Muhammad Wrote the quran
-
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
-
How about this verse3144
What does the "Ha" refer to in this verse? Isn't "rasoul " nakirah "indefinite"?Wrong the ha is referring to Mohammad and Mohammad is not a nakirah
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.
that is called drawing not writing
Calligraphers do not necessarily understand what they write.
They must br Ummis then, I guess their job is mostely drawing, they don't need to understand what they draw
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.
then you are an Ummi regarding persian language
do you have any Quran arguments please?
-
Salaam bro siki,
He is not sacrificing any sleep right now ! It is not past 10 pm in Australia at this time ! I am the one sacrificing my sleep ! P
-
LOL
I have to say Tanveer that was funny
Thanks for the laugh,
btw I stayed all night bloody writing to this thread, possibly the last 3 nights in a row
-
Salaam bro siki,
Goodbye friend '(
So does that mean I will not be able to come visit you in Islamabad now ? '(
-
Salaam Tanweer
Maybe you're right in the example about me, but as for my student, he did not know how to read Arabic, he just liked the writing of Arabic, like calligraphers. As for mixing between reading and understanding, what's the point of reading? Why read what you do not understand?
Which brings me back to the verse. The verb used is (takhu6), which is different from (taktub). We should understand that if a word is used in the quraan to convey a certain meaning, we should not attribute this specific meaning to a different word. "yakhu6" is different from "yaktub". It does not involove understanding. Calligrapher in Arabic is derived from this verb "kha66aa6" not "kaatib writer".
So, this verb cannot apply to the quraan. Muhammad was not "yakhu66" alquraan, because he understood it. But he did not "kha6" before what he did not understand.
-
Illiteracy as meant in Qur?an ?the ignorance of God? is a matter of degree and as a young teen my introduction to Islam was actually the very first word/verse revealed?
961 Read! in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created-
Thus a command to, ?be? literate (not ignorant of Islam) fulfilled in last verse revealed?
53 ?This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion?
As to who did the mechanics of writing Qur?an ? that is irrelevant, although task was most likely delegated to the best scribe; only makes sense.
Yes, stayed up most of the night reading this entire thread and all associated links...lol
Although birds are singing and dawn is approaching -- great time for prayer... sun
Peace
-
Illiteracy as meant in Qur?an ?the ignorance of God? is a matter of degree and as a young teen my introduction to Islam was actually the very first word/verse revealed?
Salam bro
but Allah kept calling Mohammad Ummi at leats couple of time, would that mean Allah was calling him an ignorant of God?
how about this one
Allah has told us to follow the Nabi the Ummi
would that mean Allah was telling us to follow the prophet who is a God ignorant?
Cheers