Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Grammar
Youtube.com/Muhad
dithDotOrg
Follow
@muhaddith
"Of all the world's great men, none has been so much
maligned* as Muhammad."
W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, Oxford University Press,
1956.
* ma-lign: v.t. to speak harmful untruths about... (R. H. Webster's).
Islamic Awareness
Foreword:
If a person writes an article claiming that a concrete beam has been designed wrong, we
expect him to be qualified in the field he is discussing, and that he passes its most basic
tests. If then we find in his article obvious and repetitious errors in addition and
multiplication, we conclude that he does not have the minimal qualifications to discuss
the subject.
We are not claiming expertise in the Arabic language, nor are we requiring it for unrelated
subjects, such as history or mathematics. We are requiring that a critic in any subject
must pass its preliminary tests, otherwise his discussions would not deserve any
consideration.
Our point is this: When reading through sources that attack Islam on the issue of
grammar, we were surprised to find elementary errors in the Arabic language that prove
beyond the least doubt, that the person/s writing them would not pass elementary school.
To mention one "eliminating" factor: The recurring interchange of the Arabic letters "zain"
and "zhaal" in the very pages where the Quran is criticized. We have saved the original
sources, and if we get the time, we will attempt to highlight such errors in red and offer
them through links inshaa'a llaah.
Enemies of Islam well versed in the Arabic language have just avoided the topic of Arabic
language. They know better. The attacks that occurred are proven to originate from
people not even qualified to discuss it (as mentioned above, and as will be shown
below).
Yet we have decided to discuss the issue anyway, for the benefit of the curious reader.
Historical review:
Because of the singular feature of "juzoor" and "tasreef" of the Arabic language, the early
Arabs used to derive the words and compose sentences according to rules that they
knew first-hand: Mentally, and not in written treaties. They would judge a person's literary
abilities by his manipulation of the language and how well he used its features
to construct words and sentences.
The people witnessed to be the most proficient in Arabic were the Arab Bedouins. The
Search our
BOOKS salla llaahu `alaihi wasallam was raised away from the city in the "baadiyah", as
prophet
was the norm then: to acquire the better rules of the language.
The Prophet's literary style was witnessed by his contemporaries and by later analysts to
be the most eloquent among Arabs, yet it was still "human".
But when the Quran was revealed, its literary style was recognized by many to be beyond
the powers of man. Several Arabs and especially "Bedouins", accepted Islam only upon
hearing the Quran. This is history, annotated and related with an authenticity far superior
to the Bible and the New Testament (and we challenge comparison on any level, provided
it is rational).
GO
o Surah Al Kawthar was written on a wall (the smallest Surah of the Quran!). Upon
reading it, a "Bedouin Arab" wrote next to it: Maa haazha biqawlil bashar (this is
not human speech).
This is a qualified testimony, not that of persons who cannot even differentiate
o Another "Bedouin Arab" accepted Islam upon hearing the aayah: "...fasda` bimaa
tu'mar" ("... obey what your are commanded with"). He was asked for the reason
and he answered that there was no word in the whole Arabic language stronger
to use in that specific instance than "fasda`" (the literal meaning of "fasda`" is
"crack down", which implies total submission far beyond normal obedience).
Quran.
An example "attack":
One such attack objects against the Quran for using the word "asbaatan" in
the masculine, instead of using the feminine gender.
For any person with simple Arabic knowledge, the following is clear:
o This is precisely the beauty of the Arabic language: It is a sign of better Arabic
style when used appropriately.
o Example: We say that a woman is haa-id (in her monthly period) instead of haaidah, and a woman is `aroos (bride) instead of `aroosah (haa-id and `aroos are
the masculine forms, and haa-idah and`aroosah are the feminine).
o In these specific examples of "haa-id" and "`aroos", and concerning the word
"asbaatan", insisting on using the feminine forms is simply poor and
clumsy usage of the Arabic language...
o Missing the goal of the attack: The writers forget (conveniently) that they are
attacking the notion of the supernatural nature of the Quran, and their approach
amounts to changing the goal of the proclaimed attack: The existence of
occasional wrong grammatical opinions among Arabs just indicates errors in
humans, not in the Quran: Not all humans are supposed to know all verses of the
Arabs: it is absurd to require it.
If I study an English article, and say that such a construct is incorrect, but you
quote a similar construct from a well know English writer, it means I am wrong,
and you are right, and the article under discussion is correct.
o Suppressing evidence: To add insult to the injury, the writers suppress the
detailed explanations and quotations of linguists as detailed above.
o Quoting biased opinions, hiding their biased nature: The writers mentioned
Al Zamakhshari's opinions, "hiding" that, as a mu`tazili, his opinions are often
formulated intentionally in opposition to that of the Sunnah and
Jamaa`ah (whom we represent). Because of this intentional bias, his opinions
are only accepted if they conform to those of Muslim scholars and other Arab
linguists: On such issues, the latter are the reference authority, not him.
Not surprisingly, this non-academic concealment recurs in most attacks on other subjects.
If such writers were Muslims, they would have been termed "dishonest"
(contradicting amaanatul naql), but we will not hold them to the high standards of our
scholars, we will suffice with the most apologetic description: Non-academic.
Conclusion:
o Linguistic experts have used the Quran to formulate the rules of the Arabic
language, not vice versa, and attacking the Quran as committing grammatical
mistakes amounts to putting the carriage before the horse.
o Those choosing to attack the Quran on the issue of grammar, are only
proclaiming their ignorance to the whole world, as if proud of inventing
the square wheel.
For us it seems more like a Chinese high school kid attacking Shakespeare of on
the subject of English Literature.
Youtube.com/MuhaddithDotOrg