Muhammad Wrote the quran
-
Peace AB,
Salam bro
I did not know that. Also I haven't been following the muslim/mumin thread you talked about. Now I know your feeling on this issue,
Sounds childish but cool with me, I have no problem that others call me as such regarding this matter, I just took my decision not to exchange info with him ever unless the God wills otherwise
lets move on. This is wrong IMO. I think you know what a "liar" is. You don't know this of me. This is my understanding of the verse, hey maybe if you could explain it without those terms I might even come to a better understanding.
Fine, on the other hand I didn?t use the word liar with malice intent, for me anyone (including myself) who says things opposite to what the Quran says is liar, if you have read my comments you should notice that I said I careless about their intention if they do it deliberately or not
Lie = A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
Liar = A person who lies.I believe lies can be categorised, yes the above description is a lie however that is a type of a deliberate lie, there are many however who say a lot of things about Allah while Allah never said it, those humans don't think they are lying, Allah however descirbed them as liars in the Quran, this title (a liar) is valid to those who say about Allah what they don't know
For example we know that many Shiekhs, Mullahs, Imams and Muftis tell us everyday this is Haram and that is Halal, Allah on the other hand hand warned us from saying that regarding matters that are never sanctioned by Him, and He described those who do as such as LIARS, 16116
I?m sure there are many other verses that described humans as liars while the malice intention was not there.
Perhaps you're looking for a different word,
Well, I?m open minded to use another word if that will make you not upset, can you suggest one?
but I take that word very seriously if someone accuses me of such.
Then you have to take the message from your God very seriously that those who say about Allah what they don?t know are liars
It's not about hurting my feeling, so saying the 'truth hurts', doesn't mean anything.
Well, I was not hurting your feeling, but I know the truth hurts the feelings, including mine, it is all about those handling that truth, the majority of humans unfortunately can?t handle the truth
Infact, if anything, THAT is a lie.I take it you don't understand that phrase - to cry foul.
Ok
So no need to call me a liar and jump to conclusions.
I didn?t say Zenje is a liar
I said all those who say the opposite to what the Quran said are liars. If you say the opposite then my statement covers you.
This is the statement, on this same thread, that I was talking about...That's crying foul. I'm sure you've watched a soccer game (especially Italy in world cup), when they get tackled and the lie down on the ground showing their in lots of pain, when truly they're not.
I don?t do that
And not 2 minutes before he did tha same thing to another player. Yes, thats you crying foul. It doesn't mean you have actual tears, or that you went crying to the mods.
Fine, but again I don?t do your metaphor
Back to the issue at hand...How?
Sounds better to me
Again, I can understand why you think the verse doesn't confirm it, but how does the verse DENY it? ???
Of course the verse denies it, see the whole matter is this
If Mohammad was able to write any book and wrote the whole Quran then the Kuffar would have doubted that it is from Allah, so Allah is saying that Mohammad had never read nor wrote any book ?including scriptures? ?UNKNOWN? ?Nakirah? ?No Al?, ?No The?, because if he did then the Kuffar would have doubted that it is from Allah
Clear and simple and does not create any contradiction in the Quran.
On the other hand as sister Honor highlighted under the flawed understanding that Mohammad wrote the whole Quran we must end up with a pile of non sense that made her confused. I'm sure ikt should confuse others as well.
- You were not reciting any scripture before this, nor were you writing one down by your hand. In that case, the doubters would have had reason.
The translation above is flawed, the verse never said any scripture, the verse said ?a book?, ?Nakirah?, ?Unkown?, ?No Al?, ?No The? and surely ?No Muddaf Ilieh (the only case to have a known nakirah without the Al?
?Min Kitab?, i.e. ?any book?, translating it as scripture is 100% wrong
Now let me just use it for now
See ? You were not reciting any scripture before this, nor were you writing one down by your hand.?, so if Mohammad was able to write any book including any scripture(unknown) ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.?, i.e. reason to doubt that it is from Allah, i.e. Mohammad didn?t write any book including the Quran
Here's my understanding - He could neither recite/read or write before this. Now (at that time) he can.
if the verse ended without this bit, ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.? then I may have given ground to your assumption, on the other hand having the verse ending like this ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.?, clearly indicate the denial that Mohammad wrote the Quran.
Let me understand your position first ?
I stated my position clearly many times now
(1) could Muhammad READ? After the revelation that is (I think before is clear).
Even if he managed to learn how to read after the revelation, if he could not write then he is still an Ummi.
(2) Was quran written during his lifetime? Yes or no answer will suffice.
No one can confirm that (Allah only knows)
I lean to believe that the answer is, No
Thanks. peace
I guess we should leave it at that and let the public decide, better that we stay pals
Salam
-
does that mean i can bum a smoke? D
not sure really what the above mean, if it means having a cigi together then why not
maybe allah wouldn't mind if you took the initiative
The idea is there for years finding the time to do it is another matter, however I started to think to create an English Quran project on my web site and get all to participate then we create an online english version over a few years or so, my plan is simply to go through all tranlstions and pick the right one, if non is not right then the community should interfer and propose one then we compile verse by verse, I lengthy process I should say but sounds exciting, I might start making a blue print to the points that we should be aware of
Salam
-
Ahmad very good idea, i have been thinking about it too. who could be a better person than you to start this noble project , MY prayers with you.
May God support you with a thousand angels angel (on line )By the way , when i research some crucial point , i usually check about 10 translations, and over a period of time i have found SHakir's translation to be relatively better than the others.
peace
siki
-
Ahmad very good idea, i have been thinking about it too. who could be a better person than you to start this noble project , MY prayers with you.
May God support you with a thousand angels angel (on line ))this is not a one person project, this is going to be a team/community project, no human is going to take credit for it inshaallah
By the way , when i research some crucial point , i usually check about 10 translations, and over a period of time i have found SHakir's translation to be relatively better than the others.
peace
siki
I agree, that is why I use his the most
Salam
-
Peace AB,
Okay, good let's get beack to the good discussion.
If Mohammad was able to write any book and wrote the whole Quran then the Kuffar would have doubted that it is from Allah, so Allah is saying that Mohammad had never read nor wrote any book ?including scriptures? ?UNKNOWN? ?Nakirah? ?No Al?, ?No The?, because if he did then the Kuffar would have doubted that it is from Allah
See, I don't understand what you said here. you keep saying this, but seriously, I don't know what you're saying. Believe me, I'm trying to understand. So let me break it down - First, you disagree that it's scripture, but rather book. Okay, I have no problem with that. So, you're saying that he did not write any book before. He did not read any book before. I agree with you if that's what you're saying.See ? You were not reciting any scripture before this, nor were you writing one down by your hand.?, so if Mohammad was able to write any book including any scripture(unknown) ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.?, i.e. reason to doubt that it is from Allah, i.e. Mohammad didn?t write any book including the Quran
Okay... the doubters would have had reason if he knew how to write before, yes?if the verse ended without this bit, ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.? then I may have given ground to your assumption, on the other hand having the verse ending like this ? In that case, the doubters would have had reason.?, clearly indicate the denial that Mohammad wrote the Quran.
Doh! You lost me there. This is the part I needed you to explain to me, I dont understand why you believe that if the doubters had reason then Muhammad couldn't write AFTER the revelation.Here's my understanding - if someone tells you, you couldn't write before this... to me it means that now you can write... right? Okay, if I'm missing AB's point here and someone else can explain it, I'd appreciate it.
Quote from zenje on Today at 045702 AM
(1) could Muhammad READ? After the revelation that is (I think before is clear).Even if he managed to learn how to read after the revelation, if he could not write then he is still an Ummi.
So I take it the answer is no.Quote from zenje on Today at 045702 AM
(2) Was quran written during his lifetime? Yes or no answer will suffice.No one can confirm that (Allah only knows)
I lean to believe that the answer is, No
Thanks. That clears some things up.How do you translate 734?
I guess we should leave it at that and let the public decide, better that we stay pals
We can stay pals, that does not change, I'm just trying to understand from you what your explanation is. I'm not trying to prove my point or that I'm right, and you're wrong. I'm trying to satisfy my curiousity, and perhaps then maybe we can both come from this having learnt something, even if we still end up in disagreement about this issue.PEACE.
-
Peace AB,
Salam Zenje
Okay, good let's get beack to the good discussion.
Sure
See, I don't understand what you said here. you keep saying this, but seriously, I don't know what you're saying. Believe me, I'm trying to understand.
Cool, let?s try an break 2948 into further details
So let me break it down - First, you disagree that it's scripture, but rather book.
No entirely accurate, let me bring the verse again and explain it to you
And you did not recite before it any book, nor did you transcribe one with your right hand, for then could those who say untrue things have doubted.
(4
The first part ? ?, ? And you did not recite before it?, the damir ?Ha? translated as ?it? in the word ?Qablihi? is referring to the Quran
The second part ? ?, i.e. ?a book?, i.e. any book (unknown)The two parts together will be like this literally ?you were not reading any book before the Quran?
As you can see we have the words ?Ma Kunt? as the denial words, the action denied is reading any book, and the time for the action is before the Quran, this constitutes a complete sentence in Arabic
What comes after is another piece of information that has nothing to do with the time of not being able to read the Quran, i.e. the words ?Qablihi? only applies to the reading of any book, it does not apply to the writing as I will confirm right now
-> The third part is like this ? ?, i.e. ? , nor did you transcribe one with your right hand?, is independent from the word Qablihi, i.e. the timing of the word Qablihi does not apply to this denial, the denial in here is specific to the Quran actually this is because of the Damir ?Ha? in the word ?Takhotuh? is referring to the Quran and not the ?a book?, if it was referring to a book as the word ?Yatlu? then the Ha should never be there, i.e. the second denial in this part is specific to the Quran and is independent from the word Qablihi, i.e. even after the Quarn he did not write it down.
The proper translation according to the Arabic sentences structures and grammar in those three parts should be as follow
?you were not reading any book before the Quran, and you do not write the Quran with your right hand?
-> The last part goes like this ? ?, i.e. ? , for then could those who say untrue things have doubted.?, i.e. if any of these two things 1) the prophet read any book before the Quran, 2) the prophet was the one who was writing the Quran, was true then the Kafiroon would have doubted that it is from Allah,
Of course if I?m a professional writer then one day I told you here is a book from God that I received, then you read it and find it amazing, there is no doubt that you will doubt that I wrote it myself because I?m a professional writer, in the case of the Quran however if the prophet was involved in any way in documenting the Quran, it would have been a massive blow to Islam from its enemies because it is going to be hard to refute that Mohammad was not the author, indeed even while the whole world know well from the history that Mohammad didn?t know how to write they still allege that Mohammad wrote it, up to this day and this hour every day on FFI and other places, they even say as you know that he copied it from the Bible, while the idiots miss that there was no Arabic bible until at least 200 years after Mohammad death, yet the same verse 2948 denied that he was reading any book before the Quran (I.E Mohammad could have not taken content from the Bible), SEE HOW ALLAH IS REFUTING THE ENEMY UP TO THIS HOUR, this is because Mohammad did not write the Quran nor read any book before the Quran.
The tom and jerry argument presented by Tanveer about the prophet signing a treaty is really a laugh because firstly he exposed his desperation by resorting to the corrupt hadith to support his allegation, secondly the hadith does not tell us that the Quarn was written in full by Mohammad.
Now Mohammad may have learnt reading and writing after the Quran, I have no problem with that but it will still classified as conjectures at my end, on the other hand I?m sorry I can?t acceot that he wrote the Qiran because 2948 denies it
Okay, I have no problem with that. So, you're saying that he did not write any book before. He did not read any book before. I agree with you if that's what you're saying.Okay...
I like to say it precisely then
-
2948 told us that Mohammad was not able to read a book before the Quran, i.e. He was not able to write either, this is because anyone who can?t read must not be able to write, it is plausible vice verse, I.e, you can read while not write, but your can?t write while not reading and that is up to the Quran revelation
-
2948 also denied that Mohammad write the Quran with his hand
-
If any of the above two was true then the Kafiroon would have doubted that the Quran is from Allah.
-
I don?t know if Mohammad learnt how to read and write before his death
the doubters would have had reason if he knew how to write before, yes?Doh!
And after, because the Quran was revealed in a period of many years, at least 20 years, so during those years if Mohammad was involved ever in writing the Quran, the same argument presented by Allah in 2948 must be valid, i.e. they would have doubted him. i.e. it never happened, that is why it was excluded from the word Qablihi as you see in 2948
You lost me there. This is the part I needed you to explain to me, I dont understand why you believe that if the doubters had reason then Muhammad couldn't write AFTER the revelation.
Exacrly and I hope I explained enough above
Here's my understanding - if someone tells you, you couldn't write before this... to me it means that now you can write... right? Okay, if I'm missing AB's point here and someone else can explain it, I'd appreciate it. So I take it the answer is no.Thanks. That clears some things up.
The argument is invalid because the word before does not apply to the writing, it was a new sentence and this is obvious that thew word Qablihi came after the word read, if the verb of writing is included then it should be without the Ha in ?Takhutuh?
How do you translate 734?
Rattil Al Quran Tartila, does not actually mean to read from a book named Al Quran, it can simply means reciting it from memory in the most proper manner, the Prophet for sure did that during his salat and at dawn all the times
Even if I accept that it means read the Quran the best way (as reading from a book), then it has nothing to do with writing the whole Quran with his own hand still, which was explicitly denied in 2948
We can stay pals, that does not change, I'm just trying to understand from you what your explanation is. I'm not trying to prove my point or that I'm right, and you're wrong.
Nor I?m trying to prove you wrong, I?m saying the truth as far as I can see it and I know well that I will be held accountable by Allah
I'm trying to satisfy my curiousity,
The issue is not important to me and you as both of us stated. Me and you know well that the Quran is from Allah
and perhaps then maybe we can both come from this having learnt something, even if we still end up in disagreement about this issue.
PEACE.
As I said, I?m happy to accept that Mohamad may have learnt how to read and write books after the Quran, there is nothing that refutes that, however 2948 refutes that Mohammad wrote the Quran with his own hands
Salam mate
-
-
Ahmad ! i think you missed ''' start ''''' in my post?
peace
siki
sorry, writing too much, I have to have a nap
Thank you very much, you can be part of it if you wish, I have not got it start it yet, possibly within a week to 10 days
salam
-
Peace all,
2948 You were not reciting any book before this, nor were you writing one down by your hand. In that case, the doubters would have had reason.
If Prophet Muhammad had never written any book, the verse would not have said "before this". In that case, it would have looked like this
"You were not reciting any book, nor were you writing one down by your hand. In that case, the doubters would have had reason."
This would mean that he never wrote any book, and would also mean that he never recited one (including the Qur'aan) !
The presence of "before this" would not make any sense if he never wrote any book (including the Qur'aan).
The presence of "before this" clearly indicates that before the Qur'aan he never wrote or recited any book, and at the same time indicates that he did write the Qur'aan with his hand and recited it.
IF 2948 IS TAKEN TO BE FALSELY INTERPRETED AS THE PROPHET HAVING NEVER WRITTEN ANY BOOK WITH HIS HAND, THEN USING THE SAME FALSE LOGIC IT WOULD ALSO MEAN THAT HE NEVER RECITED ANY BOOK (INCLUDING THE QUR'AAN) EITHER !
How can "You were not reciting any book before this" be taken to imply that he did recite the Qur'aan, and then the same kind of statement "nor were you writing one by your hand (before this)" be taken to imply that he did not write the Qur'aan with his hand ?
If I tell you "you never recited/read a book before this book", it would indicate that you recited/read this book.
Similarly
If I tell you "you never wrote a book before this book", it would indicate that you wrote this book.
See, The God knew that there will be certain people who would misinterpret and twist His words, so he included both "reciting" and "writing" in the relevant verse !
Tanveer! (and company)
I am defecting.
It really does not make any difference to me !
-
Peace all,
A book could consist of a few written pages bound together, and then we can keep expanding the same book by adding more written pages to it, and the expanded book would still be a book. For example the current Bible consists of many "books" that were added to it at different periods, but the end result is still a book !
The Qur'aan was a written book even when it comprised of only a few written pages kept together containing a few verses in the beginning. Subsequently, as more verses were revealed, those verses were written on additional pages and added to the starting book, and thus the book grew in size until all the verses were revealed, at which time it was still a book. Thus it was a book at all those stages !
-
Salaam AB
So, do I understand that you mean there is no mention in this verse that he did not write any book before? Can we presume, therefore, that he could write a book before (since the verse mentions only reading), but he specifically did not write the quraan?
-
The first part ? ?, ? And you did not recite before it?, the damir ?Ha? translated as ?it? in the word ?Qablihi? is referring to the Quran
The second part ? ?, i.e. ?a book?, i.e. any book (unknown)The two parts together will be like this literally ?you were not reading any book before the Quran?
As you can see we have the words ?Ma Kunt? as the denial words, the action denied is reading any book, and the time for the action is before the Quran, this constitutes a complete sentence in Arabic
What comes after is another piece of information that has nothing to do with the time of not being able to read the Quran, i.e. the words ?Qablihi? only applies to the reading of any book, it does not apply to the writing as I will confirm right now
-> The third part is like this ? ?, i.e. ? , nor did you transcribe one with your right hand?, is independent from the word Qablihi, i.e. the timing of the word Qablihi does not apply to this denial, the denial in here is specific to the Quran actually this is because of the Damir ?Ha? in the word ?Takhotuh? is referring to the Quran and not the ?a book?, if it was referring to a book as the word ?Yatlu? then the Ha should never be there, i.e. the second denial in this part is specific to the Quran and is independent from the word Qablihi, i.e. even after the Quarn he did not write it down.
The proper translation according to the Arabic sentences structures and grammar in those three parts should be as follow
?you were not reading any book before the Quran, and you do not write the Quran with your right hand?
Bro Tanveer !
salam i think the red part of AB's post is very critical , and you have completely ignored it.
It really does not make any difference to me !
Chi Chi Chi,, losing a good friend/admirer doesn't make any difference to you?
Goodbye friend '(
-
Salaam AB
So, do I understand that you mean there is no mention in this verse that he did not write any book before?
Salam Samia
Yes, that is because the Ha in the word "Takhutuh" i.e. the ha is referring to the Quran, if it was meant to be nakirah like reading any book then the ha should not be there
Can we presume, therefore, that he could write a book before (since the verse mentions only reading), but he specifically did not write the quraan?
no because someone who can't read must not be able to write
there are those who can read but can't write
The whole argument as i understand from brother Zenje that if he tells me that I haven't written a book before that book is flawed, this is because it can only be said by a human to another human, sort of wondering that I didn't write a book before that one but I wrote this book, the verse however is not a human talking to a human, IT IS ALLAH SAYING A STATEMENT ABOUT MOHAMMAD, the purpose of that statement by Allah is not to wonder rather to deny that Mohammad wrote the Quran or read a book before the Quran, it is not like Allah is chattting with Mohammad telling him wow you have not written a book before this one, this book you wrote is great
Salam
-
Ahamad!
Your last post contains a solid piece of evidence.
Tanveer! (and company)
I am defecting.
siki
Thanks bro
while I don't want it to look like a competition as it is never that way, you made it look like it LOL
any way, falsehood is destined to perish mate, please read my small comment to Samia when you have time
Take care
-
Salaam siki,
salam i think the red part of AB's post is very critical , and you have completely ignored it.
I would like this to be verified by other Classical Arabic experts like Samia, Anwar, Ayman etc. before believing it because of the history associated with him.
If what he is saying is true then that causes an impossible phenomenon to exist !
Then it would mean that the Prophet was not able to read other books before the Qur'aan, but was able to write other books before the Qur'aan, which is an impossibility. That is what Samia is questioning, if I am not mistaken.
I looked up many translators and they are 50/50 on this. So at this point I will have to wait for consensus from Classical Arabic experts.
Chi Chi Chi,, losing a good friend/admirer doesn't make any difference to you?
You are the one making that choice, not me
-
Salam Samia
Yes, that is because the Ha in the word "Takhutuh" i.e. the ha is referring to the Quran, if it was meant to be nakirah like reading any book then the ha should not be there
How about this verse3144
What does the "Ha" refer to in this verse? Isn't "rasoul " nakirah "indefinite"?no because someone who can't read must not be able to write
Says who? Is it a law you know? I know an English student of mine who wrote very beautiful Arabic, but could not read it. Calligraphers do not necessarily understand what they write. I can write Persian if dictated to me but I do not understand it, so I do not read it. It just happens I know its phonetics.
-
while I don't want it to look like a competition as it is never that way, you made it look like it LOL
every one needs a pat of encouragement once in a while , and i don't believe in acting like a miser ,after all you are scarifying your sleep for a greater cause, and we are benefiting for free.
siki
-
Salaam sister Samia,
I know an English student of mine who wrote very beautiful Arabic, but could not read it. Calligraphers do not necessarily understand what they write. I can write Persian if dictated to me but I do not understand it, so I do not read it.
Apologies for barging in but if someone can write something he/she can read/recite it without understanding it. You can write Persian if dictated to you so you can read/recite it even if you don't understand it. If you cannot read/recite something, it will be impossible to write it. You are mixing "understanding" with "reading" !
-
every one needs a pat of encouragement once in a while , and i don't believe in acting like a miser ,after all you are scarifying your sleep for a greater cause, and we are benefiting for free.
siki
Thanks mate
be assured that on my side it is only for the sake of truth, i care less if I have proven wring as long as comeplling quran evidneces are provided and I will concede like a man, I have no shame in that department
Take care