The Qur’an, (Koran) meaning recitation, is the sacred book of Islam. According to Muslim tradition, it was revealed by God to the Prophet Muhammad in separate revelations over the major portion of his life at Mecca and at Medina. The Qur'an was
probably compiled as a single volume under the third caliph, Uthman, who appointed
a committee (651-52). The internal organization of the Qur'an is somewhat ad hoc.
Revelations consisted of verses (ayat) grouped into 114 chapters (surah, plural -
suwar).
This is what Qur'an says in its English Translation introduction, lets see how much words is from Allah. This question is beyond any doubt that Qur'an itself proves that some verse contained in it is from Muhammad, and if Qur'an contains a single alphabet of Muhammad, it means it has to rejected as it altered by a mere man.
(Koran 4:82)
Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)?Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
According to the Muslims the Koran contains the words of God. Koran is to be read as if God Himself had spoken these words stated in it. It is important to emphasize this point because if Koran is the word of God then it should not contain any errors and it should hold true for all times. However, such is not the case.First, we will see how some of the verses in the Koran itself show clearly that these words were obviously spoken by Mohammed and Not God.
The Opening Sura Fatihah:
(Koran 1:1-7)
In the name of the Merciful and Compassionate God.
Praise belongs to God,The Lord of the worlds, the merciful, the compassionate, the ruler of the day of the day of judgement! Thee we serve and Thee we ask for aid. Guide us in the right path,the path of those Thou art gracious to;not to those Thou art wroth with, nor of those who err.
Someone need not be a rocket-scientist to comprehend that these words are clearly addressed to God, in the form of a prayer. They are Mohammed's words of parise to God, asking for God's help and guidance. Some Muslim compilers conveniently add the imperative "say" in the English translation of the Koran at the beginning of the sura to remove this difficulty. This imperative form of the word "say" occurs at least 350 times in the Koran, and its obvious that this word has, in fact,been inserted by later compilers of the Koran to remove countless similarly embarrassing difficulties. Thus, we have direct evidence that the Koran starts out with the words of Mohammed.
(Koran 113:1)
I take refuge with the Lord of the Dawn. One can clearly see, its Mohammed and NOT GOD HIMSELF who is seeking refuge in God.
(Koran 6:104)
Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs (To open your eyes): If any will see, it will be for (the good of) his own soul; If any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not (here) To watch over your doings.
In this verse the speaker of the line "I am not to watch over your doings"- is clearly Mohammed. In fact Dawood in his translation adds a footnote that the "I" refers to Mohammed here.
(Koran 27:91)
For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this city, Him Who has sanctified it and to whom (Belong) all things; and I am commanded to be of those who bow in Islam to Allah's Will
Again, the speaker here is clearly Mohammed who is trying to justify killing of innocent Meccans who were not willing to follow Mohammed's version of God. Dawood and Pickthall both interpolate "say" at the beginning of the sentence which is lacking in the original Arabic version of the sura.
(Koran 81:15)
So veriy I call To witness the planets that recede...
Again, here it is Mohammed and NOT God who is swearing by the turning planets.
(Koran 84:16-19)
I swear by the afterglow of sunset, and by the night,and by the moon when she is at the full.
Once again it is Mohammed and NOT God. He is unable to disguise his pagan heritage. He swears again in the name of the Sun and Moon, both of which were considered as holy deities by Pre-Islamic Arabs.
(Koran 6:114)
Should I seek other judge than God, when it is He who has sent down to you, the distinguishing book (Koran)?
Any sane person can comprehend that those words are not spoken by God but Mohammed himself.Yusuf Ali in his translation adds at the beginning of the sentence "say", which is not there in the original Arabic and he does so without comment or footnote.
Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terrorism. Show all posts
Saturday, 19 November 2011
Friday, 18 November 2011
Grammatical Errors in Qur'an...
Grammatical Errors in Qur'an...
Muslims believe that Allah revealed a book to each of Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus."But the Book of the prophet Abraham was lost.The Books of David (the Psalms), Moses (the Torah),and Jesus (the Gospel) were changed."
Muslims do believe that the Qur'an is a literary miracle and that it is unmatched among any other literature. It is not a human masterpiece but a divine miracle, where
every letter and dot was revealed from heaven, with no difference between what was
revealed and what we have in our hands. Muslims claim the Qur'an not just to be a human literary masterpiece, but a divine literary miracle. But this claim does not square with the facts. For the Qur'an which we have in our hands contains obvious grammatical errors which is plain to see for all who know Arabic.
The First Error
In 5:69
"Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabaeans, and the Christians, whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness - no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow." (Arberry)
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word Saabi'uuna has been
declined wrongly.In two other verses, the same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was declined correctly.
2:62 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaaraa was-Saabi'iina
..."
22:17 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina wan-
Nasaaraa ..."
You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and was written Saabi'iina in2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical error.
The Second Error
In 4:162
"But those of them that are firmly rooted in knowledge, and the believers believing in what has been sent down to thee, and what was sent down before thee, that perform the prayer and pay the alms, and those who believe in God and the Last Day - them We shall surely give a mighty wage." (Arberry)
"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bimaaa
'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."
The word muqiimiin should be muqiimuun. The word should be declined by the "raf'a sign" like the other nouns in the sentence. Indeed the two nouns before it (Raasikhuun and Mu'-minuun), and the noun after it (mu' tuun) are declined correctly. Some have argued that this word was declined as such to distinguish and praise the act of praying, but the scholar Ibn al Khatib says that this is a sick reasoning. (al-Furqan by Mohammad M. 'abd al-Latif Ibn al-Katib, Dar al-Kutub al-'elmiyah, Beirut, p.43).
Such reasoning defies logic. Why would one distinguishe prayer which is a branch of
religion, and not faith which is the fundamental and root of religion? Besides can this logic apply to the error of declension in the previous verse? Do we conclude that the Saabi'iin are more distinguished than those who believe, and the People of the Book?And why do they get distinguished in one verse and not the other as we have seen? God is much higher than this sick logic. This again is an obvious grammatical error.
The Third Error
In 20:63
"They communed secretly saying, 'These two men are sorcerers'." (Arberry)
"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."
The word haazaani should be haazayn. The word haazaani was declined incorrectly because the word inna in the beginning of the nominal sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" to the nominative and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". This is the third grammatical error.
The Fourth Error
In 2:177
"It is not piety, that you turn your faces to the East and to the West. True piety
is this: to believe in God, and the Last Day ... to give of one's substance ... and
to ransom the slave, to perform the prayer, to pay the alms. And they who fulfil their covenant ... and endure with fortitude." (Arberry)
"Laysal-birra 'an-tuwalluu wujuuhakum qibalal-Mashriqi wal-Maghrib wa laakinnal-birra man 'aamana billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Akhiri wal-malaaa-'ikati wal-Kitaabi wan-nabiyyiin: wa 'aatal-maala 'alaa hubbihii zawilqurbaa walyataamaa wal-masaakiina wabnas-sabiili was-saaa-'iliina wa fir-riqaab: wa'aqaamas-Salaata wa 'aataz-Zakaata; wal-muufuuna bi'ahdihim 'izaa 'aahaduu was-Saabiriina fil-ba'-saaa'i wazzarraaa-'i ..."
In the above verse there are five gramatical errors. In four of them the wrong tense
was used, as the sentence begins in the present tense with the verb tuwalluu, while the other four verbs were written in the past tense:
'aaman should be tu'minuu;
'aata shoud be tu'tuu;
'aqaama should be tuqimuu;
'aata shoud be tu'tuu.
The above verse when translated into English as it appears in Arabic would be: "It is
not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteousness
is he who believed in Allah and the Last day and the angels and the Book and the Prophets; and gave his wealth, ... and performed prayer and paid the alms." But the English translators have observed the tense, and the verbs "believed", "gave", "performed", and "paid" were corrected and written in the present tense. (For example see Arberry, Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and Rodwell's translations).
The fifth error is the wrong declension of the word saabiriina. It should be declined saabiruuna like the preceeding word muufuuna.
Copyright © 1996 by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton.
Muslims believe that Allah revealed a book to each of Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus."But the Book of the prophet Abraham was lost.The Books of David (the Psalms), Moses (the Torah),and Jesus (the Gospel) were changed."
Muslims do believe that the Qur'an is a literary miracle and that it is unmatched among any other literature. It is not a human masterpiece but a divine miracle, where
every letter and dot was revealed from heaven, with no difference between what was
revealed and what we have in our hands. Muslims claim the Qur'an not just to be a human literary masterpiece, but a divine literary miracle. But this claim does not square with the facts. For the Qur'an which we have in our hands contains obvious grammatical errors which is plain to see for all who know Arabic.
The First Error
In 5:69
"Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabaeans, and the Christians, whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness - no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow." (Arberry)
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word Saabi'uuna has been
declined wrongly.In two other verses, the same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was declined correctly.
2:62 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaaraa was-Saabi'iina
..."
22:17 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina wan-
Nasaaraa ..."
You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and was written Saabi'iina in2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical error.
The Second Error
In 4:162
"But those of them that are firmly rooted in knowledge, and the believers believing in what has been sent down to thee, and what was sent down before thee, that perform the prayer and pay the alms, and those who believe in God and the Last Day - them We shall surely give a mighty wage." (Arberry)
"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bimaaa
'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."
The word muqiimiin should be muqiimuun. The word should be declined by the "raf'a sign" like the other nouns in the sentence. Indeed the two nouns before it (Raasikhuun and Mu'-minuun), and the noun after it (mu' tuun) are declined correctly. Some have argued that this word was declined as such to distinguish and praise the act of praying, but the scholar Ibn al Khatib says that this is a sick reasoning. (al-Furqan by Mohammad M. 'abd al-Latif Ibn al-Katib, Dar al-Kutub al-'elmiyah, Beirut, p.43).
Such reasoning defies logic. Why would one distinguishe prayer which is a branch of
religion, and not faith which is the fundamental and root of religion? Besides can this logic apply to the error of declension in the previous verse? Do we conclude that the Saabi'iin are more distinguished than those who believe, and the People of the Book?And why do they get distinguished in one verse and not the other as we have seen? God is much higher than this sick logic. This again is an obvious grammatical error.
The Third Error
In 20:63
"They communed secretly saying, 'These two men are sorcerers'." (Arberry)
"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."
The word haazaani should be haazayn. The word haazaani was declined incorrectly because the word inna in the beginning of the nominal sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" to the nominative and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". This is the third grammatical error.
The Fourth Error
In 2:177
"It is not piety, that you turn your faces to the East and to the West. True piety
is this: to believe in God, and the Last Day ... to give of one's substance ... and
to ransom the slave, to perform the prayer, to pay the alms. And they who fulfil their covenant ... and endure with fortitude." (Arberry)
"Laysal-birra 'an-tuwalluu wujuuhakum qibalal-Mashriqi wal-Maghrib wa laakinnal-birra man 'aamana billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Akhiri wal-malaaa-'ikati wal-Kitaabi wan-nabiyyiin: wa 'aatal-maala 'alaa hubbihii zawilqurbaa walyataamaa wal-masaakiina wabnas-sabiili was-saaa-'iliina wa fir-riqaab: wa'aqaamas-Salaata wa 'aataz-Zakaata; wal-muufuuna bi'ahdihim 'izaa 'aahaduu was-Saabiriina fil-ba'-saaa'i wazzarraaa-'i ..."
In the above verse there are five gramatical errors. In four of them the wrong tense
was used, as the sentence begins in the present tense with the verb tuwalluu, while the other four verbs were written in the past tense:
'aaman should be tu'minuu;
'aata shoud be tu'tuu;
'aqaama should be tuqimuu;
'aata shoud be tu'tuu.
The above verse when translated into English as it appears in Arabic would be: "It is
not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteousness
is he who believed in Allah and the Last day and the angels and the Book and the Prophets; and gave his wealth, ... and performed prayer and paid the alms." But the English translators have observed the tense, and the verbs "believed", "gave", "performed", and "paid" were corrected and written in the present tense. (For example see Arberry, Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and Rodwell's translations).
The fifth error is the wrong declension of the word saabiriina. It should be declined saabiruuna like the preceeding word muufuuna.
Copyright © 1996 by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)