Muhammad Wrote the quran
-
Hello All
Please remember what the thread is all about, here it is highlighted
I am having a discussion with my freind who does not believe that Quran was written by Muhammad with his own hands.I already quoted him sura 25 verse 5 but still he insist on more evidence.Can any one help me find more verses from the quran or a suitable article which could help me in convincing my freind.
Thanks
-
Peace Ahmed
It's not to defame you. It's to encourage patience with your lack of knowledge/command of the english language, or in this case grammar.
Joe
Thanks for your kindness, on the other hand you can correct all my grammar and english mistakes and I won't refute back
Cheers
-
Peace all,
Here it is again, cuz looks like one of the posters here has difficulty reading too in addition to difficulty understanding
2948 You were not reciting any scripture before this (qablihi), nor were you writing one down by your hand. In that case, the doubters would have had reason.
The word "qablihi" in this verse is significant which means "before this revelation came." Thus al-qur'aan has put the record straight that the Prophet could read and write after the start of revelation.
The assertion that the Prophet was not writing ANY SCRIPTURE BEFORE THIS (this referring to the WHOLE QUR'AAN), proves that the Prophet wrote the WHOLE QUR'AAN with his hand, otherwise 2948 would become meaningless.
I am confident, however, that one of the posters here will completely fail to understand this point. Watch !
-
Wow, this thread is really busy and we haven't even mentioned the word 'ummi' oops! too late!
-
Peace all,
Let me break it down further for someone here who might have the comprehension ability of a 5th grader
From 2948
You were not reciting any scripture before this ------> indicates you (the Prophet) recited the whole Qur'aan
SIMILARLY
Nor were you writing one down by your hand ------> indicates you (the Prophet) wrote down the whole Qur'aan with your hand.
-
I stand corrected! Maybe no-one else noticed however as it's a definitely a tangent-spurning issue. D
-
Peace
I think people do follow shaky evidence as genuine often enough. It happens.
Salam
Sorry that was not the answer to my question
My question was do you agree that some ignorant Muslim take it that Mohammad wrote the whole Quran with his own hands as a fact?, remember you agreed that it is not a fact
You told me my evidence was weak, but I'm telling you I believe it to be strong and I'll tell you why.
1- In 96/1-5 one is shown the import to read and how God teaches.
well, we are talking writing not reading, sorry
2- The word umme refers to one who is ignorant of divine precepts, not to one lacking literacy.
Joe
You need to back up your claim that the word Ummi means as such from the Quran,
No guessing and no urls, I don?t read urls posted to me
Thanks
-
Peace Ahmed
I will have to agree that some do because I do. I do not think I am ignorant because I do so. I may be enlightened because I do. Apparently you seem to think you have the correct answer so I think I can safely assume you can guide us all to the promised land.
we are talking writing not reading
This is a quote from the link which you will not visit
In al-quran there is a challenge put forth to those who would seek to disavow al-quran's divine inspiration. It is made clear that nobody will be able to produce such a reading however.
"And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your helpers besides Allah if you are truthful. But if you do (it) not - and you can never do (it) - then be on you guard against the fire whose fuel is men and stones; it is prepared for the disbelievers. (223-24)
- Since no man should be able to produce a writ such as al-quran then there should be no doubt that such a reading is from the divine. Chapter 29 verse 48 seems to make it apparent that the prophet/messenger could read and write because it is declared the Muhammad could not produce a writ such as al-quran by his own means. We already know that no man can do such by their own means because of verses 23-24 of chapter 2.
And thou didst not recite before it any book, nor didst thou transcribe one with thy right hand, for then could the liars have doubted. (294
Thus we are presented with the fact that the prophet/messenger never transcribed or recited such a revelation by his own means for if he did the liars would have a just reason to doubt that al-quran was from God. Since nobody can produce such a revelation (see 223-24) we know that it was not written by Muhammad from his own means, nor did he ever have the means to produce any other scripture."
You need to back up your claim that the word Ummi means as such from the Quran
In the link I posted which you will not visit it states
"Regarding the word 'umme' the following verses will be used to back up my view that it refers to one who has not dealt with divine wisdom and/or decrees.
And when they meet those who believe they say, We believe, and when they are apart with one another they say, Do you talk to them of what Allah has disclosed to you that they may contend with you by this before your Lord? Do you not understand? Do they not know that Allah knows what they keep secret and what they make known? And some of them are illiterate; they know not the Book but only (from) heresay, and they do but conjecture. (276-7
Here we have the 'umme' among those who conceal the truth, keeping it among themselves as if they own it. The last sentence actually makes it clear what 'umme' is referring to; it is those who do not know about the book, they learn of it from ramblings and only guess about it. Thus they are not familiar with the divine precepts."
Joe
-
Salam All sun
Okay, I hate to kinda drive this subject a little of course, but I read some of what was posted here, and now it makes me have some questions
Question If the prophets companions, wrote down all that he recited over a course of time that it was revealed to him, and then after his death, it was compiled into a book=Quran. Then, how come we do not follow the hadiths? Are they not the same as companions writing down the ways, and examples of the prophet over a period of time, and then after his death, putting them into books? Not that I think its precisely the same, nor do I think we should believe in hadiths,..but it seems confusing to me, the whole issue of the Quran being compiled after the prophets death?? I mean I know the difference in hadiths vs Quran. Quran was inspired directly from God, and hadiths were not. So theres no argument there, but again...the confusion lies, in getting people to understand why we believe in the quran, when it was compiled after the prophets death, such as the hadith. Also, does anyone knows the year (est) that the first compiled Quran came out and also the year(est) the first compiled hadith came out, all after the prophets death?
Any Ideas? Opinions? Answers? Findings?
Honor
-
Peace Honor
The ahadith were compiled by Persians in Persia (All 10 of them) two centuries after the death of prophet , on hearsay coming through 7th generation, Their Frozen brains could not comprehend , as to why no Arab dared to collect/write such a writing.
The collectors themselves rejected 99% of their initial collection dismissing them as False, at best you can speculate about the rest. That shows inaccuracy of data collected through a certain method.
Even if some of them are authentic , we don't need them , because the only thing they have done or would do is freeze the last system of God, back in time 1400 years ago, where as it is suppose to serve the Mankind for all the times to come.
The case of Quran is different , Mohammad probably did write it with his own hands on different kind of objects, but it was after his death in khalifa Uthman's time , that it was compiled in a book format in the present order.
i hope this helps
peace
siki
-
Well this thread grew overnight like a beanstalk.
there is a fact that can't be ignored, we know for certain that Mohammad didn't know who to write till the Quran revelation, do you agree?
Irrelevant to my comment.
ane the relevence of that exactly?. i mean we are only contributing to conjectures, right?. wasn't that the same the sunni did?
It's thinking about possibilities and not saying that whatever conclusion we infer according to the evidence isn't subject to change with new evidence/information/knowledge as in the case of someone who might call their hadith divine and not changeable. Thus there is a big difference.
what the difference between the Muslims who do not care which human wrote the Quran, and those who believe Mohammad wrote it, and those who believe Mohammad never wrote it?
Relevance of that to my comment?
Oh Please, don't be emotional, try to be logical,
Right.
Samia came up with a story that the prophet write Be Ism as Bism, she never provided any evidence that the prophet did so though, therefore I'm not going to refute her conjectires until she provide her evidences that the prophet did so, sorry
She gave reasoning, not a story that's divine. You should be trying to refute her reasoning if you think otherwise.
well, don't ask others to refute others then, please dont be emotional, try to stay logical
That's just ironic.
-
Salaam Tanveer
Many thanks for your reply, it is really helpful.
Thanks to Ahmed, as his arguements are same as I would be facing from my freind, he has already prepared me in advance.Ahmed , do u have anything mre to say on Tanveer's explanation , please comment
-
Peace,
I want just to mention this, we all agree that the Quran was revealed by God, so when we say 'Muhammed wrote the Quran' means only that he wrote down the Revelation he received, it doesn't mean he made up the Revelation himself. Because I believe some people are confusing the two, if not, then ignore me P. The discussion is
-
Muhammed received the Revelation and let scribes wrote it down for him, as he himself could not write.
-
Muhammed could read and write, and also wrote down the Revelation himself, and of course was assisted time by time.
In both cases it still God who send the Revelation.
-
-
Narrated by Samia
God says
278 "among them are ummiyyuun they do not know the scripture but false desires"This is a direct definition of ummi Not knowing the Scripture. The verse tells about the Jews (who call non-jews ummi or gentile). God is telling them that even among them there are gentiles (those who write things and say they are from God). So it is not about not being a Jew, but about not knowing the scripture nor following it. "illiterate" does not fit here.
375 "Among the people of the scripture are those who, if you entrust them with a big amount of (anything) will readily give it back to you, and those who, if you entrust them with one coin, will not repay it unless you continue asking, that's because they say "we are not to blame as far as the ummiyyuun are concerned", telling lies about God".
illiterate or gentile?
622 It is He who sent among the ummiyyiin a messenger from among themselves, to recite to them His verses, purify them and teach them the scripture (The Book) and wisdom.."
If they were all illiterate, he should first teach them how to read and write...oops, he is one of them, so how can he find help from among them to write down the Revelation?
255
The verb in bold should be read as (uktutibaha) not (iktatabaha) as prevailing. This is why
If it is (iktatabaha), which means he had someone write it, why is it connected in as an implication that it was dictated to him? He should be the one dictating it. You dictate, some one writes = you are making some one write something (taktatatib ) he is (uktutib made to write). Since the other verb is (tumla 3alaihi he is being dictated), then this implies that he is (uktutib the verses uktutibaha). The problem of vocalization is in this verb, not the verb (dictated tumla 3alaihi), and here is why
The verb (tumla 3alaihi) can only be in the passive, because the active form is written differently and without the preposition (3alaihi), unless another word is mentioned (3alaa the writers/the others/ someone whatsoever).