajmi,

Again your illustrious translators are wrong in translating kitaaban in 78:29 to mean fi kitaab (in a book). That is my opinion.

porus,

You are right. I should rein in this drama a little bit.

As far as the book or Imam is concerned, well, there is no true Imam, but there is a book. So when the real Imam appears (which I believe he will) I will follow him, till then I follow the quran which is in the form of a book. Nothing changes!! And this I have stated in a prior post.

You however insist on preserving the perversity.
Besides, the analogy you chose was pretty lame, considering the fact that you do not know for sure if Imam refers to a book or not, about quran not translating to a book but it happens to be a book. As stupid as me saying Bertrand Russell happens to be a man but Bertrand Russell does not translate to a "man". Sounds ridiculous doesn't it?

I am going to perform a classic religious cop out over here.

I am going to assume that the verses under discussion - 3:7 or 36:12 or 78:29 and the others are allegorical, so I will not discuss them anymore.