Salamualaykum who can read this,

I began this writing with a question about the translations that follow, from Surah The Women at verse 157. This article of my writing you will only find repetitive if you first realise my meaning well.

For non-Muslim Christians reading this, you can use these translations to know there is no difference between He whom is called Isa and He whom is called Jesus; they are the same man and in everlasting life, only differently named in different language of a different time.

Salamualaykum who can read this,

I began this writing with a question about the translations that follow, from Surah The Women at verse 157. This article of my writing you will only find repetitive if you first realise my meaning well.
For non-Muslim Christians reading this, you can use these translations to know there is no difference between He whom is called Isa and He whom is called Jesus; they are the same man and in everlasting life, only differently named in different language of a different time.

I have witnessed the following verse often use to attempt to repudiate Gospel. Bear in mind that in Qur’an we are commanded to refer to Gospel as the real teaching, and also Torah. We are instructed that there is an “abrogation” of Torah and Gospel into Qur’an, such that Qur’an is knowable to sustain the entirety of Torah and Gospel, yet with many less words in use, such that finding the vision of reality can be a more elusive pursuit.
The verse I am begun by questioning the translation of is:

English Yusuf Ali: [4:157]
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
English Shakir: [4:157]
And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure.
English Qaribullah: [4:157]
and for their saying, 'We killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger (and Prophet) of Allah.' They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but to them, he (the crucified) had been given the look (of Prophet Jesus). Those who differ concerning him (Prophet Jesus) are surely in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge of him, except the following of supposition, and (it is) a certainty they did not kill him.
English Muhsin Khan: [4:157]
And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) <><> <>]:
English Pickthall: [4:157]
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture ; they slew him not for certain,


What is clear to me is that Isa was not killed. Yet there are many whom use this verse to support an argument that he was not placed upon a wooden cross among thieves. To my belief there were many witnesses of that fact, and within the lifetime of those witnesses, the Jewish scribe named Josephus by the Romans, detailed the events of Isa’s life, as were relevant to the Roman written records of the time. The historical evidence is good enough that the Christian’s who believe in Allah, will hold Muslims whom refute the evidence of the wooden cross, accountable in Allah. There is evidence of this in the group of Hafiz being born among Christian households. Yet I would that we all become Muslim again.

What I am in sound belief in Allah of is: that Isa was placed upon a cross to die, and after it came to be that the sensibility of all those around him, had begun to believe he could not still be consciously enabled through his body, and enabled by only the same miracle as his whole life is in being a messenger of Allah, He is alive, and thus his actions were always proving to us that life can continue. The verse tells that he was not killed, and that is clear. It tells also in these translations he was not “crucified”. My own understanding of the meaning of the original is that he was not condemned by Humanity to have to endure the passage of Jahannam. Yet that his mind could understand that men will traverse that mentality, became of his own experience, whilst his body seemed as though dead. His mind undertook that process by will so as that he was never “Salaba”, which is the root verb in Arabic, that has been translated into English as “crucified”.

This verse is being used wrongly in a shirk, to portray myself, and many other Muslims, as though ill for ever having believed it acceptable in Allah and as a Muslim, to enter a Christian Church and pray alongside another believer in Allah and in Isa. But it is also used by Christians to repudiate Islam; when in fact it has not any connection with authority to deny Islam and our orientation in Islam to belief with Isa in Allah.

I am in knowledge of many born able to recite Qur’an in Arabic, whom are being born today in Christian families. A friend of mine is such a man, and has expressed a dislike of the idea of becoming a Muslim only because of Muslims whom repudiate the fact of Isa having suffered so as all mankind will be able to be forgiven. Why are modern Muslims not being enabled to realise that Islam teaches that same forgiveness simply by instructing every Human within the same basic teaching? Islam should not be bowing down to accepting the lie that there are not Jews and Christians among us, whom are now also Muslims. We can not sustain our Islam whilst letting ourselves become tricked into the falsehood that Jews and Christians are not also enabled to sustain their mind in Allah, only so long as they can believe. To portray every Christian and Jew as being damned with shaytan, is to accuse them and so bears the same account in Allah of the wrong of that the accusation is of. We all know and will ever argue that being Muslim can not be defined as having fallen into committing wrong in sihr, which is as the those named as christians, but whom shirk, have attempted to define us, by tricking the worth of Islam out of real belief with Isa in the passage into Jannah. So let us not fall into that same fault by refuting the real believers whose education has provided their minds with faith in Allah through Christian and Judaic scripture. Or even Hindu, or non-textual Animist faith. If a Human mind is in Allah, we can not be in Allah ourselves if we deny that fact.

I believe that there are many very simple reconciliations of real Christian belief and Islam, but that false differences, are being forced upon many believers. Those differences become usually more apparent to those persons whom want to shirk about their own belief, but also apparent to the astute among those whom they persecute by their shirk. The reason that such falsehoods are being imposed is because of the money which the military investors make from war. Therefore it is wrong of us to let such shirks be enabled.

Many Muslims whom are in real faith in Isa, and believe he was indeed hung upon a cross but that those whom placed him there could not ‘crucify’/ nor kill him, fear being isolated as I have been within Islam, and this is a fact the Ummah must accommodate. I am not isolated by being naïve to the work of shaytan and the shirking that tries to impose the identity of a non-believer upon the real believers; but am isolated because no man could believe that I can sustain the belief required through Isa in Allah, if truly I am still alike to a child in mind, and unable to protect my self from the abuse of the shirk. This is truly my experience, and nobody can remove the experience of any child. I will not suffer that my own children are also denied their real faith in Allah, and through Isa. But I am prevented from providing them with Qur’an. Even I have purchased CD’s of recital, but those whom removed my sons from me, by defiling my own belief, will not enabled my children to listen. So all they have is their knowledge in Isa through mainstream Christian contexts, which are also too often fully an embodiment of shirk. Yet all believers are sustained in belief through such formulations of the teaching as non-believers suppose might only sustain the shirk. I will sustain myself as a Muslim despite the wrong accusations of being an “apopate” which are too often fired against Muslims by other Muslims; but will also that my children can learn that my Islam is correct to the reality of Jesus/Isa, one unique individual man, whom could not be forced to loose his complete accountibility in Allah. My children need his example, even to be brave enough to begin to listen to those CD’s while surrounded, as they are, by non-believers, and still so young as 15, 13, and 10.
Those Muslims I have witnessed to be engaging in shirk, are likely have been sponsored by the North American evangelical style churches, but also likely to have been sponsored by East Asian organised crime, or many and any other misconstruction of the truth to enabled shirk. But all the while, the Ummah, is in fact in agreement that no Muslim can define another person whom has claimed a Muslim identity, and whom has pronounced Shahada, as though they had not so pronounced. Even those whom shirk, or are just ignorant to their fall into the Rosicrucian sort of shirk, will be sustained in Islam within their commitment in having pronounced Shahada. Anybody whom doubts this fact needs to attend to the level at which Muslim scholars have agreed to this, as is known to me, and promoted at http://www.ammanmessage.com The Amman Message is the mainstream of Islam, and demonstrates the real worth in Islam, and there are no Muslims whom can sustain denying the fact, without proving inevitably to the world that they shirk. The signatories to the Amman Message are inclusive of those whom we might only too easily suppose to be among the propagators of the shirk; but in Islam we do not accuse them, and we enable their Islamic identification. This is why I am a Muslim and not a Christian, because I have found no such protection among the organised structures named Christian. Yet I can sustain protection for my self and my children only by my knowledge of the Amman Message. Many Muslims pray for us in this, and in Islam the Ummah is better prepared for what may happen in times to come, than the preparation that the Revelations of Jesus to Saint John the Evangelist, can alone have managed to prepare us. Mohammad’s work is truly great because of this fact, that He is to be blessed.
The real difference between Christian belief and Islam, is that Christians are expected to comprehend the nature of Forgiveness as a preventative concept; but while Muslims are instructed in a longer process of learning to accept that level of being able to Forgive in which we can truly be Forgiven of our own truth in Isa. To assume that Forgiveness is to just let the act being forgiven go ahead, is to refute Jesus very meaning. Christian churches are not protecting their congregations from the shirk even in the most basic teaching of what to be forgiven really is. I realise that many many Muslims are in far more gracious and realised in constance of realisation of Jesus meaning in teaching of Forgiveness, than are most whom are named Christian, and yet Hafiz are been born among the Christian Ummah. When I first learned my Islam, the context was of a method of teaching those whom are already learned to believe in their self through Christian dogma; and the instruction was to not want to believe in ourselves as Christian, until we are totally convinced in Jesus every act. This method is the way with Isa/Jesus in Islam. We can realise that we need our own evidence in Islam. And when that evidence is supplied we must believe it. The difference is within the quality at which we find we are eventually all becoming unable to refute Isa. Christian and Muslim experience is essentially the same, but in Islam we are informed of the process of that experience; and thus informed we know better than to claim of the identity of being with Isa, until that fact is indeed reality.
The worth of the Christian world, in the evidence of Jesus, will be returning to Islam, because of the agreements made in the past between Christians and Muslims, having been broken by those naming themselves Christian while in actual ignorance of what Jesus meaning is, and this fact is in full evidence in my own experience; but such worth of evidence can not transpire to any Muslim whom pursues that same shirk about the meaning of forgiving with Isa. Nevertheless, today, I know many more Muslims in true believe with Jesus, than I know of those within Christian identification whom claim to have the real story of Jesus as their own, and claim of it as though no Muslim can know it, only because we sustain belief in the verse I quote.

My full belief is that: even in fearing being confronted by other Muslims, whom had wanted to depose me in my Islam because of my ability to believe in Isa ever alive, my ability to believe the truth in Isa when within a Christian framework of teaching, and my support of his teaching of Everlasting life; is that I can still orient my belief in Isa better among Muslims than among those Christian Churches whom sponsor the falsifications in Islam. So I will continue in Islam within a fully Muslim self identification, but I can not deny my belief that an attempt was made to crucify and kill Isa, that the attempt was as extreme as nailing him to a wooden cross among thieves, and the failure of that attempt speaks of the immeasurable worth to every Human of believing in Allah through Isa. How else might we ever attain Jannah, for the Angel of Death will not show us the way unless we are of strong will in Isa, to endure what each we are potentially able to so suffer while sustaining clear will to our account in Allah. The experience of the grave is the reality which will prove me.

So my question became about the full textual interpretations in tafseer of the verse I quoted above. Are there Muslims whom can provide any data for repudiating those Muslims whom have used the verse to try to prove to my children and my father, that I am not a Muslim?

Specifically I have recently read the following I now quote from “skillganon”, a moderator at the My Islam Web internet forum, also named Musa, in a copyright post of text about Isa. I will use his quote here because I believe his belief is sound to that he has been educated for. Musa displays considerable English language scholarship in his post about the crucifixion of Jesus, and in many other similar posts. He writes:

“There seems to be an agreement that the correct interpretation is that the resemblance of ‘Eesa (Jesus) was put over another man.”

The fact to my knowledge is that such a framework of belief is that which the Rosicrucians sponsor, and thus is exactly what we are asked not to believe through other verses of Qur’an. Those verses which warn us of the falsification in which Trinity is not able to be understood by the contemporary mind, are the same exact falsification. Musa goes on to write that Jesus actualised laughter at those whom had been tricked by such a process and had supposed him dead; but when my own lessons in Isa include that of a fact that He never laughed. How can such a problem exist between Muslims that we can not find the same evidence? (not to mention the shirk having been placed into my capitalisation of “He” when referring to Isa, as though I had been in idolatry – but when rather my real meaning is of deference to him in his being a Man, and myself woman; in which I as easily can write of Musa, that He is a commendable Muslim scholar.)

I know that perhaps those many other Muslims whom believe with me in Isa, will only be able to regard this post as naïve and to be overly exposing my self; but I can not lie in this matter. Neither am I receiving enough protection from within the Ummah to cover myself in a Muslim identity whenever those whom repudiate Isa try to deny my Islam. The real Christians in my life, unsupported by church institutions, are those more likely to want to protect my mind, when my family will not, but are usually themselves also unable to lie in Isa and that is why they are not Muslim. My family are not protecting me because, although I am unwed, I refuse to accept the conditioning of making accusations, and also refuse to deny the lesson of Ka’ba; and this has been a life long experience in which I have proven multiple times I can not alone change my parents mind about my refusal to accuse. Today because I am a Muslim they suppose that their allegations against me are justified, but then I find that other Muslims are supporting my parents refusal to protect me, by such acts as sending me personal messages in internet forums which accuse me of not being in Allah because of my faith in Isa. These sort of experiences are escalating around me, in conjunction with the Australian police having been escalating a supposition of having control over my living, and being able to protect themselves from their knowledge that they have done wrong to my children and thus also to my self in motherhood. So it becomes very clear to me that a large shirk is taking place, that is engaging in the falsification of Isa’s life’s work, and it is exactly that shirk which Qur’an orients the mind against. Where I live I am not being made welcome at Mosque because of this orientation in my belief, and I am neither welcome in any local Christian Church while in Hijab.

How can I respond to this situation other than to read it as a sign in Allah such as prophesy indicates will take place.

Inshallah I will be enabled in repudiating every Muslim whom has fallen into the rosicrucian lies about Isa.

Subhanallah those whom portray their own belief as Christian and defy Isa through their own falisifications of Islam, will find their end with my own.

In my own life I have had to accommodate meeting with a larger than is normal quantity of individual persons whom are the shaytan. Therefore, I have had to learn to accommodate fully in Isa, the teaching of why, and how to prevent myself falling to their method. If I had not so learned I could not now still be of this life. It is clear that Jesus/Isa sufferance was to defeat the shaytan and to defeat the mentality in which Jehannam is comprehended. It is clearest in that what he taught thereafter, of Revelations to Saint John the Evangelist, (whom is recognised among Muslims), about the events of the future in which the accounting is fully revealed to every Human being, for every act which today is still of unaccountable wrong of sihr. Isa’s accomplishment is no less, and is in fact the necessary pre-requiste for Islam to have become the perfected Deen. We need Isa for his revelation which Mohammed existed within, and need Mohammed’s work so as to ourselves comprehend Isa as we need. The fact that all Jehannam’s fear, was Isa’s to first count, is why we are commanded to accomodate Gospel as Muslims. Yet Christians must make no mistake in this, because we are also commanded never to enable any person whom is not already a Muslim, to hold any account against us.

I can believe that there were many non-believers whom nailed Isa to a wooden cross: but that so nailed up among criminals, they could not kill him, and neither could they impose upon him, or upon anybody, to believe of him that he could have been belonging among those of the criminal mentality of Jehannam/the fire that is named also as Hell.

Thanks here need to be given to a Muslim whom responded to my initial article posted at the trinimuslims website, for their providing the word "salaba" into the dialogue. I have been pondering the full meaning of this root verb today, while re-editing this article. The word usually translated as “to crucify” is the derivative “salabuuhu” which implies also a choice is in transition. Yet we can not comprehend salabuuhu, without first being certain of salaba. Salaba has a strong connotation within my own immediate mental associations, with having committed an act which did participate in causing that Jehannam exists. The “s” and “l” imply a certainty of truth that need be held alone in Allah because it is only to be borne in danger, while the “b” implies an active participation. In that we can know that being receptive to being nailed upon a cross can not possibly fulfill the meaning. But that those whom nailed Isa to a cross, were accustomed to believing that any person so hung to die, might want to attempt to access knowledge of wrong committed in sihr, so as to escape the penality of their own public death among criminals. So clearly the words are in application to Isa in his mental capability rather than only in the bodily experience.

The translation into English of 'to crucify' is suffering from the world in which shirk has been applied to the meaning of 'to crucify'; such that we are being limited in our comprehension of Arabic by the translation of Arabic into English. The Arabic original holds no creedence in denying that Isa was nailed to a wooden cross.

Inshallah everyone will realise this in time to avert the perils of the war in the middle east from going too far.

Skillganon has also replied to my original article, and begins to be telling very truthfully, that it is an accepted point of view in Islam, that Isa was only "made to appear" as though dead and crucified, and the next three paragraphs are how I respond:

The words "made to appear" are not exclusive of the concept that being actually nailed to a wooden cross is how it was made to appear that Isa was killed and crucified. In fact in many languages the word for to crucify is a word meaning to be killed while in mind of entering Jehannam. Qur'an is telling us that no person could impose upon Isa that he die while in mind of Jehannam.

We must be very careful about a shirk having been embedded with a falsehood about the entymology of the word "Christ". One Muslim suggested to myself that the Greek, "Christos" is enabling more than the English "Christ" because of the extent of the shirk in the English language. To crucify is a term defined not by nailing to a cross, but by the intending of those whom commit the act being to force the person they nail to seem like a criminal, and thus to seem to need to enter Jehannam. It is akin to translation from Arabic about a person being stoned to death, and Mohammed speaking against such.

Also, I know that there is a mainstream accepted view point among Muslims, but when I read Qur'an what arises in my mind has a far better reconciliation with the Gospel in any of the translations I can find were being depicted through commentary. So long as we bear Allah in mind, we do not fall into the shirk of those whom abused the translators real worth.

I will add to this now, that there is also that difference between the mind entering into acknowledging Jehannam through Ka’ba, in which truly a state of salaba is implied, and the mind acknowledging jehannam through only having been informed that another Human life was suffering the sate of salaba. Truly Isa found his mind, if ever, able to acknowledge Jehannam, only through forgiving among whom find their minds entrapped by wrongs committed in sihr. Yet they could not force Isa to salaba.

What needs to be consistently clarified, is the devout belief enabled through Isa, that no person could ever in Allah, or even without being in Allah, impose upon any other person that their mind accepts the status of being in Christos/crucified/stoned/salaba. If our mind knows salaba it is of our own actions to have caused such. This is the lesson that Ka’ba embodies, and our need of this lesson is why Abraham built it for Ishmael. Today already even the descendants of Isaac are in need of utilising Ka’ba to ascertain our depth of salaba.

Just as we must all eventually accept ourselves as the cause of our own death, we must also accept that alike to killing, it is a sin to impose fear of being caught eternally in Jehannam upon the mind of any other person. If a person every enacted such a deed as might justify that state of existing, it is theirs to know and no other person’s knowledge to have. Thus even we might realise that to accuse any other person, the acquiring of what to accuse with, becomes the fact of an active entry to the condition in salaba.

That fear is akin to the fear that life is not. And yet within that sort of fear, which here in Australia is already being imposed upon many Indigenous children, only when we can comprehend that existence is constant, and thus in Allah eternity can be, is it that we naturally are caused to want to fear the fire of Jehannam being an enduring phenomenon. If a person such as a kaffur, who can not sustain constance of mind in time, supposes of what salaba is meaning, then their conception of Jehannam is diminished, but such that they openly seek to know of further. Thus we whom can commit, during Ramadan, to realising our own culpability in acts of kafr, as causal to the kaffur existing, will even want that there is not very strong emphasis being placed upon translations of specific meanings such as salaba. This is true simply because the kaffur (and shaytan) are who suppose, in their imaginations, that Jehannam might be avoided once having wanted entry to that path. While Human minds of any sort, can only seek to avoid. Yet the Human mind can conceive of the meaning of salaba, while a kaffur just can not, unless their whole life is totally accepted as the responsibility of a Human. Even though we realise that the shaytan are supposing of themselves to be doing the acts of causing the actual kaffur to exist, by forcing the minds of children to kafr; if we Human beings can not accept that our account in Allah needs to mind that the kaffur have an accountability to us more strongly than to the shaytan (since they are truly fully ignorant to the effects of their ill mindedness), then we also fall into that salaba state which the shaytan caused by imposing kafr. That is to say, the imposition of kafr mind upon a child can not cause their salaba, but only the acceptance of the truth of how to prevent the kaffur can enable even children to want to find the mind comprehensive of salaba. Ka’ba thus is built to enable that we learn also to prevent salaba, through whatever process each of us therein may find is our own.

So in Isa, what we learn is that He also sought to disprove of that which Satan approached him to inform him of Jehannam about. And that his experience in walking among the evidence which disproves that Jehannam could be eternity for a Human being, did lead him into a situation in which it seemed to many that he was killed and forced into Jehannam because he became done of salaba; most likely because he was nailed to a wooden cross, ceased breathing, and is then placed in a tomb, and the public spectacle was such an unbearable thing to witness, that the witnesses overly imagined of how unfathomable the experience could have been for Jesus.. Yet he was amid experiencing a miracle in Allah, in that his life was still fully evident to himself, and because his life was also fully evident within perfect innocence, the fact that there were forces pressuring him into the mind in Christos/in Ka'ba, as though of bearing Jehannam eternally, is that his internal experience could also disprove to him that any person can force another into the fire through forcing the state of doing the self into salaba. As a Prophet, Isa was in life attuned to the Angel of Death, as every Prophet can only be, liken to those whom experience dying and being revived as approaching a bright white light and being questioned; and so what he kept an account upon during the experience of being nailed to the cross can only have been fully acquitted in Allah, and even begun to be accounted for along with him before he undertook accepting being nailed to the cross. His acceptance of being nailed to a wooden cross, is the best sustained evidence for Humanity of everlasting life in Jannah, and so we must not diminish that.

This is what is most of all important about his life. That he gives evidence that we can not be forced into the fire through having found our self salaba, or into death. Therefore we must accept the mentality of such to be a fault in our own Human condition where such mentality exists. The fire is that end which many will fall to, not by our forcing them, but by our own believing realisations of the reality of what salaba is in our own being, and how it is that Isa avoided that.

How individuals read Qur'an such that ‘the story’ of it, or ‘the song’, or ‘the recital’ in sequence of each Surah, gives such evidence, is perhaps not necessarily always needful of the full data about Isa being nailed to a wooden cross; only so long as the truth that nobody could force death or Jehannam through salaba upon him, even with his awareness already of the lesson in Ka'ba, is really able to be accepted. (in editing this paragraph I first spelt salaba with a capital “S”, in which a shirk became applied through the shaytan interfering with my living memory, therefore this paragraph can now become the route out of the state of salaba for me, which had been orienting to the very word, and also this can provide the way through realising that the fire is not eternal for those who fell not by choice, but by being imposed upon with that very shirk in the word: think clearly thus about what I might have been intending in making this paragraph.)

Despite the fact that Muslims are proven to be able to sustain faith in Isa and Everlasting life, while having been tricked about major interpretative meaning; it is also the case that among Masonic Temples, and especially the rosicrucian factions of, there has been massive efforts made to try to prove that Muslims are not in real faith in Isa, because that is how there exists any semblance of justification of the war in the Middle East. Thus we must not fall to such fallacies. And such has been the significance of this form of shirk, that it became essential to undo it, even at the expense of being overly exposed among many whom want to shirk.

If you find your mind trained into believing that Isa was not who was nailed to the cross, then try also to remember that when we take the lesson of Jesus correctly, we must not preclude those whom have been raised to believe that Isa was nailed to a cross and gave his evidence against the shaytan from within His body in such extreme suffering. If we preclude those whom believe that the story is of the real world, then we are falling into entrapment of seeming to cause that which incriminates our enemies the shaytan, and in which Freemasons are accusing Muslims of being at fault, and supposing of therefore as though the cause of war in the middle east.

But in the world there is needing to be a mass reconciliation between the Christian economy in fall to gog and magog, and the economy in Islam which is truer to Isa.

That is why I make this post.

The word in question, usually translated into English as to crucify, has in Arabic the verb root "Salaba"

They could not cause that a force be used to do salaba to Isa
They could not kill Isa
But these facts can not disprove that he became nailed to a wooden cross

The reality is that his worth is all the more meaningful, especially among those whom can recall lynchings etc, when we know that even nailed upon a wooden cross and left to die; there was no method by which Isa/Jesus became salaba. Because of this very meaning, we must bear with disputing those whom try to tell us that the real Isa was not nailed to a cross.

The fact of salaba is connected with loosing full accountibility through Isa, and in Allah, for your every act. That we realise thorugh Ka'ba is only the consequence of being salaba.

They could not kill nor impose salaba to Jesus

Salaba is to loose full accountibility in Allah of one's every moment

That they could not Salabuuhu Isa, is that he could not be forced to choose belief in the shirk as method to reduce the pain he experienced nailed to the cross.

Ramadan Mubarak Salam


I have witnessed the following verse often use to attempt to repudiate Gospel. Bear in mind that in Qur’an we are commanded to refer to Gospel as the real teaching, and also Torah. We are instructed that there is an “abrogation” of Torah and Gospel into Qur’an, such that Qur’an is knowable to sustain the entirety of Torah and Gospel, yet with many less words in use, such that finding the vision of reality can be a more elusive pursuit.
The verse I am begun by questioning the translation of is:

English Yusuf Ali: [4:157]
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
English Shakir: [4:157]
And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure.
English Qaribullah: [4:157]
and for their saying, 'We killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger (and Prophet) of Allah.' They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but to them, he (the crucified) had been given the look (of Prophet Jesus). Those who differ concerning him (Prophet Jesus) are surely in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge of him, except the following of supposition, and (it is) a certainty they did not kill him.
English Muhsin Khan: [4:157]
And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) <><> <>]:
English Pickthall: [4:157]
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture ; they slew him not for certain,


What is clear to me is that Isa was not killed. Yet there are many whom use this verse to support an argument that he was not placed upon a wooden cross among thieves. To my belief there were many witnesses of that fact, and within the lifetime of those witnesses, the Jewish scribe named Josephus by the Romans, detailed the events of Isa’s life, as were relevant to the Roman written records of the time. The historical evidence is good enough that the Christian’s who believe in Allah, will hold Muslims whom refute the evidence of the wooden cross, accountable in Allah. There is evidence of this in the group of Hafiz being born among Christian households. Yet I would that we all become Muslim again.

What I am in sound belief in Allah of is: that Isa was placed upon a cross to die, and after it came to be that the sensibility of all those around him, had begun to believe he could not still be consciously enabled through his body, and enabled by only the same miracle as his whole life is in being a messenger of Allah, He is alive, and thus his actions were always proving to us that life can continue. The verse tells that he was not killed, and that is clear. It tells also in these translations he was not “crucified”. My own understanding of the meaning of the original is that he was not condemned by Humanity to have to endure the passage of Jahannam. Yet that his mind could understand that men will traverse that mentality, became of his own experience, whilst his body seemed as though dead. His mind undertook that process by will so as that he was never “Salaba”, which is the root verb in Arabic, that has been translated into English as “crucified”.

This verse is being used wrongly in a shirk, to portray myself, and many other Muslims, as though ill for ever having believed it acceptable in Allah and as a Muslim, to enter a Christian Church and pray alongside another believer in Allah and in Isa. But it is also used by Christians to repudiate Islam; when in fact it has not any connection with authority to deny Islam and our orientation in Islam to belief with Isa in Allah.

I am in knowledge of many born able to recite Qur’an in Arabic, whom are being born today in Christian families. A friend of mine is such a man, and has expressed a dislike of the idea of becoming a Muslim only because of Muslims whom repudiate the fact of Isa having suffered so as all mankind will be able to be forgiven. Why are modern Muslims not being enabled to realise that Islam teaches that same forgiveness simply by instructing every Human within the same basic teaching? Islam should not be bowing down to accepting the lie that there are not Jews and Christians among us, whom are now also Muslims. We can not sustain our Islam whilst letting ourselves become tricked into the falsehood that Jews and Christians are not also enabled to sustain their mind in Allah, only so long as they can believe. To portray every Christian and Jew as being damned with shaytan, is to accuse them and so bears the same account in Allah of the wrong of that the accusation is of. We all know and will ever argue that being Muslim can not be defined as having fallen into committing wrong in sihr, which is as the those named as christians, but whom shirk, have attempted to define us, by tricking the worth of Islam out of real belief with Isa in the passage into Jannah. So let us not fall into that same fault by refuting the real believers whose education has provided their minds with faith in Allah through Christian and Judaic scripture. Or even Hindu, or non-textual Animist faith. If a Human mind is in Allah, we can not be in Allah ourselves if we deny that fact.

I believe that there are many very simple reconciliations of real Christian belief and Islam, but that false differences, are being forced upon many believers. Those differences become usually more apparent to those persons whom want to shirk about their own belief, but also apparent to the astute among those whom they persecute by their shirk. The reason that such falsehoods are being imposed is because of the money which the military investors make from war. Therefore it is wrong of us to let such shirks be enabled.

Many Muslims whom are in real faith in Isa, and believe he was indeed hung upon a cross but that those whom placed him there could not ‘crucify’/ nor kill him, fear being isolated as I have been within Islam, and this is a fact the Ummah must accommodate. I am not isolated by being naïve to the work of shaytan and the shirking that tries to impose the identity of a non-believer upon the real believers; but am isolated because no man could believe that I can sustain the belief required through Isa in Allah, if truly I am still alike to a child in mind, and unable to protect my self from the abuse of the shirk. This is truly my experience, and nobody can remove the experience of any child. I will not suffer that my own children are also denied their real faith in Allah, and through Isa. But I am prevented from providing them with Qur’an. Even I have purchased CD’s of recital, but those whom removed my sons from me, by defiling my own belief, will not enabled my children to listen. So all they have is their knowledge in Isa through mainstream Christian contexts, which are also too often fully an embodiment of shirk. Yet all believers are sustained in belief through such formulations of the teaching as non-believers suppose might only sustain the shirk. I will sustain myself as a Muslim despite the wrong accusations of being an “apopate” which are too often fired against Muslims by other Muslims; but will also that my children can learn that my Islam is correct to the reality of Jesus/Isa, one unique individual man, whom could not be forced to loose his complete accountibility in Allah. My children need his example, even to be brave enough to begin to listen to those CD’s while surrounded, as they are, by non-believers, and still so young as 15, 13, and 10.
Those Muslims I have witnessed to be engaging in shirk, are likely have been sponsored by the North American evangelical style churches, but also likely to have been sponsored by East Asian organised crime, or many and any other misconstruction of the truth to enabled shirk. But all the while, the Ummah, is in fact in agreement that no Muslim can define another person whom has claimed a Muslim identity, and whom has pronounced Shahada, as though they had not so pronounced. Even those whom shirk, or are just ignorant to their fall into the Rosicrucian sort of shirk, will be sustained in Islam within their commitment in having pronounced Shahada. Anybody whom doubts this fact needs to attend to the level at which Muslim scholars have agreed to this, as is known to me, and promoted at http://www.ammanmessage.com The Amman Message is the mainstream of Islam, and demonstrates the real worth in Islam, and there are no Muslims whom can sustain denying the fact, without proving inevitably to the world that they shirk. The signatories to the Amman Message are inclusive of those whom we might only too easily suppose to be among the propagators of the shirk; but in Islam we do not accuse them, and we enable their Islamic identification. This is why I am a Muslim and not a Christian, because I have found no such protection among the organised structures named Christian. Yet I can sustain protection for my self and my children only by my knowledge of the Amman Message. Many Muslims pray for us in this, and in Islam the Ummah is better prepared for what may happen in times to come, than the preparation that the Revelations of Jesus to Saint John the Evangelist, can alone have managed to prepare us. Mohammad’s work is truly great because of this fact, that He is to be blessed.
The real difference between Christian belief and Islam, is that Christians are expected to comprehend the nature of Forgiveness as a preventative concept; but while Muslims are instructed in a longer process of learning to accept that level of being able to Forgive in which we can truly be Forgiven of our own truth in Isa. To assume that Forgiveness is to just let the act being forgiven go ahead, is to refute Jesus very meaning. Christian churches are not protecting their congregations from the shirk even in the most basic teaching of what to be forgiven really is. I realise that many many Muslims are in far more gracious and realised in constance of realisation of Jesus meaning in teaching of Forgiveness, than are most whom are named Christian, and yet Hafiz are been born among the Christian Ummah. When I first learned my Islam, the context was of a method of teaching those whom are already learned to believe in their self through Christian dogma; and the instruction was to not want to believe in ourselves as Christian, until we are totally convinced in Jesus every act. This method is the way with Isa/Jesus in Islam. We can realise that we need our own evidence in Islam. And when that evidence is supplied we must believe it. The difference is within the quality at which we find we are eventually all becoming unable to refute Isa. Christian and Muslim experience is essentially the same, but in Islam we are informed of the process of that experience; and thus informed we know better than to claim of the identity of being with Isa, until that fact is indeed reality.
The worth of the Christian world, in the evidence of Jesus, will be returning to Islam, because of the agreements made in the past between Christians and Muslims, having been broken by those naming themselves Christian while in actual ignorance of what Jesus meaning is, and this fact is in full evidence in my own experience; but such worth of evidence can not transpire to any Muslim whom pursues that same shirk about the meaning of forgiving with Isa. Nevertheless, today, I know many more Muslims in true believe with Jesus, than I know of those within Christian identification whom claim to have the real story of Jesus as their own, and claim of it as though no Muslim can know it, only because we sustain belief in the verse I quote.

My full belief is that: even in fearing being confronted by other Muslims, whom had wanted to depose me in my Islam because of my ability to believe in Isa ever alive, my ability to believe the truth in Isa when within a Christian framework of teaching, and my support of his teaching of Everlasting life; is that I can still orient my belief in Isa better among Muslims than among those Christian Churches whom sponsor the falsifications in Islam. So I will continue in Islam within a fully Muslim self identification, but I can not deny my belief that an attempt was made to crucify and kill Isa, that the attempt was as extreme as nailing him to a wooden cross among thieves, and the failure of that attempt speaks of the immeasurable worth to every Human of believing in Allah through Isa. How else might we ever attain Jannah, for the Angel of Death will not show us the way unless we are of strong will in Isa, to endure what each we are potentially able to so suffer while sustaining clear will to our account in Allah. The experience of the grave is the reality which will prove me.

So my question became about the full textual interpretations in tafseer of the verse I quoted above. Are there Muslims whom can provide any data for repudiating those Muslims whom have used the verse to try to prove to my children and my father, that I am not a Muslim?

Specifically I have recently read the following I now quote from “skillganon”, a moderator at the My Islam Web internet forum, also named Musa, in a copyright post of text about Isa. I will use his quote here because I believe his belief is sound to that he has been educated for. Musa displays considerable English language scholarship in his post about the crucifixion of Jesus, and in many other similar posts. He writes:

“There seems to be an agreement that the correct interpretation is that the resemblance of ‘Eesa (Jesus) was put over another man.”

The fact to my knowledge is that such a framework of belief is that which the Rosicrucians sponsor, and thus is exactly what we are asked not to believe through other verses of Qur’an. Those verses which warn us of the falsification in which Trinity is not able to be understood by the contemporary mind, are the same exact falsification. Musa goes on to write that Jesus actualised laughter at those whom had been tricked by such a process and had supposed him dead; but when my own lessons in Isa include that of a fact that He never laughed. How can such a problem exist between Muslims that we can not find the same evidence? (not to mention the shirk having been placed into my capitalisation of “He” when referring to Isa, as though I had been in idolatry – but when rather my real meaning is of deference to him in his being a Man, and myself woman; in which I as easily can write of Musa, that He is a commendable Muslim scholar.)

I know that perhaps those many other Muslims whom believe with me in Isa, will only be able to regard this post as naïve and to be overly exposing my self; but I can not lie in this matter. Neither am I receiving enough protection from within the Ummah to cover myself in a Muslim identity whenever those whom repudiate Isa try to deny my Islam. The real Christians in my life, unsupported by church institutions, are those more likely to want to protect my mind, when my family will not, but are usually themselves also unable to lie in Isa and that is why they are not Muslim. My family are not protecting me because, although I am unwed, I refuse to accept the conditioning of making accusations, and also refuse to deny the lesson of Ka’ba; and this has been a life long experience in which I have proven multiple times I can not alone change my parents mind about my refusal to accuse. Today because I am a Muslim they suppose that their allegations against me are justified, but then I find that other Muslims are supporting my parents refusal to protect me, by such acts as sending me personal messages in internet forums which accuse me of not being in Allah because of my faith in Isa. These sort of experiences are escalating around me, in conjunction with the Australian police having been escalating a supposition of having control over my living, and being able to protect themselves from their knowledge that they have done wrong to my children and thus also to my self in motherhood. So it becomes very clear to me that a large shirk is taking place, that is engaging in the falsification of Isa’s life’s work, and it is exactly that shirk which Qur’an orients the mind against. Where I live I am not being made welcome at Mosque because of this orientation in my belief, and I am neither welcome in any local Christian Church while in Hijab.

How can I respond to this situation other than to read it as a sign in Allah such as prophesy indicates will take place.

Inshallah I will be enabled in repudiating every Muslim whom has fallen into the rosicrucian lies about Isa.

Subhanallah those whom portray their own belief as Christian and defy Isa through their own falisifications of Islam, will find their end with my own.

In my own life I have had to accommodate meeting with a larger than is normal quantity of individual persons whom are the shaytan. Therefore, I have had to learn to accommodate fully in Isa, the teaching of why, and how to prevent myself falling to their method. If I had not so learned I could not now still be of this life. It is clear that Jesus/Isa sufferance was to defeat the shaytan and to defeat the mentality in which Jehannam is comprehended. It is clearest in that what he taught thereafter, of Revelations to Saint John the Evangelist, (whom is recognised among Muslims), about the events of the future in which the accounting is fully revealed to every Human being, for every act which today is still of unaccountable wrong of sihr. Isa’s accomplishment is no less, and is in fact the necessary pre-requiste for Islam to have become the perfected Deen. We need Isa for his revelation which Mohammed existed within, and need Mohammed’s work so as to ourselves comprehend Isa as we need. The fact that all Jehannam’s fear, was Isa’s to first count, is why we are commanded to accomodate Gospel as Muslims. Yet Christians must make no mistake in this, because we are also commanded never to enable any person whom is not already a Muslim, to hold any account against us.

I can believe that there were many non-believers whom nailed Isa to a wooden cross: but that so nailed up among criminals, they could not kill him, and neither could they impose upon him, or upon anybody, to believe of him that he could have been belonging among those of the criminal mentality of Jehannam/the fire that is named also as Hell.

Thanks here need to be given to a Muslim whom responded to my initial article posted at the trinimuslims website, for their providing the word "salaba" into the dialogue. I have been pondering the full meaning of this root verb today, while re-editing this article. The word usually translated as “to crucify” is the derivative “salabuuhu” which implies also a choice is in transition. Yet we can not comprehend salabuuhu, without first being certain of salaba. Salaba has a strong connotation within my own immediate mental associations, with having committed an act which did participate in causing that Jehannam exists. The “s” and “l” imply a certainty of truth that need be held alone in Allah because it is only to be borne in danger, while the “b” implies an active participation. In that we can know that being receptive to being nailed upon a cross can not possibly fulfill the meaning. But that those whom nailed Isa to a cross, were accustomed to believing that any person so hung to die, might want to attempt to access knowledge of wrong committed in sihr, so as to escape the penality of their own public death among criminals. So clearly the words are in application to Isa in his mental capability rather than only in the bodily experience.

The translation into English of 'to crucify' is suffering from the world in which shirk has been applied to the meaning of 'to crucify'; such that we are being limited in our comprehension of Arabic by the translation of Arabic into English. The Arabic original holds no creedence in denying that Isa was nailed to a wooden cross.

Inshallah everyone will realise this in time to avert the perils of the war in the middle east from going too far.

Skillganon has also replied to my original article, and begins to be telling very truthfully, that it is an accepted point of view in Islam, that Isa was only "made to appear" as though dead and crucified, and the next three paragraphs are how I respond:

The words "made to appear" are not exclusive of the concept that being actually nailed to a wooden cross is how it was made to appear that Isa was killed and crucified. In fact in many languages the word for to crucify is a word meaning to be killed while in mind of entering Jehannam. Qur'an is telling us that no person could impose upon Isa that he die while in mind of Jehannam.

We must be very careful about a shirk having been embedded with a falsehood about the entymology of the word "Christ". One Muslim suggested to myself that the Greek, "Christos" is enabling more than the English "Christ" because of the extent of the shirk in the English language. To crucify is a term defined not by nailing to a cross, but by the intending of those whom commit the act being to force the person they nail to seem like a criminal, and thus to seem to need to enter Jehannam. It is akin to translation from Arabic about a person being stoned to death, and Mohammed speaking against such.

Also, I know that there is a mainstream accepted view point among Muslims, but when I read Qur'an what arises in my mind has a far better reconciliation with the Gospel in any of the translations I can find were being depicted through commentary. So long as we bear Allah in mind, we do not fall into the shirk of those whom abused the translators real worth.

I will add to this now, that there is also that difference between the mind entering into acknowledging Jehannam through Ka’ba, in which truly a state of salaba is implied, and the mind acknowledging jehannam through only having been informed that another Human life was suffering the sate of salaba. Truly Isa found his mind, if ever, able to acknowledge Jehannam, only through forgiving among whom find their minds entrapped by wrongs committed in sihr. Yet they could not force Isa to salaba.

What needs to be consistently clarified, is the devout belief enabled through Isa, that no person could ever in Allah, or even without being in Allah, impose upon any other person that their mind accepts the status of being in Christos/crucified/stoned/salaba. If our mind knows salaba it is of our own actions to have caused such. This is the lesson that Ka’ba embodies, and our need of this lesson is why Abraham built it for Ishmael. Today already even the descendants of Isaac are in need of utilising Ka’ba to ascertain our depth of salaba.

Just as we must all eventually accept ourselves as the cause of our own death, we must also accept that alike to killing, it is a sin to impose fear of being caught eternally in Jehannam upon the mind of any other person. If a person every enacted such a deed as might justify that state of existing, it is theirs to know and no other person’s knowledge to have. Thus even we might realise that to accuse any other person, the acquiring of what to accuse with, becomes the fact of an active entry to the condition in salaba.

That fear is akin to the fear that life is not. And yet within that sort of fear, which here in Australia is already being imposed upon many Indigenous children, only when we can comprehend that existence is constant, and thus in Allah eternity can be, is it that we naturally are caused to want to fear the fire of Jehannam being an enduring phenomenon. If a person such as a kaffur, who can not sustain constance of mind in time, supposes of what salaba is meaning, then their conception of Jehannam is diminished, but such that they openly seek to know of further. Thus we whom can commit, during Ramadan, to realising our own culpability in acts of kafr, as causal to the kaffur existing, will even want that there is not very strong emphasis being placed upon translations of specific meanings such as salaba. This is true simply because the kaffur (and shaytan) are who suppose, in their imaginations, that Jehannam might be avoided once having wanted entry to that path. While Human minds of any sort, can only seek to avoid. Yet the Human mind can conceive of the meaning of salaba, while a kaffur just can not, unless their whole life is totally accepted as the responsibility of a Human. Even though we realise that the shaytan are supposing of themselves to be doing the acts of causing the actual kaffur to exist, by forcing the minds of children to kafr; if we Human beings can not accept that our account in Allah needs to mind that the kaffur have an accountability to us more strongly than to the shaytan (since they are truly fully ignorant to the effects of their ill mindedness), then we also fall into that salaba state which the shaytan caused by imposing kafr. That is to say, the imposition of kafr mind upon a child can not cause their salaba, but only the acceptance of the truth of how to prevent the kaffur can enable even children to want to find the mind comprehensive of salaba. Ka’ba thus is built to enable that we learn also to prevent salaba, through whatever process each of us therein may find is our own.

So in Isa, what we learn is that He also sought to disprove of that which Satan approached him to inform him of Jehannam about. And that his experience in walking among the evidence which disproves that Jehannam could be eternity for a Human being, did lead him into a situation in which it seemed to many that he was killed and forced into Jehannam because he became done of salaba; most likely because he was nailed to a wooden cross, ceased breathing, and is then placed in a tomb, and the public spectacle was such an unbearable thing to witness, that the witnesses overly imagined of how unfathomable the experience could have been for Jesus.. Yet he was amid experiencing a miracle in Allah, in that his life was still fully evident to himself, and because his life was also fully evident within perfect innocence, the fact that there were forces pressuring him into the mind in Christos/in Ka'ba, as though of bearing Jehannam eternally, is that his internal experience could also disprove to him that any person can force another into the fire through forcing the state of doing the self into salaba. As a Prophet, Isa was in life attuned to the Angel of Death, as every Prophet can only be, liken to those whom experience dying and being revived as approaching a bright white light and being questioned; and so what he kept an account upon during the experience of being nailed to the cross can only have been fully acquitted in Allah, and even begun to be accounted for along with him before he undertook accepting being nailed to the cross. His acceptance of being nailed to a wooden cross, is the best sustained evidence for Humanity of everlasting life in Jannah, and so we must not diminish that.

This is what is most of all important about his life. That he gives evidence that we can not be forced into the fire through having found our self salaba, or into death. Therefore we must accept the mentality of such to be a fault in our own Human condition where such mentality exists. The fire is that end which many will fall to, not by our forcing them, but by our own believing realisations of the reality of what salaba is in our own being, and how it is that Isa avoided that.

How individuals read Qur'an such that ‘the story’ of it, or ‘the song’, or ‘the recital’ in sequence of each Surah, gives such evidence, is perhaps not necessarily always needful of the full data about Isa being nailed to a wooden cross; only so long as the truth that nobody could force death or Jehannam through salaba upon him, even with his awareness already of the lesson in Ka'ba, is really able to be accepted. (in editing this paragraph I first spelt salaba with a capital “S”, in which a shirk became applied through the shaytan interfering with my living memory, therefore this paragraph can now become the route out of the state of salaba for me, which had been orienting to the very word, and also this can provide the way through realising that the fire is not eternal for those who fell not by choice, but by being imposed upon with that very shirk in the word: think clearly thus about what I might have been intending in making this paragraph.)

Despite the fact that Muslims are proven to be able to sustain faith in Isa and Everlasting life, while having been tricked about major interpretative meaning; it is also the case that among Masonic Temples, and especially the rosicrucian factions of, there has been massive efforts made to try to prove that Muslims are not in real faith in Isa, because that is how there exists any semblance of justification of the war in the Middle East. Thus we must not fall to such fallacies. And such has been the significance of this form of shirk, that it became essential to undo it, even at the expense of being overly exposed among many whom want to shirk.

If you find your mind trained into believing that Isa was not who was nailed to the cross, then try also to remember that when we take the lesson of Jesus correctly, we must not preclude those whom have been raised to believe that Isa was nailed to a cross and gave his evidence against the shaytan from within His body in such extreme suffering. If we preclude those whom believe that the story is of the real world, then we are falling into entrapment of seeming to cause that which incriminates our enemies the shaytan, and in which Freemasons are accusing Muslims of being at fault, and supposing of therefore as though the cause of war in the middle east.

But in the world there is needing to be a mass reconciliation between the Christian economy in fall to gog and magog, and the economy in Islam which is truer to Isa.

That is why I make this post.

The word in question, usually translated into English as to crucify, has in Arabic the verb root "Salaba"

They could not cause that a force be used to do salaba to Isa
They could not kill Isa
But these facts can not disprove that he became nailed to a wooden cross

The reality is that his worth is all the more meaningful, especially among those whom can recall lynchings etc, when we know that even nailed upon a wooden cross and left to die; there was no method by which Isa/Jesus became salaba. Because of this very meaning, we must bear with disputing those whom try to tell us that the real Isa was not nailed to a cross.

The fact of salaba is connected with loosing full accountibility through Isa, and in Allah, for your every act. That we realise thorugh Ka'ba is only the consequence of being salaba.

They could not kill nor impose salaba to Jesus

Salaba is to loose full accountibility in Allah of one's every moment

That they could not Salabuuhu Isa, is that he could not be forced to choose belief in the shirk as method to reduce the pain he experienced nailed to the cross.



Ramadan Mubarak Salam