Quran and Hadiths books, what is the difference ?
-
Slm,
I was told that these 2 types of book were relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters but in the Hadiths books the transmitters are cited.
So my question was about the difference between these 2 types of book.
Why can we trust blindly in the Quran but not in the Hadiths books as it followed the same compilation model ?
-
Slm,
I was told that these 2 types of book were relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters but in the Hadiths books the transmitters are cited.
So my question was about the difference between these 2 types of book.
Why can we trust blindly in the Quran but not in the Hadiths books as it followed the same compilation model ?
Shalom aleikhem,
Blind trust in anything is not rational. You hear someone out, see the points they make, think about them critically, then come to your conclusions.
If you study the history of the major religions of the world, the difference will be clear to you. The story goes like this
A man claims to have received divine instructions. The man strives to establish them and or practice them and leaves the instructions for the future generation. When the man is dead, decades and centuries later , people start adding things and coming up with brand new doctrines with their own books. They write it themselves, but attribute it to the dead messenger, attribute it to God.
If you wish to study traditional Islam from the core, the Qur'an, go ahead. And see if you can justify people coming centuries after the messenger and doing public surveys about other people's hearsay stories and attributing it to God. About my view, let me leave you with some things I tried to write
Generic
- Hijacked Religion of God (my general view)
- Did Prophet Muhammad receive revelation outside Qur'an
- Do you need hadiths because Qur'an lacks in details ?
Distorting Qur'an and using hadiths to promote fanciful ideas and lies about the messenger
- Authentic Lies about messenger of God 1
- Authentic Lies about messenger of God 2
- Authentic Lies about messenger of God 3
- Misquoting God Take what the messenger gives you and abstain from what he forbids
- Did Prophet Muhammad know the future ?
- Is Muhammad the Greatest messenger ?
- Death penalty for leaving Islam ?
- Which is the best creation of God
Those are my views based on the Qur'an. Instead of me dictating, I let the Qur'an be the primary source. Ofcourse, you can challenge my views about the comparison I did in those posts if you can prove your point based on evidence.
Now, the best thing to do will be to read the Qur'an first. Life is a test, people can mislead (including me), but those who are not blind sheep and can reason and verify, God will guide them.
Peace
-------------- Student of Allah -
Those are my views based on the Qur'an.
How to be sure that all written in the Quran is reliable ? Faith is not enough here, I think.
Because historically said, as I said in my first message, these 2 types of book are relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters.
Quran as a large book (pages between 2 covers) goes back to the Umayyad caliphate.In other words, how to be sure that Quran is a preserved book from alterations as muslims received it through transmitters also (Muhammad and his Companions, not only Muhammad) ?
-
How to be sure that all written in the Quran is reliable ? Faith is not enough here, I think.
Because historically said, as I said in my first message, these 2 types of book are relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters.
Quran as a large book (pages between 2 covers) goes back to the Umayyad caliphate.In other words, how to be sure that Quran is a preserved book from alterations as muslims received it through transmitters also (Muhammad and his Companions, not only Muhammad) ?
Shalom Aleikhem
A lot of the history of Qur'an are from hadiths themselves. Qur'an leaves trail of "writing it down" in its contents. A short example
8011 No, this is but a reminder.
8012 For whoever wills to remember.
8013 In scripts which are honorable.
8014 Raised and pure.
8015 By the hands of scribes.
8016 Honorable and righteous.Anyways, as I stated earlier
Blind trust in anything is not rational. You hear someone out, see the points they make, think about them critically, then come to your conclusions.
So, you have to read/study. Verify, make your choice.
A point I want to raise is that, the content in my blog assumes that you atleast agree that Qur'an is from God. Nevertheless, for anyone claiming that their number 1 source is Qur'an (example traditional muslims), my blog contents can be used to reason with them.
As for me, I check the contents in the Qur'an for validity in terms of knowledge that we have confirmed to be true. Now that can range from Astrophysics, Biology, Oceanography, Atmospheric study, et all. It is easy for the Author of the Qur'an to get away with statements about afterlife/paradise/hell/when all ends/etc, but at the same time, it is not easy for the author to get away with factual statements made about the natural world. That is what I have been using so far, to check the book for consistency.
lol.... when I was writing down my post in my blog, I assumed things which sometime are bad assumptions. Not only in the post you referred to, there is another one aswell. Anyways, let me submit my case
7226 Knower of the unseen, He does not reveal His unseen to anyone.
7227 Except to whom He has accepted as a messenger, then He reveals from the past and the future.3179 God was not to leave the believers as they were without distinguishing the rotten from the good. And God was not to let you know the future, but God chooses from His messengers whom He wishes; so believe in God and His messengers. And if you believe and are righteous, then you will have a great recompense.
2255 God, there is no god except He, the Living, the Sustainer. No slumber or sleep overtakes Him; to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth. Who will intercede with Him except with His permission? He knows their present and their future, and they do not have any of His knowledge except for what He wishes. His Throne encompasses all of the heavens and the earth and it is easy for Him to preserve them. He is the Most High, the Great.
These are the classic ayaats that can be used to make Muhammad the equivalent of God. For anyone who considers the entire Qur'an, this illusion of Muhammad knowing the future shatters. The Qur'an quotes about the past, Abraham,Jesus,Moses, Adam, origin of life, origin of universe,etc. The messenger is given these unknown informations from the past by God. The Qur'an keeps on foretelling about the future, our destiniy, the end of the universe. Now, a rational person would understand that God gave this knowledge to his messenger. Now, just so that we do not make the messenger into an all knowing entity like God, the Qur'an clarifies about Muhammad's knowledge of past/future (thats what my entire blog post is about). Oh, please do notice the last ayaat (2255), the ayaat is not referring to any single person, it is open for all, "they do not have..except". If your method is to isolate ayaats and derive conclusions based on that, you might aswell isolate this ayaat and say that you know the unknowns too.
Not only that, you will find in other excerpts of the Qur'an where Muhammad makes sure that he has to depend totally on Qur'anic revelation. Probably I wrote about that in the post titled "Did prophet muhammad receive revelations outside Qur'an" .
So, the ayaats about his lack of knowledge of unknown only makes sense if the knowledge that he has from past/future are public by the time those ayaats were revealed (the ones confirming his lack of knowledge).
And yes, thats exactly how traditional muslims mislead each other. Not drawing conclusion from overall, but just the part of a document which they can use to justify their habits. I would very much love to see how anyone can take all these ayaats and conclude that Muhammad had the knowledge to see the past/future in the traditional sense. Ofcourse, to conclude that way, they need to ignore the ayaats I quoted in my blog and replace them with hadiths. Thats exactly what they do, take a piece of content from the Qur'an (ignoring the rest) and redirect the audience to hadiths..lol.
Peace be on you
-------------------------- Student of Allah
-
As for me, I check the contents in the Qur'an for validity in terms of knowledge that we have confirmed to be true. Now that can range from Astrophysics, Biology, Oceanography, Atmospheric study, et all. It is easy for the Author of the Qur'an to get away with statements about afterlife/paradise/hell/when all ends/etc, but at the same time, it is not easy for the author to get away with factual statements made about the natural world. That is what I have been using so far, to check the book for consistency.
Your methodology could be use for Hadiths books also. Then I can't see any differences between Quran and Hadiths books.
lol.... when I was writing down my post in my blog, I assumed things which sometime are bad assumptions. Not only in the post you referred to, there is another one aswell. Anyways, let me submit my case
7226 Knower of the unseen, He does not reveal His unseen to anyone.
7227 Except to whom He has accepted as a messenger, then He reveals from the past and the future.3179 God was not to leave the believers as they were without distinguishing the rotten from the good. And God was not to let you know the future, but God chooses from His messengers whom He wishes; so believe in God and His messengers. And if you believe and are righteous, then you will have a great recompense.
2255 God, there is no god except He, the Living, the Sustainer. No slumber or sleep overtakes Him; to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth. Who will intercede with Him except with His permission? He knows their present and their future, and they do not have any of His knowledge except for what He wishes. His Throne encompasses all of the heavens and the earth and it is easy for Him to preserve them. He is the Most High, the Great.
These are the classic ayaats that can be used to make Muhammad the equivalent of God. For anyone who considers the entire Qur'an, this illusion of Muhammad knowing the future shatters. The Qur'an quotes about the past, Abraham,Jesus,Moses, Adam, origin of life, origin of universe,etc. The messenger is given these unknown informations from the past by God. The Qur'an keeps on foretelling about the future, our destiniy, the end of the universe. Now, a rational person would understand that God gave this knowledge to his messenger. Now, just so that we do not make the messenger into an all knowing entity like God, the Qur'an clarifies about Muhammad's knowledge of past/future (thats what my entire blog post is about). Oh, please do notice the last ayaat (2255), the ayaat is not referring to any single person, it is open for all, "they do not have..except". If your method is to isolate ayaats and derive conclusions based on that, you might aswell isolate this ayaat and say that you know the unknowns too. P
Not only that, you will find in other excerpts of the Qur'an where Muhammad makes sure that he has to depend totally on Qur'anic revelation. Probably I wrote about that in the post titled "Did prophet muhammad receive revelations outside Qur'an" .
So, the ayaats about his lack of knowledge of unknown only makes sense if the knowledge that he has from past/future are public by the time those ayaats were revealed (the ones confirming his lack of knowledge).
And yes, thats exactly how traditional muslims mislead each other. Not drawing conclusion from overall, but just the part of a document which they can use to justify their habits. I would very much love to see how anyone can take all these ayaats and conclude that Muhammad had the knowledge to see the past/future in the traditional sense. Ofcourse, to conclude that way, they need to ignore the ayaats I quoted in my blog and replace them with hadiths. Thats exactly what they do, take a piece of content from the Qur'an (ignoring the rest) and redirect the audience to hadiths..lol.
Good !
-
Your methodology could be use for Hadiths books also. Then I can't see any differences between Quran and Hadiths books.
Shalom Aleikhem,
Why not ? thats a very good method to demonstrate the absurdities of hadiths.
By the way, the Qur'an forbids using other sources. ( I hope you read it in qur'an or already read about them in the cases I built in my blog..or elsewhere)
By the way, whats your background ? ofcourse you can choose not to answer it.
Peace
------------- Student of Allah -
Slm,
I was told that these 2 types of book were relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters but in the Hadiths books the transmitters are cited.
So my question was about the difference between these 2 types of book.
Why can we trust blindly in the Quran but not in the Hadiths books as it followed the same compilation model ?
- We don't and should not trust blindly in anything..
- Never judge the book by it's cover or compilation model..
- Hadith books are among the most ridiculous and funniest book that I've ever read... fully Hilarious...
- It's the right of everyone to believe in any nonsense or jokes that they want...
Salam / Peace
-
Peace SearchingGod.
Quoran There is proof that it is from GOD ( Initial surahs and 19? Also there is no contradiction in it!)
Hadith There is proof that it is from man ( Too many contradictions in it ? Also fairy tales and wishful thinking!)
Peace.
-
Shalom Aleikhem,
Why not ? thats a very good method to demonstrate the absurdities of hadiths.
By the way, the Qur'an forbids using other sources. ( I hope you read it in qur'an or already read about them in the cases I built in my blog..or elsewhere)
Why do you put all hadiths in the same batch ? Not all hadiths are absurd !
Even if Quran forbids using other sources, how do you know if the sources used by the Quran are not absurd too ?Seems illogical here, Quran forbidding us to use other sources but itself uses other souces.
A lot of the history of Qur'an are from hadiths themselves. Qur'an leaves trail of "writing it down" in its contents. A short example
8011 No, this is but a reminder.
8012 For whoever wills to remember.
8013 In scripts which are honorable.
8014 Raised and pure.
8015 By the hands of scribes.
8016 Honorable and righteous.This is why I was asking for the difference between Quran and Hadiths books (for me they are similar).
Why do you blindly follow the Quran knowing that it came to you through the same process (transmission through "Companions" and you even can't d?termine which Quranic verse is added or which one is altered because of a lack of information, even if the content of the Quran sounds consistent to you .
By the way, whats your background ?
Searching God !
-
Peace SearchingGod.
Quoran There is proof that it is from GOD ( Initial surahs and 19? Also there is no contradiction in it!)
The whole story of number 19 is a big trap ! Nothing serious but speculative. And you can find so many inconsistencies.
Hadith There is proof that it is from man ( Too many contradictions in it ? Also fairy tales and wishful thinking!)
Even in the Quran you can find fairy tales similar to what you can find in Hadiths.
-
In that case, you have your book and I have mine.
Peace. -
In that case, you have your book and I have mine.
Peace.Come on dude !
Muhammad didn't come with a book called "Quran" under his armpits. The existence of a book like this is mere an abstract.
Muslims (those who submit tho God) don't have any book.
The existence of Quran in the form you can see today is nothing but the result of creating a dogmatic Islam by the caliphates (Umayyad, Abbaside).
This Quran is written by those who were in possession of power (temporal, spiritual) exactly through the same process as Hadiths book.
This is the reason of my question in the first message Quran and Hadiths books, what is the difference ?
-
Come on dude !
Muhammad didn't come with a book called "Quran" under his armpits. The existence of a book like this is mere an abstract.
Muslims (those who submit tho God) don't have any book.
Good point.. I revise it a little bit into
One doesn't need a book or a 'standardized book' to be a muslim..... (no capital)The existence of Quran in the form you can see today is nothing but the result of creating a dogmatic Islam by the caliphates (Umayyad, Abbaside).
It is very much possible..
This Quran is written by those who were in possession of power (temporal, spiritual) exactly through the same process as Hadiths book.
It is very much possible..
This is the reason of my question in the first message Quran and Hadiths books, what is the difference ?
In terms of 'build up' or 'compilation' then the difference is on 'timing' or 'freezing' of the content...
The Quran was freezed earlier than the Hadiths.. heck the 'authorized version' of hadiths is ever changing up until now...Another striking differences is of course on the quality....
The differences is like watching well researched documentary in Discovery Channel and hollywood (or bollywood) gossip show... (E!)Read the Tanakh, the Gospel, the Gita and the Tao Te Ching as well.. and you can sense the 'depth' of such materials.. and how it's strikingly different with gossip books..
Salam / Peace
-
Those who submit to GOD need HIS word . He communicates with them ?
Also, He helps them distinguish " His word" from " Men s word".
All the rest I agree, you only need GOD.
Peace
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Slm,
I was told that these 2 types of book were relying on transmitters except that in the Quran you can'nt see the name of the transmitters but in the Hadiths books the transmitters are cited.
So my question was about the difference between these 2 types of book.
Why can we trust blindly in the Quran but not in the Hadiths books as it followed the same compilation model ?
The question is loaded ("trust blindly" but here is an attempt at answering.
What is the goal of AQ?
22 This is the Book in which there is no doubt, a guidance for the righteous.
Note that AQ does not "make" anyone righteous or unrighteous--it is a guidance. Do hadith only (attempt to) guide? hmm
AQ encourages us to use our mind and senses. Hadith are taken as being authoratative without question.
1736 And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and heart, all these you are responsible for.
Hadith were first written down around 200 years after AQ was revealed. Hadith did not follow the same transmission as AQ.
AQ has not been shown to have any contradiction. This is quite an accomplishment for a text that is over 1,000 year old. Hadith are rife with errors and contradictions.
482 Do they not reflect on the Qur'an? If it was from any other than GOD they would have found in it many a discrepancy.
If AQ is true, extra-Quranic hadith are automatically of no value for the Deen. Hadith may or may not have value elsewhere, but for the Deen are worthless at best and harmful at worst.
Please read the following articles for more detailed knowledge of hadith.
http//www.free-minds.org/articles?tid=4
May ALLAH see fit to Guide all seekers.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
peace & greetings to you guys as well,
God has kind of put a promise to preserve the Quran 155 and cited that No falsehood could enter it 4142, and if it wasn't from him, it would have many contradictions 482....many hadiths would be sayings attributed to the prophet.
consider what was said to be the Prophet Muhammad's Last Sermon, which was supposedly witnessed by thousands of Muslims (one of the most witnessed events in Hadiths), yet there are actually three versions of this sermon cited in the Hadith books-
First version
"I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided The Book of God and my Family?.
(Al-Tirmidhi 6143; Muslim 44/4/2408; Ibn Hanbal 4/366; Darimi 23/1/3319) -
Second version
"I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided The Book of God and my Sunnah".
(Muwatta Book 46.1.3) -
Third version
"I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided, The Book of God"
(Sahih Muslim Book 7, Number 2803; Muslim 15/19/1218; Ibn Majah 25/84/3074; Abu Dawud 11/56/1905).
This is just an example of how "authentic" hadiths are.
nd Take a look at what the Quran says about HADITHS
?...which Hadith after God and His revelations Do they believe in?" (Quran 456)
?... Which Hadith beside this (Quran), do they believe in?? (Quran 7185)
?... Which Hadith beside this (Quran), do they believe in?? (Quran 7750) -
-
Note that AQ does not "make" anyone righteous or unrighteous--it is a guidance. Do hadith only (attempt to) guide?
Your argument here is that Quran is a guide. Let's assume that it is as you said.
First,
However, Quran as a book should not exist, theoretically, because you will find nowhere in the Quran itself a single verse ordering Muhammad or his Companions to write down the revealed verses so that it become a book, in a strict sense.
The Theory here, is that all verses talking about Quran as a "Book" is nothing more than a later addition to the original revelation. This addition is a man made fabrication mainly in response to the critics of Christians and Jews due to the fact they had already a book but Muslims not.
Explain this How is it possible that at the time of revelation Muhammad is supposedly talking about "Book" while he could never succeed to produce a book, mainly because his revelations were oral and not written one ?
Logical sense When you talk to someone about a book (here it's the Book of Muhammad), it is obvious that you have to produce something before whom you speak. Night and day, Muhammad was talking about book but he never presented his Book.
Conclusion Quran as you can see it today must be less bigger than the actual one in terms of its content.
As for the guidance through the Hadiths, yes of course there are a lot of Hadiths whose main purpose is to guide muslim (just check around).
Second,
AQ encourages us to use our mind and senses. Hadith are taken as being authoratative without question.
The reality is not as you have depicted.
Maybe it could be the case in Sunnism (even if todays progressive Sunni muslims challenge the same authoritarian Hadiths), but this is certainly not the case in Shiism and where you will find also Shia muslims challenging the same authoritarian Hadiths if they exist.Third,
Hadith were first written down around 200 years after AQ was revealed.
How many years before having a full Quran as we have today ? 70 to 80 years !
And you can't ignore the fact that during the Umayyad caliphate there was political instability specially because of the Shiite counterparts (pretending that the name of Ali and other stuff were in the original Quran).
The actual Quran is nothing than "a state Quran" of the Umayyad caliphate and a response to the Christians, Jews and Shiites.The manipulation in the actual Quran is beyond your imagination !
Hadith did not follow the same transmission as AQ.
So how the content of the Quran was transmitted according to you and what are your sources for what you claim ?
Fourth,
AQ has not been shown to have any contradiction. This is quite an accomplishment for a text that is over 1,000 year old. Hadith are rife with errors and contradictions.
1)There are no contradictions (hypothetical claim) in the Quran because there are no multiple versions of a same version (as you can find in Hadiths book).
2)The absence of grammatical errors in the Quran must support its supremacy but can you show me some grammatical errors in Sahih Bukhari for example, if there are no grammatical errors then it's not a big deal if the Quran is also free from grammatical errors ?Fifth,
Contradiction in the Quran about multiple versions of a same version History of Lot (9 versions in the Quran) 7-11-15-26-27-29-37-51-54
How many version quote the wife of Lot as "his wife" 7-11-15-27-29
However, in 26 and 37, Quran speaks about an old woman (ajzan f l-ghbirna) and not the wife of Lot as you can see in 7 & 27 (im'ra-atahu knat mina l-ghbirna ; im'ra-atahu qaddarnh mina l-ghbirna). This a serious problem semantically because saying "an old woman" is not similar to saying "his wife". And in these versions (26 and 37) we see that Quran fails to indicate who this old woman is.
Recap
9 versions talk about Lot's history
5 versions quote the wife of Lot using "his wife"
4 versions have f/mina l-ghbirna
2 versions quote "an old woman" <------ The problem is here. Why Quran didn't use "his wife" but "an old woman". What is the reason of this exception ?The Theory is Maybe the person who wrote these verse was another one who was not aware of the 5 versions in which it was used "his wife".
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
My comments in red.
Your argument here is that Quran is a guide. Let's assume that it is as you said.
First,
However, Quran as a book should not exist, theoretically, because you will find nowhere in the Quran itself a single verse ordering Muhammad or his Companions to write down the revealed verses so that it become a book, in a strict sense.
There is nothing requiring an oral transmission of AQ either. Any transmission will suffice. AQ is about the message, not the medium. If one takes AQ to be true, then AQ states that it contains everything necessary for the Deen. It doesn't teach how to bake a pizza or drive a car and neither does it forbid these things. Moreover, there are evidences that AQ was written down during the lifetime of Muhammad (peace upon all Prophets).
255 And they said "Fictional tales of old! He wrote them down while they were being dictated to him morning and evening."
The Theory here, is that all verses talking about Quran as a "Book" is nothing more than a later addition to the original revelation. This addition is a man made fabrication mainly in response to the critics of Christians and Jews due to the fact they had already a book but Muslims not.
When would this purported fabrication have taken place, and by whom? If this is a claim that you support/theory you advance, provide your evidence. It takes more than a theory to convince others.
Explain this How is it possible that at the time of revelation Muhammad is supposedly talking about "Book" while he could never succeed to produce a book, mainly because his revelations were oral and not written one ?
Why could Muhammad (peace upon all Prophets) have not written down or directed the writing down of oral revelations? Writing existed, and is referenced throughout AQ.
8013 In scripts which are honorable.
8014 Raised and pure.
8015 By the hands of scribes.Logical sense When you talk to someone about a book (here it's the Book of Muhammad), it is obvious that you have to produce something before whom you speak. Night and day, Muhammad was talking about book but he never presented his Book.
Given that much of the audience of the day was not able to read, an oral presentation was appropriate to its time and place.
Conclusion Quran as you can see it today must be less bigger than the actual one in terms of its content.
I don't find any evidence supporting this conclusion.
As for the guidance through the Hadiths, yes of course there are a lot of Hadiths whose main purpose is to guide muslim (just check around).
Hadith contain blatant contradictions with AQ, science, common sense, and common morality. There is no "severability clause" that comes with hadith. Take all, or take none--it is worse to be a hypocrite than to be a fool.
Second,
The reality is not as you have depicted.
Maybe it could be the case in Sunnism (even if todays progressive Sunni muslims challenge the same authoritarian Hadiths), but this is certainly not the case in Shiism and where you will find also Shia muslims challenging the same authoritarian Hadiths if they exist.What other "schools of thought" do is up to persons subscribing to those systems. No "school of thought" claims that any hadith is more reputable than AQ. Well then, what does AQ say about hadith?
hmm Popularity and/or opinion play no legitimate role in deciding the Deen.Third,
How many years before having a full Quran as we have today ? 70 to 80 years !
Please provide evidence and/or citations for what is presented--or is it "original research?"
And you can't ignore the fact that during the Umayyad caliphate there was political instability specially because of the Shiite counterparts (pretending that the name of Ali and other stuff were in the original Quran).
The actual Quran is nothing than "a state Quran" of the Umayyad caliphate and a response to the Christians, Jews and Shiites.That's an interesting theory about a "state Quran"--but still surmise presented without evidence. Is there any evidence of a Quran with different content (not including translations or footnotes)?
The manipulation in the actual Quran is beyond your imagination !
It would have to be imagination, since there is no evidence supporting theories of manipulation!
So how the content of the Quran was transmitted according to you and what are your sources for what you claim ?
AQ was memorized by some of those hearing it AND written down immediately upon being recited to others. My source is AQ for the writing part.
Fourth,
1)There are no contradictions (hypothetical claim) in the Quran because there are no multiple versions of a same version (as you can find in Hadiths book).
There are no claims that the earth is flat or that camel urine cures cancer or other bad science in AQ. If a person or people had fabricated AQ, it would have errors of this type. Also, don't you refute this claim later with your "nine versions of Quran" discussion?
2)The absence of grammatical errors in the Quran must support its supremacy but can you show me some grammatical errors in Sahih Bukhari for example, if there are no grammatical errors then it's not a big deal if the Quran is also free from grammatical errors ?
This is a red herring. I'm talking about scientific facts, not grammar.
Fifth,
Contradiction in the Quran about multiple versions of a same version History of Lot (9 versions in the Quran) 7-11-15-26-27-29-37-51-54
How many version quote the wife of Lot as "his wife" 7-11-15-27-29
However, in 26 and 37, Quran speaks about an old woman (ajzan f l-ghbirna) and not the wife of Lot as you can see in 7 & 27 (im'ra-atahu knat mina l-ghbirna ; im'ra-atahu qaddarnh mina l-ghbirna). This a serious problem semantically because saying "an old woman" is not similar to saying "his wife". And in these versions (26 and 37) we see that Quran fails to indicate who this old woman is.
Recap
9 versions talk about Lot's history
5 versions quote the wife of Lot using "his wife"
4 versions have f/mina l-ghbirna
2 versions quote "an old woman" <------ The problem is here. Why Quran didn't use "his wife" but "an old woman". What is the reason of this exception ?The Theory is Maybe the person who wrote these verse was another one who was not aware of the 5 versions in which it was used "his wife".
I'm unfamiliar with what you write about. There have been multiple translations throughout history. Some translations are better than others. Does one choice of words somehow dramatically change the core meaning?
For the sake of argument, suppose your argument was sound. What guidance do you think should be followed? hmm What is a proposed solution for what is claimed to be a problem?
ALLAH knows best
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
First,
However, Quran as a book should not exist, theoretically, because you will find nowhere in the Quran itself a single verse ordering Muhammad or his Companions to write down the revealed verses so that it become a book, in a strict sense.
There is nothing requiring an oral transmission of AQ either. Any transmission will suffice. AQ is about the message, not the medium. If one takes AQ to be true, then AQ states that it contains everything necessary for the Deen. It doesn't teach how to bake a pizza or drive a car and neither does it forbid these things. Moreover, there are evidences that AQ was written down during the lifetime of Muhammad (peace upon all Prophets).
255 And they said "Fictional tales of old! He wrote them down while they were being dictated to him morning and evening."
This is not an evidence but a false accusation against Muhammad from the Disbelievers.
254 And those who rejected said "This is but a falsehood that he invented and other people have helped him with it." Certainly, they have come with what is unjust and fabricated.
255 And they said "Fictional tales of old! He wrote them down while they were being dictated to him morning and evening."So your first argument to my observation is void.
The Theory here, is that all verses talking about Quran as a "Book" is nothing more than a later addition to the original revelation. This addition is a man made fabrication mainly in response to the critics of Christians and Jews due to the fact they had already a book but Muslims not.
When would this purported fabrication have taken place, and by whom? If this is a claim that you support/theory you advance, provide your evidence. It takes more than a theory to convince others.
I agree with you ! But as I said this is a Theory so it's hypothetical. And what convince me for this theory is these facts that
-Muhammad never wrote down the revelations
-Muhammad never presented his book, in a strict sense to the polytheist, the disbelievers, the Nazarenes and the Jews
-Logic says that when you talk about something, specially if it's a book, your book, you don't simply talk about it, but you have to present it to your interlocutors
-The absence of any "Book" called Quran at the time of MuhammadExplain this How is it possible that at the time of revelation Muhammad is supposedly talking about "Book" while he could never succeed to produce a book, mainly because his revelations were oral and not written one ?
Why could Muhammad (peace upon all Prophets) have not written down or directed the writing down of oral revelations? Writing existed, and is referenced throughout AQ.
8013 In scripts which are honorable.
8014 Raised and pure.
8015 By the hands of scribes.It's impossible to say that these scripts (scribes=Angels?) are related to the complete Quran because it's a Meccan Surah. So the Quran was still not in it's complete form.
Logical sense When you talk to someone about a book (here it's the Book of Muhammad), it is obvious that you have to produce something before whom you speak. Night and day, Muhammad was talking about book but he never presented his Book.
Given that much of the audience of the day was not able to read, an oral presentation was appropriate to its time and place.
Conclusion Quran as you can see it today must be less bigger than the actual one in terms of its content.
I don't find any evidence supporting this conclusion.
You gave yourself a solid evidence to my arguments ! As you said, an oral presentation was appropriate to its time and place, then why time and again Muhammad was talking about a fictitious book. Were people around him so stupid and unintelligent to even not dare to ask him to present his book, the book he was talking about night and days.
This is a serious challenge !
Third,
How many years before having a full Quran as we have today ? 70 to 80 years !
Please provide evidence and/or citations for what is presented--or is it "original research?"
And you can't ignore the fact that during the Umayyad caliphate there was political instability specially because of the Shiite counterparts (pretending that the name of Ali and other stuff were in the original Quran). The actual Quran is nothing than "a state Quran" of the Umayyad caliphate and a response to the Christians, Jews and Shiites.
That's an interesting theory about a "state Quran"--but still surmise presented without evidence. Is there any evidence of a Quran with different content (not including translations or footnotes)?
You have so many credible "academic" researches about these subjects. Just check it by your own means.
So how the content of the Quran was transmitted according to you and what are your sources for what you claim ?
AQ was memorized by some of those hearing it AND written down immediately upon being recited to others. My source is AQ for the writing part.
Your source (Quran itself) about the writing part says nothing as I showed you before. The Quran is clear about that and maybe this is in contradiction with Quran itself, supporting my idea of addition in the Quran.
1)If Muhammad claims that a book is revealed to him, then he has to present his book to the audience
IMPLIES-->
2)But if Muhammad presents his book or claims that a book is revealed to him, then audience will say he is the author in this case the defense is
IMPLIES-->
3)However, is a self contradiction argument because if Muhammad claims that a book is revealed to him, then he has to present his book to the audience
IMPLIES-->
2)But if Muhammad presents his book or claims that a book is revealed to him, then audience will say he is the author in this case the defense is
....
1-->2-->3 but if 2-->3 then again if 2-->3 ... (a series of infinite repetitions)
Conclusion no book was revealed to Muhammad only some divine guidance. The whole story of a "divine book" called "Quran" is a later addition.
Fourth,
1)There are no contradictions (hypothetical claim) in the Quran because there are no multiple versions of a same version (as you can find in Hadiths book).
There are no claims that the earth is flat or that camel urine cures cancer or other bad science in AQ. If a person or people had fabricated AQ, it would have errors of this type. Also, don't you refute this claim later with your "nine versions of Quran" discussion?
As I said it's a hypothetical claim that there are no contradictions in the Quran. And I showed later from the History of Lot that there are contradictions ! And therefore, Quran is in this way not superior to Hadiths.
2)The absence of grammatical errors in the Quran must support its supremacy but can you show me some grammatical errors in Sahih Bukhari for example, if there are no grammatical errors then it's not a big deal if the Quran is also free from grammatical errors ?
This is a red herring. I'm talking about scientific facts, not grammar.
So your criterion to judge if a "Book" is divine or not is Science. If it goes against Science then it's not a divine book. What do you say about the conception of Issa b. Mariyam. Is not this history a contradiction to what Science teaches us about procreation in the human species. You will say that it's a miracle that's why it's a contradiction. Let's assume that your answer is valid. Then, you can put contradictions in the Quran, and you just have to say, "O these are miracles that's why there are contradictions with Science".
I think your criterion of judging if it's divine or not is impotent.
Science never been a criterion to judge the divine origin of something.
Fifth,
Contradiction in the Quran about multiple versions of a same version History of Lot (9 versions in the Quran) 7-11-15-26-27-29-37-51-54
How many version quote the wife of Lot as "his wife" 7-11-15-27-29
However, in 26 and 37, Quran speaks about an old woman (ajzan f l-ghbirna) and not the wife of Lot as you can see in 7 & 27 (im'ra-atahu knat mina l-ghbirna ; im'ra-atahu qaddarnh mina l-ghbirna). This a serious problem semantically because saying "an old woman" is not similar to saying "his wife". And in these versions (26 and 37) we see that Quran fails to indicate who this old woman is.
Recap
9 versions talk about Lot's history
5 versions quote the wife of Lot using "his wife"
4 versions have f/mina l-ghbirna
2 versions quote "an old woman" <------ The problem is here. Why Quran didn't use "his wife" but "an old woman". What is the reason of this exception ?The Theory is Maybe the person who wrote these verse was another one who was not aware of the 5 versions in which it was used "his wife".
I'm unfamiliar with what you write about. There have been multiple translations throughout history. Some translations are better than others. Does one choice of words somehow dramatically change the core meaning?
I am not talking about translation ! Read again.
The numbers above are Surah numbers, if it can help you to undersand the matter.780-84
1169-83
1558-72
26160-174
2754-58
2928-35
37133-136
5131-37
5433-39 -
Sorry Abul-Hadi
I am not answering on your part. I am giving SearchingGod another angle to look at.
The Creator of the universe said HE authored the " Koran". He has provided the proof
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7TfMQJuf0I
His signature is in all HIS creation , including his preserved "book"
Peace.