Talk:Allah/Archive 2

message: Firstly, I find it hard to believe that Allah is the same God as my God, i.e, the Judeio-Christian God. Secondly, Why can't Muslims put up with Religous humor like Christians, Jews, and other straight thinking folks?-user:crazyfurf
:: With all due respect, Muslims are no less humour-tolerant than many groups throughout the history of other religions.  One of the funniest people I have ever met was a Muslim.  The trick is that fanatical muslims have no sense of humour, much the same way fanatical christians, jews, sikhs, or anyone else have poor senses of humour.  It is in fanaticism that we close our minds, and therefore lose the joy that comes with an open mind.
:: On the topic of Allah - you're going to have to deal with it.  (Well, you don't HAVE to, I suppose... :)   I know you may find it hard to believe, but you need to move past the lens of your experience with muslims or with others' ideas about islam.  The fact that you call non-muslims "straight thinking folks" should clue you in to the fact that you are taking a prejudiced view.  Have you studied the Qur'an?  I don't mean leafed through a copy at the book store, but actually studied it, with people who have also studied it with an open mind?  In the Qur'an, you find Jesus praised and loved, prophets sent by God to the hebrews (Noah, Isaiah, Elijah, Abraham, Moses, etc.) respected and honoured.  At the end of days, according to Islam, Jesus even returns just like in Christianity.  
::I'm not saying there aren't differences - big ones.  It's just that there's a difference between God's identity and His names.  Allah isn't God... Allah is a name of god.  God has many names.  In fact the word God didn't even start out as a name, it was a word - a noun.  In english usage, we started to use it as a proper noun, as a name.  That's an english thing, 1500 years after Jesus (around when English started to be modern English).  Arabs say "the God" in arabic.  That word, in Arabic, is Allah.  Christians from Arab lands use the same word to describe God the Father.   Jews sometimes have trouble thinking that Christians talk about the same God, because Christian concepts of God's nature and attributes are so different (in some formulations of Christianity) than the God of the hebrew Tanakh.  Nevertheless scholars and anyone who reads the texts realizes that even if their conceptions of God differ, they are trying, in their human and frail way, to describe the same unique being that created the universe.  The same is true with Muslims.  Cheers. --Christian Edward Gruber 20:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: crazyfurf, so you think Muslims don't fall under the straight thinking folks category? Anyway I don't see how this will help contribute to the article! so remove this section? -- Saleh 11:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have some things to say 

message: what are the underdots under the ls supposed to mean, and why were they added? afaik, there is no l-underdot in standard arabic transliteration. dab (ᛏ) 16:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  transliteration 

message: H2O does have a point, in that Allah may be considered a "personal name" in the same right as "God" may be considered a personal name. The distinction we are making here is the one between YHWH and El, a very peculiar development foreign to Islam. Therefore, the "personal name" issue should maybe not be mentioned so apodictically in the intro. Allah is Arabic for God. There was a lot of dispute about this on the God article also, and it was settled with 
:"The use of capitalisation, as for a proper noun, has persisted to disambiguate the concept of a singular God from pagan deities for which lowercase god has continued to be applied, mirroring the use of Latin deus."
Arabic doesn't have the possibility of capitalisation, but the "inseparability" of the article is comparable. Allah of course is from al-lah, etymologically, but it became a proper noun in as much as the article became inseparable from the root. dab (ᛏ) 08:15, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  proper noun 

message: I agree that Allah is from Proto-Semitic  'il. But is that not via NW Semitic El? Or why is the connection to NW Semitic el wrong? sorry, I forgot that Arabic is considered South-Central. El according to Gesenius may be from 
* 'wl "to be strong"
* 'wl "to be foremost"
* 'lh "to swear, make a covenant"
The question is of course, what about the h - was it lost in El, or was it added to Allah? Why is it not in Allat? If the word is really from  'lh, Allah would in fact not be from   'il, but directly from Proto-Semitic  'ilah (maybe "god of the oath", i.e. it would never have lost its h. This is not suggested by Gesenius, however. dab (ᛏ) 07:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allah and El 

message: I went and tried to look up Allah in the Lisan al-Arab, and found:
: ت. وقال الخليل: الله لا تطرح الأَلف من الاسم إنما هو الله عز ذكره على التمام؛ قال: وليس هو من الأَسماء التي يجوز منها اشْتقاق فِعْلٍ كما يجوز في الرحمن والرحيم
: Al-Khalil said: Do not drop the 'alif from the noun, for it is Allah who has recalled it in full; and he said: And it is not among the nouns for which one may find a verbal etymology, as one can for ar-Rahman and ar-Rahim.
However, the entry goes on to quote another authority:
: قال أَبو الهيثم: فالله أَصله إلاهٌ، قال الله عز وجل: ما اتَّخذ اللهُ من وَلَدٍ وما كان معه من إلَهٍ إذا لَذَهَبَ كُلُّ إلَهٍ بما خَلَقَ
: Abul-Haitham said: The origin of "Allah" is ilaah, Allah (azz wa jall) said: (23:91) Allah hath not chosen any son, nor is there any god (ilaah) along with Him; else would each god have assuredly championed that which he created...
: ال: وأَصل إلَهٍ وِلاهٌ، فقلبت الواو همزة كما قالوا للوِشاح إشاحٌ وللوِجاحِ وهو السِّتْر إِجاحٌ، ومعنى ولاهٍ أَن الخَلْقَ يَوْلَهُون إليه في حوائجهم
: And he said: The origin of ilaah is wilaah, for the waaw became a hamza, just as they say ishaaH for wishaaH, and ijaaH for wijaaH, and the meaning of wilaah is that the people are enthralled (wlh) by him in their needs...
(http://www.alwaraq.com/index4.htm?c=http://www.alwaraq.com/LisanSearch.htm&m=http://www.alwaraq.com/search.htm). Just thought I'd throw this in. - Mustafaa 17:54, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The traditional Arabic grammarians' positions 

message: An anon deleted a sentence that has been in the article for a long time, something about the word Allahummah being found in the Qur'an. Is this true? False? Why was this deleted? I restored the sentence, at least for the nonce, and I'm asking the other editors for an opinion. Zora 02:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Allahumma is found in the Qur'an, but it's essentially an irregular vocative form of Allah, and I am very sceptical about this unsourced claimed link to "Elohim". - Mustafaa 18:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well then, let's remove it after all. Zora 18:13, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  From my understanding, Allahummah is a supplicative form. It is akin to saying, "Oh Allah <insert wish here>" --GNU4Eva 13:47, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anon's deletion 

message: As of the most recent version of the article, it states, in discussing the etymology of "Allah", tht "some Muslim scholars feel that "llāh" should not be translated, because it expresses the uniqueness of God more accurately than "God", which can take a plural "Gods", whereas "llāh" has no plural. This is a significant issue in translation of the Qur'an. This also explains why Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians freely refer to God as Allāh." Overlooking the inevitable weasal words, "some Muslim scholars feel that ...," I'm bringing into question the factual accuracy of this statement. I am skeptical of the statement because (a) no source is provided, and (b) the word "ilāh" is from pre-Islamic times. As the article explains, linguists believe that "Allah" is a contraction of "al-ilāh" ("the god.") The pagan Arab religion, in addition to using the word "Allah" also used the word "Allat," itself a contraction of "al-ilāh-at" (literally "the godess"). The words "ilāh" (god), "ilāh-at" (godess), "Allat" (the name of a female diety in the pagan Arab pantheon), and "Allah" (the name of the masculin creator God in the pagan Arab pantheon), all existed as words in pre-Islamic times. In light of the fact that pagan (polythiest) Arabs in pre-Islamic times used the word Arabic word "ilāh" (god), it seems doubtful that the word "ilāh" can only be used in a monotheistic sense (as the editor claims in the disputed statement). The statement has no source, and appears to be inconsistent with known etymological facts, so I am going to edit it. The point of the statement is that some Muslims don't like to translate "Allah" into "God," especially in publish translations of the Qur'an. That should be mentioned, in the contest of the belief of linguists that the word "Allah" is in fact just a contraction of the words "al-ilah" (the god).
--Zeno of Elea 3 July 2005 08:58 (UTC)
:I think you misunderstood the statement. The point is that "llāh" became lexicalized as a new word meaning "single God", as a lexeme different from "ilāh", which of course still can take the plural. "llāh" is therefore a lexeme that only arose in Islamic times, and it cannot logically take a plural. Etymologically, it is an univerbation of ilah with the article, but that is etymology, not synchronic Arabic. You may as well say that "God" is a participle, which is etymologically true, but certainly not synchronically. Nowhere do we claim that "ilāh" has a monotheistic sense, much to the contrary, because "llāh" was coined, "ilāh" is now reserved for polytheistic idols. dab (ᛏ) 3 July 2005 09:36 (UTC)
::Oh, I"m sorry, I misread "llāh" as "ilāh."  Though I don't agree with your statement that "ilāh" is reserved for polytheistic gods only, since "Allāh" is called an "ilāh" in the shahada. --Zeno of Elea 3 July 2005 21:05 (UTC)
:::that's because the shahada is pre-Islamic Arabic, so to speak, and remained untouched for 1400 years. Your interpretation also hinges on the translation of ila, it is unclear if that implies that allah is considered a subset of ilah. You may also translate something like: "there are no ilah. ok, but there is Allah" which may mean that allah is a related concept, but not identical to ilah. Historically, of course, the shahada translates "there are no ilah, exept for The One Ilah (which we will refer to as Allah from now on)", i.e. it is really the axiom defining the terminology of all post-shahada-Arabic. Correct me, but that's how I came to think about the case. dab (ᛏ) 8 July 2005 09:21 (UTC)
If you want a source for this common view (which I disagree with), try a translation of Muhammad al-Ghazali's work. - Mustafaa 4 July 2005 16:38 (UTC)
:As far as the issue of translating Allah into English goes, that's easy enough: "God" with a capital "G" specifies monotheistic diety. Using the word Allah in English has confused many people into thinking that Allah is a name of God, equivalent to Jehovah -- especially with Christian missionaries promoting the "moon god" nonsense.Kauffner 15:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ilāh" is an Untranslatable Monotheistic Concept? 

message: Any reason for linking to this article besides the debunked arguments that Hubal was Allah?Heraclius 22:12, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh and by the way, regarding my edit comment of "that's false", I was referring to your accusations of vandalism.  A removal of one link from the See Also section is not vandalism.Heraclius 22:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just incorporated the Hubal reference in the appropriate section.  Hopefully this will stop your edit warring.Heraclius 22:21, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's fair enough, Heraclius. For the record, I'm not saying that Hubal was Allah, I'm saying that Hubal was an important diety in pagan South Arabia, similar to how Allah was an important diety in pagan South Arabia. As long as Hubal is mentioned somewhere, it's fine with me. --Zeno of Elea 20:10, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think the pre-Islamic situation may be discussed, and Allah put in context of his pagan origins. That's all fair enough, and I wish you could always be as reasonable, Zeno. but this is really of another kind, and marks you as a vandal, pure and simple. I mean, the Judeo-Christian God originated as a burning bush, but what do you think people would say if I went about plastering the YHWH article with pictures of bushes? That's really too low a register to waste much breath on, I can only hope your present agreement with Heraclius will  help you regain your countenance. dab (ᛏ) 16:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hubal 

message: I would appreciate it if the Catholic moderators would stop deleting the information on dance allah.  Dance Allah is an integral part of the Islam religion.  
:Please create new sections at the bottom of talk pages and add ~~~~ at the end of your posts so we can tell who and when posted it.  Also cite notable sources. Catholic? O_O gren グレン 23:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not catholic... I'm Viennese!  Dance Ballroom!- Tεxτurε 23:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dance Allah 

message: Al-Andalus has twice removed references to the Arabic-speaking Sfaradi communities of the Maghreb who, in daily speech, to this day, refer to the Almighty as "Allah".  The assertion that they have retained "their traditional Judeao-Spanish [sic] rendering of His name" is true, but only in liturgical and literary environments, environments in which no other Arabic-speaking Jewish population has adopted the use of "Allah" either.  If he removes the Sfaradim again, revert the removal, and cite it as vandalism.  TShilo12 07:26, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "Allah" by Sfaradim 

message: Surely we can find a better way of putting this? After all, it is universally used in Christianity as well. What exactly is this trying to get at? That Muslims use it more than Christians (because more Muslims speak Arabic than Christians)? That in English (and other languages) it is used (only) by Muslims? There must be a better way of saying whatever is intended to be said.
Equally, "Although the usage of the word Allāh is traditionally attributed to Muslims": this is a somewhat unclear sentence. I think it's an attempt to find a more glorious-sounding way of saying, "although most people think that Allah is something that Muslims say". Perhaps it should be read "Although outside the Arab world use of the word Allāh is widely associated with Islam" or something similar?
And does it really have to have a macron on the second "a"? How does this fit in with our conventions? Palmiro | Talk 03:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Although most often used by Muslims around the world, it is also used by other Arabic-speakers to refer to the eternal monotheist Deity." I made that change, but you are free to change it. Yes, it should have the macron on the second a; it clarifies the pronounciation. I'm sure you've heard the ever popular pronounciation that rhymes with "walla," "holla," and "calla" (sorry for the slang terms, but they're the only words that sound even close to what I'm thinking). joturner 04:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, that's a pretty popular pronunciation in Arabic as well, though granted you're unlikely to hear it from an imam! Palmiro | Talk 06:08, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "It is most commonly used in Islam...", "usage is traditionally attributed to Muslims" 

message: I couldn't really find the purpose of this article. Is it about the etymology of the word "Allah" (the arabic word)? About the usage of this arabic word? or about the islamic conception of "God"? If it was about the conception I would like to move it to Islamic conception of God, a clearer title that really reflects the content. CG 14:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible that it's about all three? Many people, particularly non-Muslims, think Allah and God are two different things. Therefore, this is the most appropriate title because it allows us to talk about the etymology and usage of the word as well as the Islamic conception of God. Allah would be the most common search term for all three. joturner 14:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not necessarly. I agree about the reasoning but it is not that Many people, particularly non-Muslims, think Allah and God are two different things. As CG notes below, Allah is not an exclusive Islamic term. Cheers -- Szvest 09:39, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Don't take me wrong, I've read the article. I just think that, since "Allah" is not an islamic term, or particular to Islam, why its islamic conception is in this article? CG 14:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, this page could alternatively deal with the meaning, use and etymology of the word and we could have another page on the Islamic conception of God. I'd be inclined to favour that, as the current set-up could be seen as reflecting either or both of (a) ignorance of the usages of non-Muslim Arabs and (b) the anti-Islamic prejudice among some Christians that Muslims worship a different god from them. Palmiro | Talk 17:37, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of this article 

message: Without being disrespectful, I think the etymology of "ole" in Spanish derives from a similar root to "allez" as in "go!" in French.  I just picked up a mistake on the section where the use of "All-h in phrases" which deemed the etymology to come from Arabic.  Thanks.
:In fact the RAE gives the etymology of olé as "Voz expr." which might be translated as "expressive word", meaning it's just a noise not derived from any other word. — Hippietrail 16:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the origins of the word "Ole" in Spanish 

message: I think that this article has all the FA criteria, besided the intro that should be expanded. Would you consider nominating it to Featured article status? CG 10:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There aren't really any sources. But yes, it could be on its way. joturner 05:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article 

message: That image of the word Allah does not appear to be calligraphy... it just looks like arabic to me. --Irishpunktom\talk 09:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calligraphy 

message: Right now the article is a little strange, structurally.   There is duplication/overlap between etymology and history.  Also, the arabic phrases, while many are islamic in origin, contain non-exclusively-islamic phrases (O God! could be easily invoked by an Arab-speaking Christian, for example.)
I recommend re-working the structure as follows:
::Overview
:#Etymology and History
:#Use of the name
:##Islamic Uses
:##Other Uses
:##Common Phrases
:#See Also
:#External Links
I think this structure is easier to read, keeps things in context, and would let additions/improvements to the article be more easily and consistently made.  Any comments or objections?--Christian Edward Gruber 03:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article structure. 

message: Etymology section has been removed, I'm not sure if it is an improvement or not, someone should look and see if it needs to be reverted --Serival 03:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: One thing that is compelely missing in all the Etymology is Maimonides-- whom no one can deny.
"`Abdullāh"  was also the name of the father of Maimon, whose son Moses is the Jewish principal Rabbi commonly known in English as Maimonides. Maimonides himself wrote his works mostly in Arabic on which his  name appear as "Mussa bin Maimun ibn Abdullah al-Kurtubi." موسى بن ميمون بن عبد الله القرطبي
--Abdel Hameed Nawar 11:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maimonides 

message: As stated in the anon talk page, the edits he makes are pure original research. I must refrain from editing this article for 24 hours. However, if the anon got a point, he's invited to discuss it here or else that would be considered as vandalism. -- Szvest 15:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits by [[User:195.93.21.2]] 

message:  (commenting out to remove old request from category)
How about renaming this to Allah (Arabic) to make it clear that this is about an Arabic word and not primarily about the Islamic concept of God? --Striver 02:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Allah does fairly well; it's a common word in English. -Patstuarttalk|edits 21:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: For Arabs unfamiliar with ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas I explain that ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas is One Complex Allah, but *NOT* three simple ilahs. According to Christians, whole Allāh is ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas, that is consisted from three permeating and concentrically placed lite-spherical persons such as Abu-Father, Bin-Son, and Ruh-Spirit, which are drawn in picture on right. These persons *CAN NOT* be ever separated, because Allah is unchangeable and because Allah is an sum of all three persons.--83.5.24.96 08:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Less than 25 percent Muslims are Arab. I thought that it might be an information for you. --- ابراهيم 10:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thus I think that this ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas definition that I posted here will be useful for other non-Arabic Muslims too. Additionally, I inform, that Maryam *NEVER WAS* and *NEVER WILL BE* a part of ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas. She is only human being.--83.5.24.96 11:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For your further information, we have a full article on Trinity, accessible to everyone interested, Arab or non-Arab. dab (ᛏ) 11:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Trinity article lacks ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas spherical picture useful for purpose of documenting that Christian Allah is One Complex God in Three Persons *BUT NOT* three separate one-person gods. Additionally, images included in Trinity article are misleading for Muslims in this matter.--83.5.24.96 12:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

text: There is Islamic page with faithful understanding of ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas: http://www.muhammadanism.org/Trinity/default.htm --83.5.24.96 11:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ath-Thaluth al-Muqaddas 

message: In Indonesia, Muslims that I met often pronounced (and sometimes spelt) Allah as "Alloh," saying that that is the correct Arabic pronunciation. (Actually the pronunciation was a bit more complex, and different to either English or Indonesian, but "Alloh" is the closest I can come to writing it. Some words like Ramadhan were also often pronounced with the "o" sound replacing the "a".
Some of them seemed very keen to distinguish between Allah pronounced according to standard Indonesian pronunciation, which they considered Christian, and the true Arabic pronunciation. 
Is this a correct way to pronounce these words? --Singkong2005 · talk 02:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why isn't it correct? See Ignatius Abded Aloho II for example, who was a Syriac Orthodox Patriarch. His name (in Arabic) is written "عبد الله" (Abd Allah - servant of God). —MK (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, indeed. This sound occurs only in the Divine Name. The correct pronunciation is "Ałłāh", with dark l and stress on last syllable. /o/ doesn't exist in Arabic. Aminullah 09:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation as "Alloh"? 

message: This article's lead paragraph needs to be shortened according to the ambiguous guidelines set out in WP:LEAD. Yes I know it says there that some topics needs longer leads then others, but this topic is interrelated with God, Jesus, HaShem amongst others. Please can the main editors of this article discuss. Thanks! User:FrummerThanThou 18:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup LEAD 

message: Should this entry redirected to God. I don't think so but there are reason maybe to do it. 
Anyone has a view on it  ? Zeq 21:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article should stay so that users like Frotz might be prompted to reconsider their views. The question is not whether the Islamic "god" is an imposter, but whether the Islamic conception of "god" is true or useful. If Jews, Christians, and Muslims all say that there's one, and only one, god, then they're all talking about the same entity. They just have different ideas about this entity. Zora 06:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm talking about the idea that a malevolent being may masquerade as the Supreme Being to stir up hatred, misery, and chaos. This idea is presented as a significant reason for "kill all unbelievers", no matter the creed of who utters it.  With temptation, you know deep down that a bad action is bad, but you do it anyway.  Now if God commands you to murder others, then it's God's will and therefore correct and honorable.  I think Blaise Pascal had the same idea when he said "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.".  (Pensees, Number 894 (1670)) Frotz661 07:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of this entry  ? 

message: Allah is the name of the Muslim god. By this god, all Muslims devote their faith and love although 99% of them have no clue as to its origins. Allah, who is he? Following the road signs of Hajj from ancient Sumer to Mecca.
It is an undeniable fact of history that before Muhammed was born, the moon god "al-Ilah" (Allah) had three daughters named al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat. The first two were even named after their father. Each daughter had a separate shrine near Mecca, where Allah's shrine was located.
The word has been around for thousands of years. Notice the "word" rather than "name".  "Allah" originated first as a word which meant...."Al"="the" and "lah"=god. "al"-"lah" meant, "the god". Note as well the lower-case "g": because the fact is, the original word was meant for a god. 
So from an English equivalent "Allah" comes from "The + God". "The common theory is that it is formed from ilah, the common word for a god, and the article al-; thus al-ilah, the god," becomes Allah, "God." 
This theory, however, is untenable. In fact, the name is one of the words borrowed into the language in pre-Islamic times from Aramaic." (Islam: Muhammad and His Religion, Arthur Jeffery, 1958, p 85)  
Nabonidus (555-539 BC), the last king of Babylon, built Tayma, Arabia as a center of Moon-god worship. Stele of Nabonidus, Star and Crescent of Harran coin, Sign of Sin (Beaulieu, Segal 1963). 
Symbols:Tell Halaf 5 th to 4 th millennium BC, near Harran, at the source of the Charbur, Euphrates.2 Kings 17:6 "they carried Israel away into Assyria and placed them in Halah and in Habor" (Zehren 154) Symbols Centre of Topkapi coat of Arms, Turkey.
The origin of why the crescent moon is on top of every minaret at the Kabaa today and the central symbol of Islam atop of every mosque throughout the world:   About four hundred years before the birth of Muhammad one Amr bin Lahyo ... a descendant of Qahtan and king of Hijaz, had put an idol called Hubal on the roof of the Kaba. This was one of the chief deities of the Quraish before Islam. (Muhammad The Holy Prophet, Hafiz Ghulam Sarwar (Pakistan), p 18-19, Muslim)
The Rise of Islam  by Rabbi  Ken Spiro
" In the early stages of his spiritual awakening, Mohammed came to be greatly impressed by the Jews. Writes S.D. Goiten in Jews and Arabs (pp. 58-59):
"The intrinsic values of the belief in one God, the creator of the world, the God of justice and mercy, before whom everyone high and low bears personal responsibility, came to Muhammad -- as he never ceased to emphasize -- from Israel."
He clearly had some knowledge of the Torah as later he would quote Moses (though not always accurately) more than one hundred times in the Koran, the record of his teachings which became the holy book of his newfound religion. Of the 25 prophets listed in the Koran, 19 are from Jewish scripture, and many ritual laws of Islam parallel Judaism -- circumcision and prohibition against eating pork, for example.
Children of Ishmael:
Through his studies, Mohammed concluded that the Arabs were the other children of Abraham - through the line of his son Ishmael by the Egyptian maidservant Hagar - and that they had forgotten the teachings of monotheism they had inherited ages ago. He saw his mission as bringing them back. Paul Johnson, in his History of the Jews (p. 167), explains:
"What he [Mohammed] seems to have wished to do was to destroy the polytheistic paganism of the oasis culture by giving the Arabs Jewish ethical monotheism in a language they could understand and in terms adapted to their ways. He accepted the Jewish God and their prophets, the idea of fixed law embodied in scripture - the Koran being an Arabic substitute for the Bible - and the addition of an Oral Law applied in religious courts."
There is no argument that the Arab world into which Mohammed was born was badly in need of moral values and social reform. The Mecca of his day was a central place of pagan worship. The Arab tribesmen of the region worshipped a pantheon of gods there, including Al-Lat, the sun goddess, and Al-Uzza, a goddess associated with the planet Venus, both of whom were daughters of the chief deity, known as Al-Ilah, (Allah) or "the God."
In Mecca stands Kaaba, the shrine enclosing the famous black meteorite, a former site of pagan worship. The Kaaba, the shrine enclosing the famous black meteorite which was worshipped in Mecca before Mohammed's time, was also a site for an altar where blood sacrifices were offered to these and other gods.
The morality of the neighboring tribesmen could, charitably, be described as chaotic. Huston Smith, in his classic The Religions of Man, (p. 219) goes so far as to call the Arab society before the advent of Mohammed "barbaric." Tribal loyalties were paramount; other than that, nothing served to mitigate the blood feuds, drunken brawls and orgies that the harsh life of the desert gave sway to. 
When he had made Medina his stronghold, Mohammed mobilized an army of 10,000 men and, in 630 CE, moved against Mecca, meaning to purify the Kaaba and turn it into a center of worship of one God, Allah. His success is legendary. Two years later, when he died all of Arabia was under Muslim control."
 
1400 years later the conquering is in full swing.
<<<On the topic of the Maimonides>>> Source: Joseph Telushkin. Jewish Literacy. NY: William Morrow and Co., 1991
Maimonides's full name was Moses ben Maimon; in Hebrew he is known by the acronym of Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Rambam. He was born in Spain shortly before the fanatical Muslim Almohades came to power there. To avoid persecution by the Muslim sect — which was wont to offer Jews and Christians the choice of conversion to Islam or death — Maimonides fled with his family, first to Morocco, later to Israel, and finally to Egypt.
Philosophically, Maimonides was a religious rationalist. His damning attacks on people who held ideas he regarded as primitive — those, for example, who understood literally such biblical expressions as “the finger of God” so infuriated his opponents that they proscribed parts of his code and all of The Guide to the Perplexed. Other, more liberal, spirits forbade study of the Guide to anyone not of mature years.
To this day, Maimonides and the French­Jewish sage Rashi are the most widely studied Jewish scholars. Contemporary yeshiva students generally focus on the Mishneh Torah, and his Book of Commandments (Sefer ha­Mitzvot) a compilation of the Torah's 613 commandments. Maimonides also formulated a credo of Judaism expressed in thirteen articles of faith, a popular reworking of which (the Yigdal prayer) appears in most Jewish prayerbooks. Among other things, this credo affirms belief in the oneness of God, the divine origins of the Torah, and the afterlife. Its twelfth statement of faith — “I believe with a full heart in the coming of the Messiah, and even though he may tarry I will still wait for him” — was often among the last words said by Jews being marched into Nazi gas chambers.
Maimonides was one of the few Jewish thinkers whose teachings also influenced the non­Jewish world; much of his philosophical writings in the Guide were about God and other theological issues of general, not exclusively Jewish, interest. Thomas Aquinas refers in his writings to “Rabbi Moses,” and shows considerable familiarity with the Guide. In 1985, on the 850th anniversary of Maimonides's birth, Pakistan and Cuba — which do not recognize Israel — were among the co­sponsors of a UNESCO conference in Paris on Maimonides. Vitali Naumkin, a Soviet scholar, observed on this occasion: “;Maimonides is perhaps the only philosopher in the Middle Ages, perhaps even now, who symbolizes a confluence of four cultures: Greco­Roman, Arab, Jewish, and Western.” More remarkably, Abderrahmane Badawi, a Muslim professor from Kuwait University, declared: “I regard him first and foremost as an Arab thinker.” This sentiment was echoed by Saudi Arabian professor Huseyin Atay, who claimed that “if you didn't know he was Jewish, you might easily make the mistake of saying that a Muslim was writing.” That is, if you didn't read any of his Jewish writings. Maimonides scholar Shlomo Pines delivered perhaps the most accurate assessment at the conference: “Maimonides is the most influential Jewish thinker of the Middle Ages, and quite possibly of all time” (Time magazine, December 23, 1985). As a popular Jewish expression of the Middle Ages declares: “From Moses [of the Torah] to Moses [Maimonides] there was none like Moses.” 
While Maimonides wrote in Arabic it would be respectful to honor the origins  and culture which your main page "Allah" does not display.
:Who writes this kind of none sense? I mean, who in the world has time on their hands for writing or even reading this BS —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.99.60.243 (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and Islam 

message: At the risk of "stoking the fire" I have a concern about the following statement and related statements.
:Mainstream Muslims and mainstream Christians typically agree that they do not represent the same deity's attributes, while both parties assign the same basic definition to the word "God" and the word "Allah." It is often preferred in popular religious media to maintain the two separate words because it is mutually agreed by the two belief systems that their deities differ in many attributes. Sometimes each party believes the other one serves a false deity; therefore the literary distinction is maintained.
The most serious concern about this statement is that it could be considered blasphemy by some Muslims. The Quran states (mind you I am no Islamic scholar) that Christians and Jews are People of the Book which means that, by definition, they do worship the same deity. The fact that they hold different beliefs about Him is a completely separate matter. I realize that the author here probably "meant" it this way but regardless of what was "meant" that's not what it says. Certainly it is true that some Muslims interpret the Quran differently in this regard but the article is walking on dangerous ground by implying that this is mainstream Muslim thinking.
Apart from that historically speaking all these religions are based on a common tradition so even just from an objective perspective the article should not be "assuming" that the religions worship different deities. Although obviously some Christians believe this (as shown by the above discussion), this certainly is not the universal opinion of the Christian community either.
It is certainly reasonable to mention these differing opinions but treating this particular viewpoint as the "common thinking" is at best unwise (and POV). I am going to attempt to rephrase a little. Please comment if you disagree.
--Mcorazao 16:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rephrasing on debate in popular media? 

message: The wars between posters here must have been very fierce indeed. The first sentence of the History section isn't even grammatical anymore. It's like reading Tertullian to try to find out what heretics believed: you know there's a context, you just aren't told what it is, so a lot of head scratching results.
Fix and freeze at least this one short section, History. If only the Muslim view can be given because a fatwa or cyber-attack might result otherwise, however gently any other view was phrased (which seems unlikely to me unless someone starts uploading cartoons) say that. Otherwise, give the two sides even if you're going to refute one. Right now it reads like a transitional version of the Soviet People's Encyclopedia or something. A mangled half of one view is the most one can be puzzled out.
Understanding of any kind isn't likely to result from this page as it is.
I have no opinion about the content - what little I can understand of it - I came here for information, and am confronted with an article one can't actually make sense of which reeks of censor-wars. Whose been at it and what used to be here I couldn't say. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.69.130.131 (talk) 21:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone fix the History section 

message: I don't why someone who's reading about the word "Allah" has to know about the Hebrew word Eloah which was used as a synonym, along with a quote from Jesus and suddenly having the paragraph end with a greek trasnlation of the word ... Cloud02 12:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind the question, i removed the paragraph because the exact same paragraph appears later in the article Cloud02 12:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology last paragraph 

message: I have removed this material as plainly ridiculous, and too marginal to warrant inclusion on this article. I did enjoy reading it, but it's not right that Wikipedia should be making me laugh.Proabivouac 09:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. That was pretty funny. I think it is an english tradition to take the first letters of a couple of words and make up a new word out of it. Am I right? --Aminz 09:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These are called Acronyms. See also Hamas. However, I believe that very few everyday words arise from this process; most explanations along these lines are folk (and false) etymologies. English speakers are very conscious of the distinction between acronyms and real words, even when those acronyms are associated with wordlike pronunciation conventions.Proabivouac 09:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm. We don't have any acronym in Farsi. But I like it. --Aminz 09:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't fully agree.  It has been used in African American Islam and--well, this article doesn't even mandate that it is part of Islam.  It seems notable overall, to me since I've read about it in quite a few articles.  This isn't just a false etymology... it's a religious belief from a notable religion.  It's also not so nice to laugh... :/  --gren グレン 12:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arm, Leg, Leg, Arm, Head 

message: Since Allah is a direct 'translation' of 'God', shouldn't this article be merged and redirect to the God article? Why do we have two God articles? We could have a section in the God article about God in Islam... Sfacets 09:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose Historically (the aspect which Wikipedia is supposed to present), Allah is very much different than the Christian God. Both are viewed differently by those who follow them and those who do not, and both taught their "prophets" different sets of rules. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hojimachong (talk • contribs) 05:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Which is appropriate, because the article deals with the etymology, typography, and history of the word "Allah". Historically, it has been used differently. --Hojimachongtalk 01:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect to God 

message: I am returning to this topic after some years have passed. I original had posted Arabic Lexicon sources that was removed which was needed in this discussion in which many people have been requesting for.
So that I am not suspected of altering a quoted source I have quoted the sources below and links to scanned images to the actual page source. This info would have stoped many unsupported assumption being made in this discussion if someone had not removed the original posted and reference source to Arabic Lexicographic authority. {} are mine in the quote :
Source #1 "Edward William Lane's Lexicon"
" الله {Alllah}, [written with the disjunctive alif الله, meaning God, i.e. the only true god,] accord. to the most correct of the opinions respecting it, which are twenty in number, (K,) or more than thirty, (MF) is a proper name, (Msb,K,) applied to the Being who exists necessarily, by Himself, comprising all the attributes of perfection; (TA;) a proper name denoting the true god, comprising all the excellent divine names; a unity comprising all the essences of existing things; (Ibn-El-Arabee, TA;) the ال {AL} being inseparable from it; (Msb:) not derived:....... {Image of complete entry http://img426.imageshack.us/img426/4340/ewlanelexiconnn0.jpg Entry starts from right to left}
Source #2 Abdul Mannan Omar's Lexical Dictionary of the Quran 
Allah.....It is the proper noun applied to the Supreme Being, Who is the sole possessor of all perfect attributes, Who is free from all defects and Who exists necessarily by Himself. It is not a common noun. All Divine atributes mentioned in the Holy Quran are qualities of the proper name Allah. No other language has a distinctive name for the Divine being. the nsames found in other languages are either attributive or descriptive and can be used in the plural form, but the word Allah is never used for any other thing, being or deity. It is never used as a qualifying word. Sibwaih and Khalil say, Since Al in the beginign of the word is inseparable from it si it is a simple sub-stantive, not derived from any other word. the word Allah is not a contraction of al-ilah, as some people tend to believe, but quite a different word................{Image of complete entry Page 28 http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/6815/abdulmannanomardictofthxh4.jpg Page 29 http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/5408/abdulmannanomardictofthkb6.jpg
The above are Arabic Lexographic Authority of the Arabic word. Oxy2Hydro 20:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lexicographic Sources 

message: I oppose merge. No need for that. --Aminz 07:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why keep two pages about the same subject? Someone might think Allah and God are two separate entities (duotheism) Aminullah 16:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This article is about the Word itself. Not what it means in Islam, thus Oppose. Cloud02 10:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, this article is not specifically about Allah in Islam. Allah is simply the Arabic word for God used by Arab Christians as well. Muslims don't own it. --Aminz 10:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Saying that "Allah" is "God" is just as POV as saying that "Eloi" is God. "Eloi Eloi, lama sabachthani"--Kirby♥time 02:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Aminz, my opinion is that God in Islam should be redirected to Allah. There's nothing much in God in Islam anyway. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 03:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was correctly pointed out that Arab Christians also refer to God as Allah, as Allah is simply the Arabic word for God.  I do, however, think that God in Islam should be merged with Tawhid. MezzoMezzo 15:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: This removal was really uncalled for.  Why all this apprehension?--71.108.12.39 (talk) 02:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think the word "apprehension" means what you think it means. ناهد(dAnāhita)  07:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that your fear knowledge.--71.108.12.39 (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not apprehensive about your edits. Consensus long holds that the material you've posted is fringe theory and unencyclopedic. There is a whole article called Criticism of Islam that mentions such theories, but they don't belong here. Read the archives for an in-depth discussion of the situation. ناهد(dAnāhita)  15:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call the current version of the article achieved through the obstinacy of a few Islamic editors the result of a "consensus."--71.108.0.175 (talk) 15:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New deletion