What is Al Asar?
-
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
-
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 could not identify the leaders of those days.
Salam Makaveli i recommend reading these then
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 '(
-
It looks like it is the Yemeni theory, but does the author explains how did a wild unlettered Arabic/Yemeni tribe acquired the most powerful world's religion now called Judaism?
This is the only thing which is interesting to me in the anti-Egypt thesis, so if he explains it please, if you can, provide pages where he outlines his thesis regarding this.
-
It looks like it is the Yemeni theory, but does the author explains how did a wild Arabic/Yemeni tribe acquired the most powerful world's religion now called Judaism?
This is the only thing which is interesting to me in the anti-Egypt thesis, so if he explains it please, if you can, provide pages where he outlines his thesis regarding this.
He does in Book 1 Search for Pharoah
-
He does in Book 1 Search for Pharoah
But I am not browsing 170 pages long of the Muslim traditional propaganda, so if he does, please point at specific pages. As for now I only see one traditional deception attack the other traditional deception. An example is on pp. 51-52
There is very solid and eye-opening evidence that Farawn was indeed the personal
name of the tyrannical figure who persecuted Msa (P) and the Israelites. Had the term
been a title, it would have been mentioned in the form of al-Farawn, (meaning the
Pharaoh”. The fact is, nowhere in the Qurn does it appear with the prefix al-. Lets
look at the following examples
{And the wife of Farawn said A pleasure to my eye and yours, so do not
kill him, perhaps he will benefit us or we may take him as a son while they
did not perceive}
52
The phrase wife of Farawn is no different than wife of N (Noah), or wife of L
(Lot), as can be seen in the following passage
{Allah puts forth as examples of those who have covered the truth, the wife
of Nh and the wife of Lt. They were married to two of Our righteous
servants, but they betrayed them and, consequently, they could not help
them at all against Allah. And it was said Enter the Fire, both of you, with
those who will enter it * And Allah puts forth as an example of those who
believed the wife of Farawn. She said My Rabb, build a home for me near
You in the Paradise, and save me from Farawn and his works; and save me
from the transgressing people}No, it is not at all a "very solid and eye-opening evidence", unless of course Al-Lah is a title or a personal name, not an ancient root depicting something, but then he would have to prove it.
I can also see an overall poor study with little to no references
Furthermore, the builders of the pyramids were not slaves. They lived in good housing
conditions at the foot of the pyramids, and when they died, they received honored burials
in stone tombs near royal cemeteries, as a reward for their contribution. This information
is relatively new, as the first of these worker tombs was discovered only in 1990. They
ate well, received the best medical care, and were exempt from taxes. Unlike slaves, they
were also well paid. The pyramid builders were recruited from poor communities and
worked shifts of three months (including farmers, who worked during the months when
the Nile flooded their farms), distributing the kings wealth out to where it was needed
most. Virtually every fact about the workers that archaeology has revealed rules out the
use of slave labor in the construction of the pyramids. Furthermore, there is zero mention
of Israelites or Jews taking part in the project. Try convincing the Zionists of this
fact.Reference?
This puts the date of their completion some nine hundred years before the
time of Ysuf (P)! This information can be found quite easily on the internet, or in books
dealing with Egyptology.Why not properly cite it?
Finally, we find the terms Qrn and Hmn, both of which are obviously personal
names mentioned alongside Farawn {And We had sent Moses with Our signs,
and a clear authority * To Farawn, Hmn, and Qrn. But they said A
lying deceiver} Mentioning two proper nouns in the same sentence,
53
and in the same context, alongside a title, is both logically and linguistically unsound. For
example, if we say Joe, Mack, and King are walking in the castle garden, it would
seem that King is a proper noun. If it was a title, the sentence would have to be stated
as such Joe, Mack and the king are walking in the castle garden. By the same logic, if
Farawn was a title, it would not appear in the same sentence with two proper nouns
(Hmn and Qrn) without the prefix al- (the).And who are Human and Qar'un? Why the Qur'an mentions them? Keep in mind that the Sura 40 starts with letters Ha-Miim, maybe it wants to point at something?
4024 may as well speak of That which is to/to Uncover/Loose (Firawn, root Fa-Ra-Ayn) Concealed/Taken (Haman, root ha-Miim-Nun) Glory/Power (Qarun, root Qaf-Ra-Nun) indicate to the journey/travel/caravan /lasting deception.
The authors of this diatribe are agressively focused at particular subject of their narrow interest, yet do not even bother uncovering the deception of their personal object of worship. How can this be regarded as objective? Needless to say only conspirological flat earth freaks like Sam Gerrans will spread stuff like that.
-
But I am not browsing 170 pages long of the Muslim traditional propaganda, so if he does, please point at specific pages. As for now I only see one traditional deception attack the other traditional deception.
But he is against "Muslim" tradition, didn't you check the preface? Also check for references in page 121.
