Is this true?

[ZeeshanParvez]

Re: Is this true?

@psyah

What I understand from the given is that some commentary is being given about negation assuming the meaning as though it were prohibition.

In other words it supports what I was saying the Laam Alif is translated with negation but the sentence as a whole may be taken as prohibitive. This is in the realm of ilm-ul-ma’aani rather than nahuw.

The famous hadith you gave about laa-darara … From Imam Nawawis collection I believe is not laa of negation … That is Laa of prohibition, but the difference cannot be seen since the verb is mabniy. Right? But the state of the verb is in majzuum, that is what shows it is prohibitive in translation.

Good brother. May Allah bless you. Now consider this, you know the Hadith about Istigathaa. It is possible that the first site I took it from - the Arabic - inflected it wrong! You know that the Hadith were recorded without vowels. If you download the Volume 10 of Al-Haythmi, you will see it is not inflected.

Considering how all Arabs understand it to mean a Nafi for prohibition, perhaps the website site inflected it wrong.

Now getting to the point of Aqeedah. Aqeedah cannot be taken from weak Hadith! As a matter of fact according the school you and vroom follow, it cannot be taken from authentic hadith either if it is not mutawaatir or mashoor.

But first lets decided if this is an issue of Aqeedah. I mentioned this to vroom and he said this is not Aqeedah rather only an act Muslims perform. If you scroll back you will find his statement.

So, what do you say. Is this a matter of Aqeedah or not?