The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

The Prophet Muhammad PBUH is both Light (Noor) and Human

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/13/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 779 times Debate No: 78632
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (1)




I believe that the Quran and Hadith and sayings of scholars support that the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is Noor-ul-Bashar, meaning Light and Human and that this is the belief of Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jamaah, the Sunni Muslims.

The Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jamaah believe that it is indeed permissible to call the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) as 'Nur (light) of Allah'. The Qur'an has itself applied this description to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) at many places and so have overwhelming ahadith.

However, it is often at this point that those who oppose this view believe from some erroneous conviction that we deem the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) as a non-human. This is indeed a strange and gross accusation, as those who claim that he was not a human, have clearly ventured out of the bounds of Islam, and have entered into kufr. The belief of Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jamaah is that our Noble Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is both Nur and Human.

I will use plenty of evidences to support my belief.


I would like to thank my opponent for creating this debate.


My opponent has plagiarized most of his first round from the following website:

I ask the voters to consider this when voting on this debate.
Debate Round No. 1


I am new to this and so was not fully aware of the rules.

So I now begin with the evidences.

Firstly I shall prove this from the Quran:

"O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Now has come to you Our Messenger (Muhammad SAW) explaining to you much of that which you used to hide from the Scripture and passing over (i.e. leaving out without explaining) much. Indeed, there has come to you from Allah a light (Prophet Muhammad SAW ) and a plain Book (this Quran)." Quran 5:15 from the Muhsin Khan translation.

Though that which is mentioned between the brackets is not stated in the Quran, it is explained as such by the vast majority of Muslim scholars in their interpretations of the Quran known as Tafseer.

Imam At-Tabari, the author of one of the most famous exegesis of the Quran called Tafseer Tabari states in this magnificent piece of work:
"قد جاءكم يا أهل التوراة والإنـجيـل من الله نور، يعنـي بـالنور مـحمداً صلى الله عليه وسلم"
which translates as: "There has come to you, O people of the Torah and the Gospel, from Allah a Light, what is meant by light is Muhammad peace be upon him."

Imam Ar-Razi, author of another famous exegesis called Tafseer Al-Kabeer, states in this work of his:
"وفيه أقوال: الأول: أن المراد بالنور محمد، وبالكتاب القرآن "
which translates as:"There are different positions about it, the first being that the Light is Muhammad, and the Book is the Qur’an".

Tafseer Jalalayn written by Imam Jalal-ud-Deen Mahalli and Imam Jalal-ud-Deen Suyuti whose exegesis is famous state: "قَدْ جَاءكُمْ مّنَ ٱللَّهِ نُورٌ } هو النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم}"
which translates as:"{There had come to you from Allah a Light} It is the Prophet Peace be upon him".

Ibn Al-Jawzi, a famous Hanbali scholar, states in his exegesis: " قال قتادة: يعني بالنور: النبي محمداً صلى الله عليه وسلم."
which translates as: "Qatadah said: What is intended by Light is Muhammad peace be upon him"

Al-Alusi, author of the great exegesis Rooh Al-Ma'ani , states in his work:
"وهو نور الأنوار والنبـي المختار صلى الله عليه وسلم، وإلى هذا ذهب قتادة"
which translates as: "And he is the Light of Lights and the Chosen Prophet: Muhammad peace be upon him. And this is the interpretation followed by Qatadah"

The same scholar states in another place in his exegesis: "وكونه صلى الله عليه وسلم رحمة للجميع باعتبار أنه عليه الصلاة والسلام واسطة الفيض الإلٰهي على الممكنات على حسب القوابل، ولذا كان نوره صلى الله عليه وسلم أول المخلوقات، ففي الخبر " أول ما خلق الله تعالى نور نبيك يا جابر " ،وجاء " الله تعالى المعطي وأنا القاسم " وللصوفية قدست أسرارهم في هذا الفصل كلام فوق ذلك"
which translates as: "And as for him (Peace be upon him), being a mercy to all is associated to the point that he is the intermediary of the divine emanation to all occurrences from the very start, and that is why his light was the first thing to be created, as stated in the narration "The first thing Allah created was the Light of your Prophet, O Jabir" and also quoted is, "Allah is the Giver and I am the Distributor." And the Sufis, may their secrets be sanctified, have more to say on this matter."

So as can be seen, many scholars understood the Light mentioned in the verse to refer to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

The second verse I present as evidence is Quran 24:35.

"Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp. The lamp is in a glass. The glass is as it were a shining star. (This lamp is) kindled from a blessed tree, an olive neither of the East nor of the West, whose oil would almost glow forth (of itself) though no fire touched it. Light upon light. Allah guideth unto His light whom He will. And Allah speaketh to mankind in allegories, for Allah is Knower of all things." Quran 24:35 from Pickthall translation.

Qadi Iyyad, a well-known scholar, states in his biography of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, named Al-Shifa:

وقال الله - تعالى - : الله نور السماوات والأرض [ النور : 35 ] الآية .

قال كعب الأحبار ، وابن جبير : المراد بالنور الثاني هنا محمد - صلى الله عليه وسلم - . وقوله - تعالى - مثل نوره [ النور : 35 ] أي نور محمد -صلى الله عليه وسلم - .

وقال سهل بن عبد الله : المعنى : الله هادي أهل السماوات ، والأرض ، ثم قال : مثل نور محمد إذ كان مستودعا في الأصلاب كمشكاة صفتها كذا ، وأراد بالمصباح قلبه ، والزجاجة صدره ، أي كأنه كوكب دري لما فيه من الإيمان والحكمة يوقد من شجرة مباركة أي من نور إبراهيم عليه الصلاة والسلام . وضرب المثل بالشجرة المباركة . وقوله : يكاد زيتها يضيء [ النور : 35 ] أي تكاد نبوة محمد - صلى الله عليه وسلم - تبين للناس قبل كلامه كهذا الزيت . وقيل في هذه الآية غير هذا ، والله أعلم .

وقد سماه الله - تعالى - في القرآن في غير هذا الموضع نورا وسراجا منيرا ، فقال - تعالى - : قد جاءكم من الله نور وكتاب مبين [ المائدة : 15 ] الآية . وقال - تعالى - : إنا أرسلناك شاهدا ومبشرا ونذيرا وداعيا إلى الله بإذنه وسراجا منيرا [ الأحزاب : 45 46 ] الآية

which translates as: " And Allah says: "Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth..." [Surah Noor:35]

K'ab Al-Ahbar and Ibn Jubayr said: The meaning behind the second Light is Muhammad, PBUH. And His saying " the Parable of His Light", this refers to the Light of Muhammad PBUH.

And Sahl Bin Abdullah said: The meaning is: Allah is the guide of those in the heavens and the earth, then He said: Like the Light of Muhammad when it is lodged in the loins (of his forefathers) like a niche. And the intent behind the Lamp is his heart. The glass is his chest. Meaning as if it is a shining star due to what is in it of belief and wisdom, lit from a blessed tree, meaning from the Light of Ibrahim AS. He makes a comparison with the blessed tree. And His saying: its oil would nearly glow, meaning the Prophethood of Muhammad PBUH is evident to people before he speaks like the oil. And other things are said about this ayah, and Allah knows best.

And Allah has called the Prophet PBUH in the Quran A LIGHT and a LIGHT GIVNG LAMP. For Allah has said: "Indeed, there has come to you from Allah a light (Prophet Muhammad SAW ) and a plain Book (this Quran)." Quran 5:15. And He has also said: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner,-And as one who invites to Allah's (grace) by His leave, and as a lamp spreading light." Quran 33:45-46."

Imam Baghawi
writes in his exegesis concerning this verse:
فقال بعضهم: وقع هذا التمثل لنور محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم، قال ابن عباس لكعب الأحبار: أخبرني عن قوله تعالى: { مَثَلُ نُورِهِ كَمِشْكَاةٍ } فقال كعب: هذا مثل ضربه الله لنبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم، فالمشكاة صدره، والزجاجة قلبه، والمصباح فيه النبوة، توقد من شجرة مباركة هي شجرة النبوة، يكاد نور محمد وأمره يتبين للناس ولو لم يتكلم أنه نبي كما يكاد ذلك الزيت يضيء ولو لم تمسسه نار
which translates as: "The Parable of Allah's Light is the Light of Muhammad PBUH in the loins of his forefathers"

Other scholars who gave the same interpretation are: Ibn Jarir al-Tabari in his Tafsir, Suyuti in al-Durr al-Manthur, Zarqani in Sharh al-mawahib and al-Khafaji in Nasim al-Riyad.

So as can be seen there are TWO verses in the Holy Quran that state the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is indeed Noor (Light).

In the next round I shall bring evidence from the Hadith.



Now that we have gotten your plagiarism out of the way, let's discuss
this issue:

Definition of noor:

"The word "n$3;r'" means "light" in Arabic, Persian and Urdu. It is often
used in the Quran, notably in a verse that states "God is the light of
the heavens and the earth." [1]

"There is controversy over the doctrine of An-N$3;r al-MuM17;ammadī, or the Muhammadan Light, in which Muhammad is thought to have existed before creation." [ibid]


As the instigator, and the one making the positive claim, my opponent
has the full burden of proof. Considering the hole my opponent has dug himself, this is no small matter. First, before Pro can show Muhammad is "God's light" (noor), Pro must show us two other things:

1. God exists.

After all, the only way Muhammad can be noor (God's light) is if
there's a God in the first place.

2. The Qur'an is the literal Word of God.

Just because it claims to be so proves nothing. I could claim to be a
talking eggplant, but it wouldn't make it so. The Bible and the Book
of Mormon make the same claim, but neither of them even mention
Muhammad. Pro can quote the Qur'an all day, but that in no way proves God exists, or that the Qur'an is the literal Word of God. And if it doesn't do either of those, it can't show Muhammad is noor (God's light).

If Pro is unable to establish either one of these claims, I
automatically win the debate.


Pro has found some scholars who agree with him. I have found some that disagree:

For example, Persian scholar, Al-Zamakhshari says the noor is "the truth":

"He is the possessor of the light of the heavens and the owner of the light of the heavens. The light of the heavens and the earth is the truth (al-M17;aqq), which can be compared to light in its manifestation and clarification, just as he says, "God is the friend of those who believe; He brings them forth from the shadows to the light (2:257), i.e., from the false to the true"" [2]

Another scholar, MuM17;ammad al-Bāqir, says the noor is not Muhammad, but rather his descendants:

"And believe in Allah and His Messenger and the n$3;r (light) that We have brought down." [3]

So, we can easily see that Pro hasn't even begun to make a compelling case. Appeals to the Qur'an and scholars are premature. Pro must FIRST establish:

1. God exists, and...

2. The Qur'an is the literal Word of God, and as such, is trustworthy.

I now turn the debate back over to my opponent.



2. Sufi Commentaries on the Qur'an in Classical Islam (p. 110) (

Debate Round No. 2


My opponent is now straying away from the main topic of the debate and into another vast and extensive field. If he would like to debate the existence of the Almighty and authenticity of His Book then this can be done at another debate at another time but right now I would like for my opponent to stick to the matter at hand. There are many proofs for both existence of God and the Quran being His last revealed Book but now is not the time nor the place.

And I disagree with Con as I were to establish them then the matter of debate would be strayed from and the debate would turn into one of that of proving existence of God and authenticity of the Quran, which I remind Con is NOT the debate at hand. So me sticking to the topic will NOT automatically make you win the debate.


I have not found some scholars who interpreted the verses as such rather it is the vast majority and most widely accepted interpretation of the Quranic verses dating back to the companions of Muhammad PBUH himself.

Con uses the interpretation of Al-Zamakhshari. Now, this man was a scholar of the Mu'tazila who are considered by most mainstream Muslims to be a heretical sect who does not represent their religion. An example of how distant this sect is from mainstream Muslims is that during the time of the Abbasid Caliphs when these Mu'tazilahs began to gain power, they spread their false and blasmphemous beliefs such as the Quran being created by God which is a blasphemous belief in Islam. They managed to influence the Caliph and anyone who disagreed was persecuted. The famous Sunni scholar, Ahmed bin Hanbal, who was the founder of one of the four traditonal Islamic schools of thought and respected by the Sunni Muslims, especially for his magnificent work of compilation of Hadiths called Musnad Imam Ahmed. This scholar refused to utter the blasphemous statement that the Quran was a creation and rather it was the spoken word of God. He was thus persecuted by the Caliph as a result of the lies and deception of this heretical sect. This is just one of their many anti-Islamic beliefs.

If Con is going to quote scholars then it would be nice if he quoted scholars that mainstream Muslims do not consider as heretics.

Again con is quoting from non-mainstream sects, this time that of the Shias. Now this sect, which consists of many subdivisions of which some are considered even out of the fold of Islam for their beliefs and actions, though the mainstream Shias are cosnidered Muslims by the majority yet their beliefs and writings are considered heretical as they oppose mainstream Sunni beliefs.

And I have indeed made a compelling case for the Quran is the Holy Book of Islam and thus the first source for Islamic beliefs, including the matter at hand. Con again demands for the debate to stray away from the original topic.

The proof of the existence of God are many and a whole other debate is needed for justice to be done to that matter and the same applies for the Quran.

I will now present proof from the secondary source of Islam: the Hadiths.

Hadiths are the sayings and narrations from the Prophet Muhammad PBUH.


"ورأت أمي حين حملت كأنه خرج منها نور أضاءت له بصرى من أرض الشام"
Which translates as: The Prophet Muhammad PBUH said, "When my mother gave birth to me, a Noor (LIGHT) emerged from her which lighted up the castles of Syria".
This narration is mentioned by the famous scholar of Hadith, Imam Bayhaqi, in his book Dalail an-Nubuwwa and also by Imam Al-Haythami, another famous scholar, in his famous collection of Hadiths Majma al-Zawaid. Imam Al-Haythami also said that this Hadith is Hassan meaning it is good and accepted and he stated there are other narrations that strengthen it.


"عن عثمان بن أبي العاص حدثتني أمي أنها شهدت ولادة آمنة بنت وهب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ليلة ولدته قالت فما شيء أنظره في البيت إلا نور وإني أنظر إلى النجوم تدنو حتى إني لأقول ليقعن علي"
which translates as: "Uthman bin Al Aas narrated that his mother narrated to him that she witnessed the birth of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH and on the night of his birth there was nothing I looked at in the house except it was Noor (Light) and when I looked at the stars they were so close to earth that I were to say that the will fall upon me."

This can be found in the remarkable and lengthy work of Ibn Kathir called Al Bidaya wa An-Nihaya.


عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ : " لَمَّا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ آدَمَ خَيَّرَ لآدَمَ بَنِيهِ ، فَجَعَلَ يَرَى فَضَائِلَ بَعْضِهِمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ ، قَالَ : فَرَآنِي نُورًا سَاطِعًا فِي أَسْفَلِهِمْ ، فَقَالَ : يَا رَبِّ ! مَنْ هَذَا ؟ قَالَ : هَذَا ابْنُكَ أَحْمَدُصَلَّى
اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ هُوَ الأَوَّلُ وَالآخَرُ وَهُوَ أَوَّلُ شَافِعٍ "

which translates as: "The Prophet Muhammad PBUH said:"When Allah created Adam AS He informed him of his descendants, Adam saw superiority of some over others. Then he saw me as a shining light. He said, " O my Lord, who is this?" He said, " This is your son, Ahmed (PBUH), who is the first (to be created) and the last (to be sent as a Prophet) and (on the Day of Judgement) he wil be first to intercede."""

This is also mentioned by Imam Bayhaqi in his aforemntioned book. The chain of narrators of this narration is good and accepted and the men who narrated it are relied upon.

Jabir ibn AbdAllah said to the Prophet (PBUH) : "O Messenger of Allah (PBUH), may my father and mother be sacrificed for you, tell me of the first thing Allah created before all things." He (PBUH) said: "O Jabir, the first thing Allah created was the light of your Prophet from His (created) light, and that light remained in the midst of His Power for as long as He wished, and there was not, at that time, a Tablet or a Pen or a Paradise or a Fire or an angel or a heaven or an earth. And when Allah wished to create creation, he divided that Light into four parts and from the first made the Pen, from the second the Tablet, from the third the Throne, [and from the fourth everything else]......."

This narration is recorded by Imam Abdur Razzaq in his Musannaf, Imam Qastallani in Al-Muwahib al-Ladunniyyah, Imam Al-Zurqani in Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Imam Ajluni in Kashf al-Khafa, Imam Halabi in his Sirah and also Ashraf Ali Thanvi in Nashar ut-Tib. Imam Ibn Hajr al-Haythami also narrated this in his Fatawa al Hadithiyyah.
Sheikh Abdul Haqq Muhadith Dhelvi
said, "The source of all creation, the universe and of Adam is Nur (Light) of Muhammad(PBUH), hence "IT HAS COME IN SAHIH HADITH THAT THE FIRST THING WHICH ALLAH CREATED WAS MY NUR!"" This can be found in his book Madarij Al-Nubuwwah.

Imam Badr ud-din Ayni states in his Umdat al Qari, Sharh Sahih al Bukhari, "Imam Ahmed and Imam Tirimdhi have narrated the Marfu hadith with Sahih Isnad from Ibada bin Samit (ra) which proves that Allah first created the Pen and then told it to write and It wrote everything which would happen till day of Judgement. Hassan, Ata and Mujahid have adopted this too, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Jawzi also have this Madhab whereas Ibn Jarir has narrated from Muhammad bin Ishaq that “ALLAH CREATED THE NUR AND DARKNESS PRIOR TO EVERYTHING” and then differentiated between them, There is also a saying that Allah first created “THE NUR OF MUHAMMAD (PEACE BE UPON HIM)” so how could reconciliation be brought in these different narrations? I say that they could be reconciled by saying that everything has its “RELATIVE PRIMACY” and they are first in relevance to things which came after them. "

These are but a few of the many narations on this topic.



Debate Resolution

My arguments were in no way in conflict with the debate resolution. We are debating whether or not Muhammad is God's light (noor). Pro has the full burden of proof, so I don't have to make an affirmative case. I only have to refute Pro's claims. If anyone is not debating the proper subject, it's my opponent. He seems to be wanting to debate "The Qur'an says Muhammad is noor (God's light)." But that's NOT what the subject of our debate. As anyone can see, we're debating if Muhammad is God's light.... WELL, the only way for Muhammad to be God's anything is if God exists. So, Pro needs to establish that first. The only way the Qur'an can be accepted as evidence in this debate is if it can be established as God's literal Word. Absent that, what it says is irrelevant to this debate resolution.

His Scholars vs. My Scholars

Pro claims my scholars are heretical, but offers no sources or evidence to back this up. With this in mind, I know my opponent will understand if the voters reject this argument as the baseless claim that it is.


Pro defines hadiths as "Hadiths are the sayings and narrations from the Prophet Muhammad".

Well, just because Muhammad says he is God's light doesn't make it so. I could claim to be President of the United States, but that wouldn't make it so. Again, this is nothing more than a bare assertion that should be rejected as the baseless claim that it is. We're not debating what Muhammad said; we're debating if it's true or not.

Pro has basically wasted a round. I encourage him to begin engaging the actual debate resolution he created.
Debate Round No. 3


Umar99 forfeited this round.


My opponent has forfeited this round. I ask the voters to consider this when voting.
Debate Round No. 4


I was unable to post the previous round as I was staying in a place where there was no internet connection which is not my fault.

My opponent seems to have misunderstood the debate. I clearly stated, "I believe that the Quran and Hadith and sayings of scholars support that the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is Noor-ul-Bashar, meaning Light and Human and that this is the belief of Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jamaah, the Sunni Muslims." So hence it was my job to provide evidence for that belief which cannot be done without quoting the aforementioned sources otherwise the debate would be pointless. It is as if someone said "I believe this book says the sky is blue and so do these experts". Now if that person wanted to debate that belief of his it is incumbent upon him to bring proof that the book DOES say that and that the experts DO say that. And for anyone against his belief is to prove that the book DOESN'T say that and the experts DON'T say that.

My opponent is in conflict with the debate resolution as the debate is about the belief that "the Quran and Hadith and sayings of scholars support that the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is Noor-ul-Bashar, meaning Light and Human and that this is the belief of Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jamaah, the Sunni Muslims." Perhaps I should have made it clearer so an opponent would not start to drift away from the topic.

My opponent knows full well that debating about God's existence and the Quran being His word is a huge and expansive topic that is NOT appropriate to debate right now as that would require many more rounds and cannot be done in one or two rounds. And the Quran IS a valid source to quote Islamic belief from as it is the Holy book of Islam and so are the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH since he is the last Prophet of Islam and the scholars are they considered "inheritors of the Prophets" in Islam and are the most respected and knowledgeable men of Islam, so who better to refer to than the experts?

My scholars

My scholars are mainstream Sunni scholars which is the largest group of Muslims and so represent majority Muslim belief. Since my opponent thinks I just pulled that out of nowhere I shall now provide evidence to reassure him that the Mutazila and Shia are heretical groups.

Regarding al-Zamakhshari states, "Theologically, he was affiliated with the rationalist MuF3;tazilah school." *

Regarding the Mutazilah states, "Under the F3;Abbāsid caliph al-MaF2;m$3;n, this doctrine of the created QurF2;ān was proclaimed (827) as the state dogma, and in 833, a miM17;nah or tribunal was instituted to try those who disputed the doctrine (notably the theologian AM17;mad ibn M16;anbal); the MuF3;tazilī position was finally abandoned by the caliphate under al-Mutawakkil c. 849. "**

Dr G.F.Haddad, a famous Islaimc scholar writes as can be found on, "while the name of Mu"tazila refers to the broader "Five Principles" " tawh"d, "adl, thaw"b, "m"n, and amr bi al-ma"r"f which al-Ash"ari and al-Maturidi refuted in whole and in detail in many of their books. Following is a survey of these Five Principles integral to Mu"tazili doctrine:
1.In the chapter of tawh"d, the Mu"tazila " and the Shi"a in their wake " held that Allah cannot be seen at all, whether in the world or on the Day of Resurrec"tion as that would necessitate corporeality and direction for Him. In contrast, Ahl al-Sunna held that Allah will most certainly be seen by the believers on the Day of Resurrection without our specifying how. Al-Ash"ari authored several refutations of the Mu"tazili and Shi"i view, and early Hanbalis considered that the belief that Allah will not be seen on the Day of Resurrection entails kufr. Further"more, the Mu"tazila " and the Shi"a in their wake " held that the Attributes are none other than the Essence, otherwise, they claimed, there would be a multiplicity of Pre-eternal Entities (qudam"); therefore, to them, the Qur"an is created and both they and the Shi"is deny the reality and pre-existence of the Attribute of Divine Speech. The vast majority of the early Muslims including Ahl al-Bayt reject this fallacious reasoning as summed up by Imam Malik: "The Qur"an is the Speech of Allah, the Speech of Allah comes from Him, and nothing created comes from Allah Most High." Similarly al-Tahawi said of the Qur"an in his "Creed of Abu Hanifa and his Companions" known as the "Aqida Tahawiyya: "It is not created like the speech of creatures." This is the position of the totality of the Salaf including the Four Imams and their immediate colleagues, in addition to Sufyan al-Thawri, "Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak, al-Awza"i, Ja"far ibn Muhammad , Abu Ja"far al-Tabari, Dawud ibn Khalaf, Zayd ibn "Ali and others of Ahl al-Bayt, Ishaq ibn Rahuyah, al-Bukhari and his 1,000 shaykhs by his own verbatim report in Khalq Af"al al-"Ibad, and count"less others of the pious Predecessors. Dr. Sa"id al-Buti wrote:"The Mu"tazila denied the existence of the "Attributes of Meanings" (sif"t al-ma""n"),asserting that Allah is Knower with"out being character"ized by any Attribute of Knowledge (sifa al-"ilm), and Powerful with"out being characterized by any Attribute of Power (sifa al-qudra). The only reason that made them adopt this position is their notion that to attribute such an essential Attribute (sifa dh"tiyya) to Allah I entailed assent to a multi"plicity of beginningless entities (ta"addud al-qudam") to the number of these Attributes, which assent constitutes disbelief by unanimous agreement. Therefore, they said that His "being-knower" (""limiyyatuhu) and "being-powerful" (q"di"riy"yatuhu) are necessarily true of His essence and need not, in order to exist, Knowledge and Power, contrary to the case for human beings. They also said that Allah is perfect and complete in His essence, so that, if we said that His "being-knower" is estab"lished by means of the Attribute of knowl"edge, then His essence would be lacking something since it needs, for its completion, an external means " a position that is unanimously null and void.

The above are all specious claims to which the Mu"tazili per"spec"tive gave rise due to their burdening reason with more than its capacity in these matters. This is their well-known method. What is impossible in the multiplicity of beginningless entities is that the be"gin"ningless essences be multiple " not the Attributes of a single es"sence. Now, the "being-knower" of Allah is nothing more than the ascrip"tion of the Attribute of knowledge itself to Allah I. Nowhere in this is there anything "needing" nor anything "needed." This also tells you that the ascription of the Attribute of knowledge to Him does not entail His being com"pleted by means of something other than Him.

There is proof enough for us that Allah ascribed to Himself the Attribute of Knowledge in the verse (they encompass nothing of His know"ledge save what He will) (2:255). It is natural that reason cate"gorically assimilate His other Attributes with this one, as"cribing to Him, similarly, the Attributes of life, power, hearing, sight, etc.

The adduction of this verse as proof is well-established even if we interpret the terms "knowledge" in it to mean "the known" (al-ma"l"m), although there is no necessity for such interpretation. For if knowl"edge were not firmly established for Allah I He would not have at"tributed it to Himself nor signified the object of the known by it. Thus the signify"ing of "the known" by "knowledge" is still a branch of the validity of the ascription of Knowledge to Allah Almighty.

2. In the chapter of the Divine Justice (al-"adl), the Mu"tazila " and the Qadariyya, Shi"a, and Christians likewise " held that Allah I cannot possibly create the evil deeds of His servants, therefore they are in charge of their own destinies and create the latter themselves through a power which Allah I deposited in them. This heresy is the core of Qadari belief and was refuted by Imam al-Ash"ari in his book Khalq al-A"mal, his student Ibn Khafif in his al-"Aqida al-Sahiha ("40: "Acts belong to Allah, not to creatures, while earning " al-iktis"b " belongs to creatures, but earning is created by Allah, not by them") and, before them, by al-Bukhari in his Khalq Af"al al-"Ibad."***

The Shi'a have many more heretical and strange beliefs distant from mainstream Muslims such as their belief in 12 infallible Imams after the Prophet Muhammad of which the last is hiding in a cave and has been so for hundreds of years and will reveal himself close to end of times. They also believe the Quran is incomplete and they believe the companions of Prophet Muhammad PBUH apostated after his death except a few and other such disgusting beliefs. ****

So now I have established the Mutazilah and Shia are heretical minority sects I will continue.

Hadiths are a valid source as for without it most of Islam and Islamic beliefs and practices would not reach us today. Also since Prophet Muhammad PBUH is more knowledgeable about himself than us then we are to take his word for it. Also I said at the beginning that I believe the hadith supported my beliefs and so its my responsibility to show they do and I have done so.

My opponent is clearly not well-informed about this topic and so is wasting his time trying to divert the topic to something else which I did not do. I ask the voters to keep this in mind when voting.




Let me quote the debate resolution that PRO chose when creating this debate:

"The Prophet Muhammad PBUH is both Light (Noor) and Human"

Notice what it doesn't say: It doesn't say the Qur'an and/or some Muslims say Muhammad is noor and human. If it DID say that, then Pro would have possibly won this debate.... But it doesn't say that. The resolution Pro needs to support is that Muhammad IS noor (God's light). But he hasn't. He hasn't because before he can prove Muhammad is God's anything, he needed to establish there is a God at all.

But he hasn't. And it's too late now because this is the last round.


As I said earlier, my opponent has the full burden of proof. He has never argued otherwise, so we should presume he agrees. With that in mind, I didn't have to offer any affirmative arguments. As Con, I simply had to refute any relevant arguments Pro made...

But he never made any. Time and time again, he tried to change the topic of this debate, but to do so is disingenuous, and not allowed on

So basically, Pro never gave me anything to refute, because he never engaged the debate resolution. Not only that, but he forfeited a round and ADMITTED to plagiarizing!

The choice is clear. Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Umar99 2 years ago
teaparty1 you are an ignoramus who knows nothing of Islam and Prophet Muhammad PBUH who is the Mercy to all creation and was it not for him you and nothing would exist.
Posted by Teaparty1 2 years ago
Some people say that most Muslims are moderate, but when polled their real beliefs come out and they are not so moderate like people would think.
Posted by Teaparty1 2 years ago
Mohammed (MHRIH) was an evil violent man. The west is really starting to have an Islam problem. If these people would integrate and not support sharia law that would be okay. But they don't, they bring their horrid ideas and beliefs with them.
Posted by Umar99 2 years ago
Well I'm new to this so I guess I'll learn as I go along
Posted by n7 2 years ago
@ Umar99

lol, I was kidding. It was a joke expressing that you need to define your terms or at least put up rules that say no trolling/semantics. Because there are people who would accept your debate and seriously do that.
Posted by shalal12 2 years ago
Brother Imami Shia Muslims also believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was Noor. I doubt your opponent believe Muhammad (pbuh) as a true prophet let alone regarding him as Allah's Noor. The thing which matters him is to win or lose, however I know you are preaching hidayat. Have you ever tried to lead a Shia through Sunnah?
Posted by Umar99 2 years ago
That is the most stupid thing I've ever read.

Just because something is light does not mean it will not exist if it is dark. A fire is a source of light yet it exists in the dark. The moon gives off light yet it exists in the dark. A ray of light from a bulb exists in the dark.

I do not know whether you are just stupid or are trying to insult Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

If you're going to act like this then do not comment, I do not have time to waste on foolishness like this.
Posted by n7 2 years ago
If Muhammad was light, he wouldn't exist when it was dark.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Le-vox-von-zhizn 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Good debate. Both arguments were sourced and detailed. But Pro forfeited and plagiarized so I'll give Dsjpk5 the point also I'll gave him the sources point for now for spotting it. I'll probably extend my vote later.