What is Al Asar?
-
So it was sponsored/organized by the alleged fourth ruler/exploiter/an subject of political worship and taxation, hence was politically/religiously motivated and if I understood correctly no authentic Arabic linguistic or at least poetic sources of this particular linguistic tradition was preserved for comparative analysis with Quranic consonantal text. Doubt it is of any use to me. Thanks.
Neither there is an original written manuscript of Quran, nor language rules were written from day one of its inception. The Chronological comparison of older manuscripts available in public domain attest to evolution of the text over time to its final version of the text we have today. The rules of the language as well lexicon were written to explain this evolved text and not the older manuscripts. There is only one translation written by Tabari, which is considered as De-fact o Quran until now and it was all based upon hearsay.
Therefore, there are only few choices regarding Quran based upon above facts.
-
Consider Quran a lost cause and the book of a lost language. Since all people speaking that language are long dead. No rules were written by them right away and all were written over time by lots of people. Furthermore, current text is also an evolved form with signs and marks not present in oldest manuscripts available. Hence, oldest manuscript can not be understood.
-
Continue to accept Tabari's Hearsay based De Fact o Quran as the real Quran continue doing what Muslims are now doing for 1200 years. Which is to follow hearsay.
-
Final one, accept the reality above. Use current text with all its marks. Use first rules of the language available, if no rules exist use reason and logic within the confines of existing rules to translate Quran. Once translated, evaluate this translation based upon standards of reason and logic, leaving tradition, held understanding and beliefs on side. If this translation fits the standards of reason and logic, accept and adopt. Otherwise, reject as non-sense. However, the later should be done entirely based upon use of reason and logic and not because it contradicts held beliefs of centuries.
Regards,
-
-
Neither there is an original written manuscript of Quran, nor language rules were written from day one of its inception. The Chronological comparison of older manuscripts available in public domain attest to evolution of the text over time to its final version of the text we have today. The rules of the language as well lexicon were written to explain this evolved text and not the older manuscripts. There is only one translation written by Tabari, which is considered as De-fact o Quran until now and it was all based upon hearsay.
Are you sure about that? Because i doubt that's true.
-
If you have doubts, please present your evidence, refuting my claim.
Salam/Peace, the only evidence i can't think of right now is Sanaa Manuscript that was found in Yemen, yes i know it's whole but hear me out.
There is a 4-part E-Books named Arabia The Untold Story and you wonder what does it involve in this topic? Well the books involve Quran heavily and exposing the Zionist & Orientalist corruption involving the geography in the Quran. And i recommend checking them out
Book 1 Search for Pharaoh
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/1st-E-Book_Search-for-Pharaoh.pdfBook 2 Road of the Patriarch
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/2nd-E-Book_Road-of-the-Patriarch.pdfBook 3 Israel and Sheba
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/3rd-E-Book_Israel-and-Sheba.pdfBook 4 The Assyrian Storm
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/4th-E-Book_The-Assyrian-Storm.pdfAlso there is these verses
8521
Bal huwa qur'?nun maj?dun
No,it is a glorious Qur'an.
8522
F? lawHin maHf?Zin
In a tablet, preserved.Once you read all of the books and the 2 verses i have shown, you may get a conclusion the Original Quran may be in Yemen. I can help but notice that the Sanaa Manuscript was found in Yemen.
Salamun Aleykum/Peace be upon you. group
P.S Just letting you know i am not a skilled debater '(
-
Neither there is an original written manuscript of Quran, nor language rules were written from day one of its inception. The Chronological comparison of older manuscripts available in public domain attest to evolution of the text over time to its final version of the text we have today. The rules of the language as well lexicon were written to explain this evolved text and not the older manuscripts. There is only one translation written by Tabari, which is considered as De-fact o Quran until now and it was all based upon hearsay.
Therefore, there are only few choices regarding Quran based upon above facts.
-
Consider Quran a lost cause and the book of a lost language. Since all people speaking that language are long dead. No rules were written by them right away and all were written over time by lots of people. Furthermore, current text is also an evolved form with signs and marks not present in oldest manuscripts available. Hence, oldest manuscript can not be understood.
-
Continue to accept Tabari's Hearsay based De Fact o Quran as the real Quran continue doing what Muslims are now doing for 1200 years. Which is to follow hearsay.
-
Final one, accept the reality above. Use current text with all its marks. Use first rules of the language available, if no rules exist use reason and logic within the confines of existing rules to translate Quran. Once translated, evaluate this translation based upon standards of reason and logic, leaving tradition, held understanding and beliefs on side. If this translation fits the standards of reason and logic, accept and adopt. Otherwise, reject as non-sense. However, the later should be done entirely based upon use of reason and logic and not because it contradicts held beliefs of centuries.
None of what you said in its whole abundance is of any practical use and is not even a refute to my initial claim above, even confirms it. There does not have to be an original copy of the Quran since the text is more or less preserved albeit in different recitation traditions, with additional nuns and waws here and there, but overall they are pretty much identic. All of the more or less old copies discovered had absolutely no grammar in them, except occasional dots, which if anything hints to the Yemeni and later Babylonian Talmudic traditions, and hence has no indication of dialect called 'Classic Arabic'. But were there any authentic linguistic copies or works of the same linguistic tradition/time period for comparison, that would be another story. But given the lack of it it is merely your personal belief based on hypothetical thinking and lacks any authoritative historical confirmation. It is plain scholasticism to be exact.
Also I would like to see you debate with any one of the modern Arabic grammatists of your choice, preferably of Arabic rather than the Orientalist descent, such someone from Al-Azhar Uni or of similar scholarly background (not that I care for his/her background, but rather to make debate more authentic and less biased by the likelihood of opponent's possible inclination towards alternative Quranic theories), either video debate or text based, as long as the other side may confirm his/her identity.
My question remains unanswered/semi-answered with no particular observable historical information, if we are to accept it as an answer, nor I ever asked what options do 'we' have 'left' with the Quran, it is up to every individual in particular and is not limited to these three options though.
-
-
Salam/Peace, the only evidence i can't think of right now is Sanaa Manuscript that was found in Yemen, yes i know it's whole but hear me out.
There is a 4-part E-Books named Arabia The Untold Story and you wonder what does it involve in this topic? Well the books involve Quran heavily and exposing the Zionist & Orientalist corruption involving the geography in the Quran. And i recommend checking them out
Book 1 Search for Pharaoh
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/1st-E-Book_Search-for-Pharaoh.pdfBook 2 Road of the Patriarch
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/2nd-E-Book_Road-of-the-Patriarch.pdfBook 3 Israel and Sheba
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/3rd-E-Book_Israel-and-Sheba.pdfBook 4 The Assyrian Storm
https//www.quranite.com/wp-content/uploads/4th-E-Book_The-Assyrian-Storm.pdfAlso there is these verses
8521
Bal huwa qur'?nun maj?dun
No,it is a glorious Qur'an.
8522
F? lawHin maHf?Zin
In a tablet, preserved.Once you read all of the books and the 2 verses i have shown, you may get a conclusion the Original Quran may be in Yemen. I can help but notice that the Sanaa Manuscript was found in Yemen.
Salamun Aleykum/Peace be upon you. group
P.S Just letting you know i am not a skilled debater '(
I have chosen not to be distracted by history. As there is also historical evidence that there never existed a town in Arabia where current Kaaba and Mekka are at the time of Alexander the Great in the maps made of the area by his advance mapping team for the area. Hence, the simplest approach in my assessment of the complex situation is following given in the red below.
Neither there is an original written manuscript of Quran, nor language rules were written from day one of its inception. The Chronological comparison of older manuscripts available in public domain attest to evolution of the text over time to its final version of the text we have today. The rules of the language as well lexicon were written to explain this evolved text and not the older manuscripts. There is only one translation written by Tabari, which is considered as De-fact o Quran until now and it was all based upon hearsay.
Therefore, there are only few choices regarding Quran based upon above facts.
-
Consider Quran a lost cause and the book of a lost language. Since all people speaking that language are long dead. No rules were written by them right away and all were written over time by lots of people. Furthermore, current text is also an evolved form with signs and marks not present in oldest manuscripts available. Hence, oldest manuscript can not be understood.
-
Continue to accept Tabari's Hearsay based De Fact o Quran as the real Quran continue doing what Muslims are now doing for 1200 years. Which is to follow hearsay.
-
Final one, accept the reality above. Use current text with all its marks. Use first rules of the language available, if no rules exist use reason and logic within the confines of existing rules to translate Quran. Once translated, evaluate this translation based upon standards of reason and logic, leaving tradition, held understanding and beliefs on side. If this translation fits the standards of reason and logic, accept and adopt. Otherwise, reject as non-sense. However, the later should be done entirely based upon use of reason and logic and not because it contradicts held beliefs of centuries.
Regards,
-
-
Furthermore, the Sanna Manuscript is never claimed by anybody to be the original manuscript. By original, I am referring to the one that Sunni's claim was completed in Abu Bakar's time and was preserved with Hafza prophet's wife. Which supposedly Uthman use to canonize before destroying others. Even the others claimed to be Manuscripts from Uthman's time are very doubtful to that time.
-
I have chosen not to be distracted by history. As there is also historical evidence that there never existed a town in Arabia where current Kaaba and Mekka are at the time of Alexander the Great in the maps made of the area by his advance mapping team for the area. Hence, the simplest approach in my assessment of the complex situation is following given in the red below.
Salam/Peace i never mentioned Kaaba, Mekka & Alexander the Great. In fact i agree that Kaaba & Mekka are not towns. Didn't they surface in 900s? Anyway my point is that original Quran that is preserved in a tablet in Yemen. Simply read the E-Books if you are interested.
-
Furthermore, the Sanna Manuscript is never claimed by anybody to be the original manuscript. By original, I am referring to the one that Sunni's claim was completed in Abu Bakar's time and was preserved with Hafza prophet's wife. Which supposedly Uthman use to canonize before destroying others. Even the others claimed to be Manuscripts from Uthman's time are very doubtful to that time.
I wonder does Abu Bakr or Uthman really exist? As of now i haven't seen historical evidence of Abu Bakr or Uthman. Sorry if i was ignorant.
-
I wonder does Abu Bakr or Uthman really exist? As of now i haven't seen historical evidence of Abu Bakr or Uthman. Sorry if i was ignorant.
Or Ali or pretty much anyone until the late Abbasid period who can be confirmed by the Western Roman sources. The Ummaya opponents, at least so it seems, appear to be faked individuals, or at least their history was corrupted by the party that won the war.
-
Salam/Peace i never mentioned Kaaba, Mekka & Alexander the Great. In fact i agree that Kaaba & Mekka are not towns. Didn't they surface in 900s? Anyway my point is that original Quran that is preserved in a tablet in Yemen. Simply read the E-Books if you are interested.
Post a link to this original tablet.
-
I wonder does Abu Bakr or Uthman really exist? As of now i haven't seen historical evidence of Abu Bakr or Uthman. Sorry if i was ignorant.
We can agree on that. This is what my conclusions are. Even for that matter, Mohammad as depicted in the history.
-
Post a link to this original tablet.
But the thing is it's not found. Well at least not yet.
-
We can agree on that. This is what my conclusions are. Even for that matter, Mohammad as depicted in the history.
I am not sure about that, check this out if you wish. Note It's very long. http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/earlysaw.html
-
We can agree on that. This is what my conclusions are. Even for that matter, Mohammad as depicted in the history.
Yet you use Ali as an argument for someone who started the alleged Classic Arabic grammar tradition, which accoding to observable sources started as late as the end of the 8th century at best and not with the alleged Ali's (because his identity is questioned) alleged rule period (because his reign is questioned), which according to traditional sources (i.e. lack of confirmed sources) was around in the late first half and early second half of 7 AD.
Sibawayhi is only one of them. There were two schools one in Basra and other at Kufa that worked on it. Please check out preface by Mortimer Sloper Howell's Arabic Grammar book to know where did work of language rules writing started. It started at the request of Ali.
-
Yet you use Ali as an argument for someone who started the alleged Classic Arabic grammar tradition, which accoding to observable sources started as late as the end of the 8th century at best and not with the alleged Ali's (because his identity is questioned) alleged rule period (because his reign is questioned), which according to traditional sources (i.e. lack of confirmed sources) was around in the late first half and early second half of 7 AD.
Hence, my reality based argument. We we two things on our disposal Quran in its current written text and the archives of its language rules. No way of determining the authorship of either. Historical and traditional accounts are all suspect. Therefore, use these language rules to understand the meanings of text. Evaluate resulting translation based upon scale of given innate ability of rationale, then decide.
-
Hence, my reality based argument. We we two things on our disposal Quran in its current written text and the archives of its language rules. No way of determining the authorship of either. Historical and traditional accounts are all suspect. Therefore, use these language rules to understand the meanings of text. Evaluate resulting translation based upon scale of given innate ability of rationale, then decide.
Traditional yes but historical though i am not sure about that.
-
Hence, my reality based argument. We we two things on our disposal Quran in its current written text and the archives of its language rules. No way of determining the authorship of either. Historical and traditional accounts are all suspect. Therefore, use these language rules to understand the meanings of text. Evaluate resulting translation based upon scale of given innate ability of rationale, then decide.
It does not explain the language dialect of your choice, not at all. Why not use any of the OSA dialects or or ANA? What makes it be the Classic Arabic for you, which did not even exist before the end of the 8th c?
-
It does not explain the language dialect of your choice, not at all. Why not use any of the OSA dialects or or ANA? What makes it be the Classic Arabic for you, which did not even exist before the end of the 8th c?
OSA is Old South Arabic but what is ANA?
-
OSA is Old South Arabic but what is ANA?
Ancient North Arabian, you know, some theories believe the Quranic script originated from the North, in the Persian or Jordan region, which makes sense given the state of technological advancement in the North and stagnation of the South in the pre-Islamic period.
Copies like the Yemeni Saana Manuscript could be left there to make it look like it originated from Yemen though. Just like they did when they left the copies of Mo's "diolomatic letters" in the countries that they counquered, it seems to be their historical deception tactics, but they barely could identify the leaders of those days.
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_letters_to_the_heads_of_state
