Re: For they are created from a bent rib
if not Adam then who or what does the term “nafs-sin wahidatin” refer to?
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
uffo, now i've increased the confusion. in the above passage i meant it is unlikely that Havva's creation is being done through Adam's physical manifestation (or person->rib). whereupon the physical manifestation would have a gender (male) and the pronoun (minhaa) would shift from female to male (minhu).
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
ravage, thanks for answering my questions. Also, I'd love to read the material that you will try to post, insha'Allah. :)
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
so nafs-sin wahidatin = Adam’s soul only without body?
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
Nafsin wahidah means....One Soul. and that is the original soul that was placed in Adam's Body.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
context sahab, context 
in this verse, since the verse is about the creation of the physical manifestation of Adam and Eve from a single soul, I would think yes, the same soul Adam was created with, and not a physical (corporeal) aspect of Adam, such as his rib.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
Ok bottom line is, The ahadeeth and the Quranic verses are supposed to be taken literally.
So its plain and simple either you believe in them, and are a believer, or you dont believe in them and are an unbeliever, period.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
there was one soul split between Adam and Eve?
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
yes, if we go with soul as the translation. even if you say that the soul was first embodied in adam, then transferred to havva through the rib, you are agreeing to atleast their creation from the same soul in either case.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
religious concepts can be proven within a religious construct, for people of the same religion. to a Muslim a direct reference from the Quran would be proof. nobody here is talking about measuring the amount of soul provided to Havva, we're talking about whether the religious sources we do have indicate one interpretation or another.
AQ, baja farmaya
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
No, religious concepts should not be proven within a religious construct. The mere fact you are trying to prove faith makes the logic circular. DO you know what "Proof" means? Why do you guys cheapen a noble religion by trying to prove articles of faith. Which do not need proving or disproving. AJ had it right..like 2 pages ago..
while you are trying to prove whether it is bend in the rib or the bend in the danda, jews are filing tech patents like there is no tomorrow. Use your heads..or atleast the ribs.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
Adam’s soul inhabited him only after his physical (corporeal) creation… so if Adam was ‘soul only’ when Eve was created it means Eve had already been created before Adam ‘the man’ (i.e. body and soul) or ‘person’ came about?? And no, I don’t agree with the line about transference of the same soul or a portion of it(!) through the rib… people have their own souls…
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
that’s interesting because I heard this hadeeth from Dr. Israr Ahmed who is very particular in such things. Plus, for what I remember I read the same hadeeth in one of the Mufti Justice Taqi Usmaani’s Book.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
That’s the guy’s name! Dr. Israr Ahmed! 
He was the one talking about the df. of “nafs” on ARY.
Now I know why its such a big deal 
Sharaabi: You are wrong - if the Quran was to be taken literally and without context, then you hadith-lovers wouldn’t be using hadith in the first place. Then if I asked you to look at the Quran alone, you would shift positions and say that the Quran should not be taken literally and should be examined with hadith in hand.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
By the way, I don’t think bringing in someone’s religious background is appropriate for the thread. The topic of discussion is the ayah and whether or not it corresponds to certain hadith.
Whether or not someone is shia is irrelevant. I’m siding with ravage’s arguments on this one, and I’m sunni and I totally buy into those hadith which don’t contradict the Quran.
So please, lets keep a mature attitude when talking about these hadith. Saying “oh well you’re shia so that’s why you believe this way” is not helpful - that’s a very narrow-minded way of thinking, and I know that’s precisely where those questions were going.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
If you have missed, I posted the audio link by him too :P
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
its ironic how ill thought out your post is, considering its lecturing us on logic. are you suggesting that there is no debate on articles of faith within the jewish religion?
trying to prove articles of faith is not circular logic. there is no circularity so long as all participants have faith in sources that are used as evidence.
heres a simple test for you, just so you know you’re not talking out of your behind. try and figure out what we are actually talking about, and what arguments we have put forward. try and tell me at what point the argument offered by any participant became circular, no not for you, but for a Muslim.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
ravage, choro - this is P-Diddy's way of having fun. Ignore him.
Re: For they are created from a bent rib
pcg.. samjho chore dia.
the creation of a person does not have to imply physical creation, but begins with the creation of their souls. here is one instance where Quran talks about the primordial covenant of our souls with Allah:
now if you are to go with the “soul” translation, then the meaning would be that Adam and Eve were created from the same soul. Having the same origin does not mean that they had the same soul post creation, just as saying that Allah breathed His spirit into man doesnt mean that we (nauzubillah) have the same spirit as Allah. their souls shared a common origin, the physical embodiment of these two souls might’ve been done through Allah’s will.
if you feel uncomfortable with soul, then “nature” or “essence” would suffice. but the reason most translations have gone with either soul or essence, i would think, is because of the pronoun, “minhaa”. if the source of Havva’s creation was male, why would the pronoun by minhaa? The creation (Adam) was mentioned implicitly in the same sentence, there would be a switch of pronouns if Adam was the intended target.
at any rate, I think this discussion has run its course.