Is The Quran only meant for Arabs or All of Mankind?
-
Salaam Nice Input.
When I say Arabs I am just referring to the people of the time of the Revelation not the actual ethnicity or race of said people.
The Prophet of the Quran's Ethnicity doesn't matter what I'm conserned about is the language. In 3022 I would understand this as taking about the diversity within The Prohets own people. ie not everyone in the same community would speak the same language and the reading refers to all sorts of people in the Quran Christians, Jews etc which would make me understand The Prophet's community would be multicultural.
Mercy to the World is a statement I agree with I definitely think that the Quran even with a basic understanding (understanding acquired through studying the actual Quran) would be a Mercy.
Some of the verses I mentioned such as 26198-199 or 6156-157 would you say the Language Barrier is a viable excuse to not follow the Quran?
Also do you have anymore clear evidence that The Prophet was sent to all Mankind as per my understanding I'd The Prophet of the Quran was sent to all Mankind then every Prophet would therefore have been sent to all Mankind. Th. Prophet's messages have been the same the only difference would have been Language.
-
Yes, Quran is for Mohammed and his people at that time for them there is a direct message. But for us definitely there are signs and a message about God. If God wills any one will be guided.
Messengers are everywhere and any one can be a messenger for the other.Quran Verse 6/156-157, Explains about the people who complain that if they had received the guidance in the form of a scripture like that of Christians and Jews, they would be better guided. Now that a prophet had come with the Quran, they cant complain.
Quran 6/158
Do they wait for anything except that the angels should come to them or your Lord should come or that there come some of the signs of your Lord? The Day that some of the signs of your Lord will come no soul will benefit from its faith as long as it had not believed before or had earned through its faith some good. Say, "Wait. Indeed, we are waiting."
This verse after is also a continuation and explains, there were people there not satisfied with Mohammed's messages and waiting for angels and other signs from God.
-
All peoples have had messages, we know it as soon as we learn something about their history and culture. Some may have still a very pure spiritual treasure, amongst other it may be more corrupted. In the western world all remembrance of old prophets and their teachings have been swept under the Roman-Christian imperial sway, and the message has been "preserved", disguised under the Christian doctrine.
The language does not matter once the message has by any means been understood. As we know, it is always the same message, distorted many times by human intervention. In this sense, the preservation of the qur'an, no matter whethether it is in Arabic, is a gurantee. And the fact that it is in Arabic, which is a language very appropriate to preserve a message, due to its characteristics, makes for effectiveness of that guarantee. At any point we can always refer to it and undo any confusion the translations may have introduced, although the trnaslations are no more guilty than the own default settings of the readers or trnaslators.
That Arab speaking people have distorted the Qur'an imposing on it interpretations many tiemes so absurd they should have aroused plenty of suspition is a proof that the question is not so much not understanding the language but the incapacity of understing or asimilating something which goes against our own default settings. That people who do not speak the language sometimes make discoveries in the Qur'an other Arabic speakers have not suspected is also a give away.
The main question is that the quester quests and seeks. We are not children to be spoonfed matters that are in our own interest and we should undertake ourselves our own discoveries.
May be the seal of prophethoos is aobut that, about people becoming spiritual adults and taking the lead for ourselves after the message of the Qur'an has been put within our reach and, the most important, we do want that message.
May be, as has been suggested mnay times in thsi forum, the Muhammads, the praised ones, are all those who want the message, take it seriously, and exert themselves making it available to every person interested, and the seal of prophets, was merely or not so merely, the first Muhammad.
Also,today we live in a world where nothing is the private exclusive holding of a particular people, but all (theoretically) can share in all.
Salaam
-
Salam Hello Everyone, I've had a question on my mind for a while now and I'd like to come to a better understanding.
Is The Quran only meant for Arabs or All of Mankind?The Quran 1047 says,
"And for every nation is a messenger. So when their messenger comes, it will be judged between them in justice, and they will not be wronged"
In 144 "And WE have not sent any Messenger except with revelation in the language of his people in order that he might make things clear to them."
As per my understanding I would then ask where is my Messenger if Every Nation Gets a messenger?
Repeated again in 1636Salaam brother,
That is what I was trying to convey since long, but it seems people love Mohammed a lot. Anyways...
As per the aayaat quoted by you
- If there is any person called Mohammed and he was a messenger of Allah, he is not a messenger to us as he was send to Arabs.
- If the alQuraan was given to Mohammed, it is not our book but for Mohammed's people, we don't need to follow it.
Thank you for bringing it up.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
Salam,
But ALLAH, sent Messengers to every nation and He stated that they came one after another, as He says
- Then We sent Our Messengers in succession, every time there came to a nation their Messenger, they denied him, so We made them follow one another (to destruction), and We made them as Ahadeeth. So away with a people who believe not
Allah has named some of those Messengers and told us the stories of some of them, but not of many others.
- And Messengers We have mentioned to you before, and Messengers We have not mentioned to you,
However, if there is no messenger sent to their own people than
- And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning)?
-
Salaam Nice Input.
When I say Arabs I am just referring to the people of the time of the Revelation not the actual ethnicity or race of said people.
The Prophet of the Quran's Ethnicity doesn't matter what I'm conserned about is the language. In 3022 I would understand this as taking about the diversity within The Prohets own people. ie not everyone in the same community would speak the same language and the reading refers to all sorts of people in the Quran Christians, Jews etc which would make me understand The Prophet's community would be multicultural.
Mercy to the World is a statement I agree with I definitely think that the Quran even with a basic understanding (understanding acquired through studying the actual Quran) would be a Mercy.
Some of the verses I mentioned such as 26198-199 or 6156-157 would you say the Language Barrier is a viable excuse to not follow the Quran?
Also do you have anymore clear evidence that The Prophet was sent to all Mankind as per my understanding I'd The Prophet of the Quran was sent to all Mankind then every Prophet would therefore have been sent to all Mankind. Th. Prophet's messages have been the same the only difference would have been Language.
I personally believe the ethnicity of the Last Prophet is very important to know in order to propagate Islam, which is, the Last Prophet was directly descended from Prophet Ishaq ? . The Islamic Tradition renders the last Prophet as descended from Ismael, meaning that he was an Arab and that is why the Quran was in Arabic. I believe that there was an Arab messenger who worked with the Last Prophet.
As I have said, the Last Prophet was sent as a mercy to the Worlds and with Quranic proof clearly shows that he is not an Arab. But there were other messengers who worked with him ? Messengers who probably spoke South Arabian, Greco-Roman, Persian, Soghdian, Bactrian, Nabataea and Khawarazmian.
In the Quran - 0307
He is the One who has sent down to you, the Book; of it are Judgemental verses. They are the foundation of the Book - and others similar. As for those in whose hearts is aberration, then follow what it likes of it, seeking sedition and seeking to construe. And no one knows its interpretation except Allah and those firms in knowledge. Say, "We believe in it. All is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.
- ALLAH sent down the Book and Judgment to all Prophets including the last Prophet, a Book with Judgment verses. This Book is the ?UMMUL-KITAB? that is now with ALLAH .
- ALLAH also sent Books to the Last Prophet with similar verses considering the Fact that word ?others? in plural are mentioned ? referring to Books. The proof is in 1587 and 3923
And We have certainly given you, SEVEN of the SECOND ONE, that is, the Great Qur'an.
AND
ALLAH has sent down the best statement BOOKS, SECOND ONE...
What does it means. In verse 0304 tells us that there are OTHERS, in 1507 tells us that there are 7 numbers and in 3923 the word Book is in plural . So is the Quran telling us that there are 7 of the OTHERS which are similar in their verses? Yes I believe so.
Further in 1037
And not is this the Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but a confirmation which is in between, support it and EXPLAIN THE BOOK, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.
So EXPLAIN what Book? The answer to this question, we will have to cross examine 1101?
A Book, verses prejudged and then EXPLAINED from Wise and Acquainted.
So the above verse 1101 tells us that the UMMUL-KITAB that was sent to all Prophets including the last Prophet in which during the latter?s era, it was EXPLAINED and put in 7 Books.
So how do you explain the Book to the nations especially if you are the Prophet? Although you are a Prophet, but still a human. You need assistant to carry out your job. So was there a possibility that ALLAH grant the prophet assistant, such as, messengers of the various people during his era who spoke in various languages?
Peace
-
So, in this verse Allah clearly says that he did not send any Messenger, except speaking in the language of his people. Then according to this verse, if Allah sent Muhammad for Arabs, because Arabs were his (Muhammad?s) own people, who spoke in language in which Muhammad spoke than he cannot be the messenger for the whole world. Please read
I think your conclusion here is wrong. Looking at the many borrowed words from different languages (hebrew, aramaic, etc) inside the Quran, you can hardly say it was in a language that could only be understood by arabs. Many of the frequent used keywords in Quran would be understood by christians, jews, anyone speaking hebrew or aramaic. Not limited to only hebrew or aramaic either btw.
These languages belong to the same semitic family. Just like anyone who speaks dutch can understand german, Quran was understandable to anyone speaking a language belonging to that same linguistic family.
1538 comparison of Hebrew and Arabic, by Guillaume Postel
http//i.imgur.com/bQp6UWb.png
The christians and jews were as much the intended audience as the arabs.
Peace
-
I think your conclusion here is wrong. Looking at the many borrowed words from different languages (hebrew, aramaic, etc) inside the Quran, you can hardly say it was in a language that could only be understood by arabs. Many of the frequent used keywords in Quran would be understood by christians, jews, anyone speaking hebrew or aramaic. Not limited to only hebrew or aramaic either btw.
These languages belong to the same semitic family. Just like anyone who speaks dutch can understand german, Quran was understandable to anyone speaking a language belonging to that same linguistic family.
1538 comparison of Hebrew and Arabic, by Guillaume Postel
http//i.imgur.com/bQp6UWb.png
The christians and jews were as much the intended audience as the arabs.
Peace
Peace RLZ
You have been running too fast without see left and right. In doing so you have knock the wall. You have become groggy.
No such things as Hebrew language. In fact according to Joseph Yahuda, who happen to be a Jew and author of the book Hebrew is Greek, have you read the Book? And just like Pazuzu wrote in the other thread, with some Arabic grammer and words in corp orated into the language by Ben Elizer.
Also no such things as Aramaic. In fact Aramaic is actually Nabatean. My proof is the Namarah, AlJimal with ancient Greek translation and Raqqush Inscriptions, the three most famous inscription dated in the 3rd Century CE, of which the Namarah and Al-Jimal founded in Syria, Raqqush founded in Northern Hijaz, all written in Nabatean. According to western apologist the areas mentioned were Syriac / Aramaic spoken area. If that is the case why the inscription were written in Nabatean???
So my findings are, in the Levant, Fertile Crescent including Arrum and Persia, before and after the common era, the spoken languages were those which contain Huzwaresh, meaning having Nabatean influence. Middle Persian languages, Greco-Roman have Nabatean words and influences and in which Nabatean itself derived from Musnad of South Arabia - the Cradle of Civilization. So there were no problems for those in the North to comprehend the languages of South Arabia.
Further to proof my point, according to Saad D. Abulhab - who conducted original research and authored two books and several scholarly articles in the fields of Arabic language and script history, typography, and computing wrote-
"The earliest bits and pieces of an alphabet in the greater Arabian Peninsula, including the Fertile Crescent, were found in the eastern Mediterranean region located between ancient Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and Egypt. They were dated back to the 14th century BC. Collectively, these ancient shapes and forms were referred to as the Canaanite alphabet which was said to be derived from proto-Sinaic scripts of Egyptian origin. It is commonly believed today that this Canaanite alphabet is the progenitor of most major alphabets of the old world. Some experts believe that the so called Phoenician script was derived from Arabic Musnad. German historian, Max Muller (1823-1900) thought it was adapted from Musnad during the 9th century B.C. when the Minaean Kingdom of Yemen controlled areas of the Eastern Mediterranean shores. Syrian scholar of the 19th century, Shakb ?Arsaln shares this view. Because of the shape similarity of several Greek and Musnad letters, some experts even believe that Greek was derived from Musnad too! After all, it is a known fact that ancient Greece had extensive trade relations with Yemen going back to the 9th century B.C. Moreover, unlike Phoenician, which was exclusively right to left script, Musnad was bidirectional which may explain Greek?s left to right ordering or even the ancient Boustrophedon practice of bidirectional writing."
So where is Canaanite? The answer is South Arabia!
But what about those living in Europe, South Asia and the Americas? Does their languages contains Huzwaresh? No. so how were they to comprehend the Quran written in Cursive Musnad OR the other languages that contain huzwaresh???
-
It may be, I don't know that there are several dialects frouped in Qur'an but I think the borrowing of non Arabic words is absolute bullshit. The Arabic words that are supposed to be borrwings are pefectly recognizable Arabic words formed from arabic roots and with pperfectly recognizable meanings.
As to it being only for Arabs, nothing is only for some class of people, if somebody finds it serves him or her. If I take the Qur'an, read it, find that it contains things useful for me, who is going to say that it is only for Arabs? That is absolute nonsense. It is for whoever is able to use it. And if it is God who revealed it, as I believe, then He knows perfectly who is going to find it useful, and, that I know people of every etnia have have found it useful while on the other hand not all Arabs find it so.
As the saying goes, the proof is in the eating.
Salaam
-
A good article about the semitic languages
http//phoenicia.org/semlang.html
Peace
-
A good article about the semitic languages
http//phoenicia.org/semlang.html
Peace
Peace
Seriously though, Arabic is much older than Akkadian. This does not mean that the oldest Semitic writings that can be found are in Arabic. In fact, measured from earliest extant writings, Arabic looks relatively young (it is in fact formed in the late 3rd /early 4th Century CE in cursive Musnad from South Arabian Musnad). What it means that Arabic is older than these other relatives is that , ( kalb, (9) may, (10) 'amlak, (11) dam, (12)
'amat, (13) Hadiith, (14) senn, (15) samaay, (16) kookab, (17) qast,
(1 aqrabENGLISH (1) brother, (2) name, (3) head, (4) eye, (5) tongue, (6)
soul, (7) earth, ( dog, (9) water, (10) king, (11) blood, (12)
bondwoman, (13) new, (14) tooth, (15) sky, (16) star, (17) bow, (1
scorpionYou can find these @ http//sasha.inet.ru/ru/akkadian/gramm/lexicon.html
Following a few simple rules of equivalence (i.e., identical consonants
and long vowels count for one point, identical short vowels count for
half, single<>double consonants count for half, m<>n counts for half,
sh<>s counts for half, w<>u counts for one quarter, o<>u counts for one
quarter, i<>e counts for one quarter, ii = y, and uu = w), we have the
following computed average strengths of relationship, based on this
random sampleAkkadian to Arabic 67%
Akkadian to Aramaic 55%
Akkadian to Hebrew 52%
Akkadian to Ethiopic 48%Further, if Akkadian which was spoken by the Assyrian and Babylonian and later on convert to the so called Aramaic which in turn was adopted by the Persian in the 7th Century BCE as agreed by western apologist but in actual fact what it came to be known as the ancient Iranian languages that were widely spoken over an extensive region until the downfall of the Achaemenian Empire in 330 BC, is the Elamite language. The Elamite Cuneiform script was used from about 2500 BC to 331 AD and WAS ADAPTED FROM AKKADIAN CUNEIFORM. Can you see the contradiction?
AND ALSO
why was Nabatean used in the Levant and NOT Aramaic in the 3rc Century CE, as I have pointed out earlier.
http//www.ummeljimal.org/gal/inscriptions/fixed/i1_f2.jpg
And Greek translation
http//www.ummeljimal.org/gal/inscriptions/fixed/i1_f8.jpg
Let me show you the lies, below shows bilingual Greek and Aramaic...
http//i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Modern-Technology-Helps-Decipher-Ancient-Aramaic-Tablets-2.jpg
The Greek inscription is actually modern Greek. Ancient Greek writings are not cursive, compare the the writtings with Umme Jimal above.
Peace