Over it are neither nineteen nor seventeen
-
An especially meritorious reconstruction by G?nter L?ling, A Challenge to Islam for Reformation. The Rediscovery and Reliable Reconstruction of a Comprehensive Pre-Islamic Christian Hymnal hidden in the Koran under the Earliest Islamic Reinterpretation, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2003 (ISNB 81-208-1952-7), a translation and considerable reworking of the G?nter L?ling, ?ber den Ur-Koran, Erlangen 11974, 21993, is surah 7430
,
alayh? tisata `aara,which is translated verbatim "Above it (are) nineteen."
As is well-known, this verse has been the origin of a lot of numerological phantasies concerning some magic behind the Koran.
The current Islamic understanding says that the verse (ayah” refers to 19 angels guarding the gates to hell.
After all, this understanding of verse 7430 admittedly is stipulated by verse 7431
And We have set none but angels as guardians of the Fire; and We have fixed their number only as a trial for Unbelievers, in order that the People of the Book may arrive at certainty, and the Believers may increase in Faith, and that no doubts may be left for the People of the Book and the Believers, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the Unbelievers may say, 'What symbol doth Allah intend by this?' Thus doth Allah leave to stray whom He pleaseth; and guide whom He pleaseth; and none can know the forces of thy Lord, except He. And this is no other than a warning to mankind.
It is however common view of Islamic and orientalist scholarship that verse 7431 was inserted/revealed later. Indeed, already its enormous length in comparison with the verses of its context is striking. Verse 7431 obviously was thought as kind of comment or admonition to cling exactly on to this understanding that "above it (are) 19" means 19 angels guarding the hell.
If we duly discard this understanding forced upon verse 7430, how might we understand it? Nineteen what? We are to answer this question in two steps.
Firstly, instead of the usually given Arabic text "
alayh? tisata `aara" Muslim tradition knows also the version,
alayh? sabata `aara, "Above it (are) seventeen."
(Ibn Hiam, Kit?b s?rat ras?li ll?h, ed. Ferdinand Wuestenfeld, Goettingen 1860, reprint Frankfurt/Main 1961, II, 67, 4-16).These two Arabic figures, 17 and 19, even if written in words, are actually indistinguishable if the writer wrote, as usual, the "water waves" of the Arabic script with equal spaces and didn't set the diacritical point or the two diacritical points, resp., at the crucial places.
Referring to 17 angels guarding the gates to hell, of course, is nothing better than to 19 ones.
Secondly, L?ling proposed to read
,
alayh? sabatu a`urin,an emendation which presupposes in the rasm (= script apart from diacritical points and vowel marks, which are later inventions) the metathesis of the ", " (?n) with the ",
" (ain) and an additional ", '" (alif) in front of the rasm "-`-r".Such metatheses are rather common in Semitic etymology, and due to the structure of the Arabic script it is even no big affair to interchange a ", s" (s?n) with an ",
" (ain) or in a script without diacritical points a ", " (?n) with an "," (ain).For this reading "a
urin", including the additional alif, we have documental evidence Some of the oldest Qur'an codices read "tisata a`urin" (Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur'an. The Old Codices, Leiden 1937, p. 217).Already in the 9th century AD, when Islamic orthodoxy consolidated, Muslim scholarship did not know what to make of this reading. Ab? H?ti as-Sijist?n? (+ 864) e.g. is reported (G. Bergstraesser, Nichtkanonische Koranlesarten im MuHtasab des Ibn Ginn?, Muenchen 1933, p. 73,5ff) to have said about this odd variant "It makes no recognizable sense except that 'tis
ata aurin' could mean the plural of 'ten' or something else apart from what just occurred to our minds."In addition one may remember that "Brother Mark" in his "A `Perfect' Qur'an " has shown that in the oldest Koran manuscripts with their older orthography more alifs were present, which later were omitted in many cases.
Whereas a plural "a
ur" of "aara" like "tens" of "ten" certainly is nonsense, a plural "asur" to "sar" or "saar" makes sense. Though this word is not contained in any of the Arabic dictionaries, it can be shown from old Arabic literature, amongst them the poets Mutalammis and Umayya b. Abi S-Salt, that there was a word "sar" or "saar" (with the plurals "asur", "suur" or "sur" having the meaning "gate" or "bolt".Eventually we arrive at the reconstruction of surah 7430 as
,
alayh? sabatu as`urin, "To it (are) seven gates."The assertion that hell has seven gates or bolts is very apt to the context of surah 7430. And this topic of hell having seven gates is not only a very familiar one from Old-Orient times, but is present also in the Qur'an, namely in surah 1544
, lah? sab`atu abw?bin, "To it (are) seven gates."
http//www.christoph-heger.de/Surah_74_30.htm
-
Wow, JM thank you for one more possible way of reading confused
no this is not ironical, i mean it
and the seven gates already present in quran make it very probable
This is a wonderful example for people fighting each other verbally about the real meaning of 19, is it a fitna for those that believe in the code, for the others... now there may even not be any 19
salaam, lk
-
Peace,
I know this guy, i have read his book that showed the Quran is not divine but a christian song and praises that were changed into the Quran. A lot of things were nonsense in his book, as he just wanted to proof old christain hymns which he doesn't even have on record. he approaches the Quran as it is an old christian song-book that was made special by the arabs. There are more books like this. All based on that the Quran is copied from old aramaic scriptures. Sp the way he approaches the Quran is already completly wrong. He maybe find some truths, but he will only use them to prove his point. It is an old priest turned loose....
He says most prayers in the Quran are not directed at God but to Jesus!
I will check it further, but be carefull with this guy...please don't just fall into his ideas.
-
Peace JM,
Whereas a plural "a
?ur" of "a?ara" ? like "tens" of "ten" ? certainly is nonsense, a plural "asur" to "sar" or "saar" makes sense. Though this word is not contained in any of the Arabic dictionaries, it can be shown from old Arabic literature, amongst them the poets Mutalammis and Umayya b. Abi S-Salt, that there was a word "sar" or "saar" (with the plurals "asur", "suur" or "sur" having the meaning "gate" or "bolt".Eventually we arrive at the reconstruction of surah 7430 as
,
alayh? sabatu as`urin,"To it (are) seven gates."
That does not make any sense to me. He invented words and Ayat too!
You cannot find this in any Arabic dictionary, not to mention Al Quran, then what is his basis? Poets!? -
Your're right to advert arnold, thank you
but as the saying goes - don't wash away the baby with the bathtubwater...
guess you also read luxenberg - is this luxenberg ? Many of his findings make sens, even though he uses them in order to "christianize" quran
peace lk
-
Peace,
Like i said, we need to be carefull as the guy can maybe find some truths, but he will use it to twist it all for his lies. He tries to prove the Quran is an old christian hymn book. But the ignorance is, the guy doesn't have the old hymn book to refer to! So he is just guessing most of his things. And yes, i know luxenburg, and he is crap also. Their approach is to dis-prove the Quran instead of clarifying it. They have never approached the Quran from a revelation point of view. And they also have a non-sense view of Jesus and his followers, which they use to prove their view.
I have read his thick book, and it is one guess to the other, one big book of guesses. He used aramiac to prove his point, but aramiac and classic arabic are to different.
watch out! heretic priest cross-over............. D
-
Dear JM,
I find the explanations in the article somewhat farfetched.
If the same exercises are applied to the rest of the qur?an or any other text, any tales may be created. I can not find any base for the claims put forward here.
I do not know the person who has authored it, but unless there is further evidence for the allegations, I believe it to be quite useless.The comments from ?arnoldyasin? may explain a bit.
Regds
Ali
-
If you would read his book, you would understand. He uses aramaic to change words, as he believes that is the real origin of the word, to change it back to the 'original' form. But he has zero evidence why it should be like he says. He keeps refering to old aramaic christian hymn books without any reference or quote. It is still not clear to me if he even has old aramaic hymns to refer to, like real manuscripts...........
And he believes many surahs are really hymns directed to Jesus.
-
Peace all,
I think the first message of the thread shows clearly that the number 19 is a trial for Unbelievers, as verse 7431 states.;D yeah
It is however common view of Islamic and orientalist scholarship that verse 7431 was inserted/revealed later.
what about the following facts
verse 7431 consists of 57 (19x3) words.
the portion of verse 7431 which tells us the functions of 19 consists of 38 (19x2) words.
There are exactly 95 (19x5) words from the beginning of sura 74 until verse 7431.
moreover there are many more findings/facts that you can find in various websites.
In fact it is understandable why kafirs hate miracle 19, as 19 is the SCIENTIFIC PROOF that all rejecters are miserable hell creatures.
4416 On the Day We strike the great strike, We will avenge.
-
I guess the author of that non sense forgot to also change Alayha to Laha
because when you say Alayha, it means "on it", and when you say Laha it means "to it"
but was a nice but very funny try though