Challenging Questions about Islam

QheQ wrote: This is where Quran says that it is the "Qaul-e-Rasool" (69:40) Also, what does it exactly mean tha Quran is Laa Raib? Why do Muslims, in response to questionning of the grammatical errors in Quran say: "Its eloquence is so High that we cannot reach it?" Most sincerely, do you think it is the right answer?

Did you pay attention to your own spellings even when the spell check is marking your bad spellings? and you  have a gall picking the errors in Arabic Quraan when there was no such thing as grammar in those days or any where for that matter
There have been countless Arabic scholars in the western world since the Prophet's time but none have come up with grammatical error criticism. 

So I suppose, you should have a Phd at least in the Arabic language in order to qualify you; which would let you do the critique on Quraanic language
Are you some where close to the level of Allama Mashriqi being a Pakistani!!

If that is the case why your post indicates such lack of scholastic finesse?

As we say here there are no dumb questions but there are looks which have come through




Edited by Sign*Reader

Without referring to the writers of the answers, I�ll try to refute all the points you guys made as follows (Please find your responses in bold and my refutations in normal text. Will try to follow the ethics next time. Sorry for the inconvenience):

                    �����S in ce   you claim Pakistan as your place of residence, I find it
                    �����a t& nbsp;��least "puzzeling" that you have not been able to find your
                    �����a ns we rs.

This is more a point of pondering than puzzling.

                    �����I &n bsp;��am only aware of one hadith that is sound and makes
                    �����r ef er ence to "not writing" hadith.
                    �����F ir st   lets us take the "responsible" context and derive a
                    �����p la us able interpretation that follows all of the rules of "the
                    �����c ha ri ty principle" which is a principle in rhetoric which
                    �����s ta te s in basic terms that we are to render or interpret a
                    �����w ri ti ng assuming the most reasonable "interpretation (not to
                    �����f or ce   a rendering that assumes something absurd)".
                    �����a )& nbsp;��There are hadiths that permit the writing of hadith

That a source in question validates itself, is it an acceptable premise?

                    �����b )& nbsp;��Companions and their followers and their followers wrote
                    �����a nd    transmitted hadith without incident and point of serious
                    �����c on te ntion

So we are to rely on companions and their followers and their followers and not on what the book claiming to be from God says? What, then, is the problem with the Bible which is comes through a similar traditional process?

                    �����W e& nbsp;��have one authenticated narrative that speaks of a
                    �����p ro hi bition of writing hadith.
                    �����D on �t   write what I say. Whoever has written anything I have
                    �����s ai d   other than the Qur�an must erase it. But relate from me:
                    �����t he re   is no harm in that. And whoever deliberately lies in
                    �����o rd er   to falsely attribute something to me, then let him prepare his
                    �����s ea t   in the Fire." (Muslim)

The last part of the Hadith opens up the possibility that false Hadith MAY be fabricated. This infers that even among the followers of the prophet, there could have been some who could fabricate the Hadith. Or else, who was the prophet addressing to? The people to come who couldn�t have narrated anything from the prophet? Do you see any rationale in it?

                    �����G iv en   a) and b), and the wording of the hadith, whether we
                    �����i nv ok e Occam's Razor (entities should not be multiplied beyond
                    �����n ec es sity) and the Charity principle (rational accomidation
                    �����p ri nc iple), we arrive at two rational conclusions:
                    �����1 )& nbsp;��A prohibition to write on the same page as the quran is
                    �����w ri tt en on
                    �����o r,
                             �2) It is a prohibition to write hadith but later abrrogated by
                    �����t he    various hadiths that permit the writing and copying of
                    �����h ad it h.
                        � �But the hadith cannot be used to make a conclusive argument
                    �����t ha t   the hadith are invalid.

This only infers that a Hadith can ALSO not be used to validate a Hadith.

                                           ��Translation: "Indeed this (Quran?) is the Saying
                                           ��of the Rasool e Kareem"
                    ������
                              �You will have to further argue or explain your use of this as
                    �����a n& nbsp;��evidence. If the verese was as clear as you think it might
                    �����b e& nbsp;��to prove your unexplained conclusion, then we would not be
                    �����h av in g this discussion. (everyone would see it)

Interestingly, a Muslim needs further argument about a Laa Raib Quran while quite authoritatively confronts an AYAH using some sayings about which no one can surely say whether they are from the prophet. And when a Hadith goes in clear contradiction with the Quran, they prefer the Hadith. Whereas the Quran says: �But they love the things that can be attained quickly�.

                                           ��And Quran describes itself in 12:111 as
                                           ��"Detailed, to be thought into, not a self-made
                                           ��Hadith"


                    �����T hi s   does not invalidate the hadith of the prophet (saw). In
                    �����o th er   words, it does not offer anything in the verse which
                    �����a ll ow s you to extend its meaning to conclude there is a
                    �����p ro bl em with the Hadith.

If Quran is the word of the prophet, why use a different source? Let this be the question.

                    �����I &n bsp;��find no solid rational reason based upon what you have
                    �����p ro vi ded that would argue that I am wrong in my worship.
                    �����R at he r, it would appear that you have buried many unargued
                    �����a ss um ptions into them which simply does not allow you or me or
                    �����a n   yone to deduce that Islam, as practiced by Muslims for the
                    �����l as t   1200 years, have been wrong.

And what is it that invalidates what Christians have been following for 2000 years?

                    �����Y ou    final statement is simply fallacious, we have written
                    �����n ar ra tives (extant) that date from a student of a companion.
                    �����T he    collection was of narrative that had already been in
                    �����p la ce , so collecting something does not make them "untrue".

Agreed. Neither does it make something �True�.
                    ������
                    �����" Lo !   It may well be that my hadith reaches a man who is
                    �����r ec li ning on his luxurious bed, and he replies, �We have
                    �����b e   tween us the Book of Allah: we permit whatever it permits
                    �����a n d   we forbid whatever it forbids,� but in truth, whatever the
                    �����M es se nger of Allah forbids is like what Allah has forbidden."
                    �����( Ti rm idhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Darimi)

For a long time I kept referring to the same tradition as a reason to reject alleged Muslim groups like Ahle Quran and Parvezis. But it sounds fallacious to quote a Hadith to validate a Hadith. Secondly, anti Islamists of the near-prophet age must be trying to spread invalid traditions so that quick fix seekers would get away from the Quran (Islamic history does report such an era when fabrication was common.). One of the first rumors they would have logically spread must have been something like what you have quoted here so that Muslims stopped trying to understand the Quran and grab �what can be quickly accessed�.

                    �����M y& nbsp;��dear QheQ. The Quran can not have grammatical mistakes
                    �����b e   cause Arabic grammer is derived from the Quran. So you
                    �����d er iv e the grammer from the Quran and then from the grammer
                    �����y ou    derived from the Quran you say there are grammatical
                    �����m is ta kes in the Quran based on the Quran, thats impossible.
                    �����T he   se are ies spread by people who want to make Muslims who
                    �����a re    not Arab doubt the Quran especially since many of them
                    �����d on t   know that Arabic grammer is derived from the Quran.

A logical fallacy. If I make a table which has defects and just to validate my own table, I scribe rules that validate these defects, will my rules be valid? Will this table serve as a valid table?

If the Arabic grammar is derived from Quran, why does an Arabic grammar text not have rules that can validate the Quranic language? If you add more to grammar to validate Quranic language, you know you are committing false justification.

                    �����L a& nbsp;��raiib means no doubt.

We may pick up this issue later.

      The prophet said dont write down what
                    �����I &n bsp;��say because he was afraid it would get mixed with the Quran
                    �����a n d   the Quran and his sayings would be one and people wouldnt
                    �����k no w   the difference.

Can you prove this from the Hadith or am I obliged to take your words for granted?

Nottice he forbade his sahaba, his sayings wrent written by the sahaba but                                ����
later on.

This further complicates the issue.

                    �����T he    sources of sharia are the Quran, the sunnah (hadiths) and
                    �����i jt ih ad.

Self-driven conclusion.
                    ������
                             �QheQ wrote: I hope to become a devout Muslim. ....Why do
                    �����M us li ms, in response to questionning of the grammatical errors
                    �����i n& nbsp;��Quran say: "Its eloquence is so High that we cannot reach
                    �����i t? ". .... Also, what does it exactly mean tha Quran is Laa
                    �����R ai b?   

                    �����S in ce rely this is my answers....
                    �����W e& nbsp;��need to realize humility,�we are mere human beings who are
                    �����a cc or ded limited understanding of the Divine. �All Knowledge
                    �����i t& nbsp;��is only a little that is communicated to you O men� (Quran
                    �����1 7: 85 ) and therefore we should not insist to completely know
                    �����t he    complete interpretation in revelation and tradition. �We
                    �����b e   lieve in the Book (Quran); the whole of it is from our Lord�
                    �����( Qu ra n 3:7)

This all is valid once you presume that the book IS from God. At another instant the Quran quotes: Context: Who is more ZAALIM than the one who says something and says �This is from God�. When you say the Quran is from God, what valid reasons do you have to validate your statement? Why don�t you show the same humility for Bible, Vedas and Upanishads? Why don�t you say this Quran MAY BE from God, which will be more true.

                    �����L a& nbsp;��raib means 'no doubt (therein)'. You will find the phrase
                    �����i n& nbsp;��the Holy Quran in Surah Al-Baqarah (Chapter of The Cow) in
                    �����t he    second verse: [2.2] This Book (Quran), there is no doubt
                    �����i n& nbsp;��it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).

                    �����T he    Sharia'h has a priority system which goes as follows:
                    �����d ep en ding upon the issues of the day:

So if Sharia�h is dependent, why do Muslims impose that strictly? Should I conclude that the Sharia�h CAN CHANGE?

                    �����1 .& nbsp;��Quraan and it's Commentaries explaining the immediate
                    �����r ea so ns for the revelations and figures of speech, as
                    �����u nd er standin g would vary from person to person. so the
                    �����P ro ph et(s)ma de additional comments.
                    �����T he   n the test for the true believers who will look for the
                    �����m an if est verses vs meaning in allegorical.
                    �����2 .& nbsp;��Sunnah: if the subject is not mentioned in Quraan lookup in
                    �����S un na h that how the Prophet managed the issues not mentioned
                    �����i n& nbsp;��Quran, you don't need to run 200 years later for Bukhari
                    �����f or    that. If you read the history of the Islamic schools of
                    �����l aw    by the second generation (Tabiun) to handle issues
                    �����b ri dg ing the Ummayad and Abaside dynasties, the schools of
                    �����I    mams Jafer, Hanifah, Malik, Shafie and Ahmad (all-r)you will
                    �����f in d   the quality control kept on the hadith transmission by
                    �����t he re   prodigious scholarship with great integrity. The Imam
                    �����H an if ah accepted prison rather than become the accomplice
                    �����c hi ef    Qazi for the unjust ruler.
                    �����3 .& nbsp;��Ijmaa (the consensus) the established schools of
                    �����a fo re mention ed Islamic Jurisprudence had prerogative to find
                    �����a n    answer to the new problems faced by the community.
                    �����" Wh os oever contends with the Aposle after guidance been
                    �����p la in ly conveyed to him, and follows the path other than that
                    �����o f& nbsp;��the belivers, we shall leave him in the path he has chosen
                    �����a n d   land him in hell. What an evil refige! (4:115)
                    �����4 .A l   Qiyas(Anology) A jurist to apply a solution to a new case
                    �����w hi ch   has been given in the previous three sources cuz of some
                    �����a pp ar ent similarity between the the two. Example if booze is
                    �����f or   bidden cuz it's intoxicating, deleterious and bad health
                    �����e ff ec ts; all such drugs like cocaine and heroin ingested for
                    �����s uc h   effects will be prohibited.
                    ������
   You missed out one: �Fiqh�. I don�t know why. But weren�t the above principles made by human figures? Can you prove that these principles have been authenticated by God? Beside this, there is a sect among Muslims who says �Quran only� another says �Quran and Hadith only� another says �Quran Hadith and Ijma� another says �Quran and Ijtihad� another says �Quran, Hadith, Fiqh and Ijma�� you can see this fact right in this forum and you still claim that Islam is one! I am not criticizing Islam. Just asking why Muslims reject other faith while they are themselves not sure what the right source of their religion is.

                               ��QheQ wrote:
                                      ���This   is where Quran says that it is the
                                           ��"Qaul-e-Rasool" (69:40)

                                           ��Also, what does it exactly mean tha Quran is Laa
                                      ���Raib?   

                                           ��Why do Muslims, in response to questionning of
                                      ���the   grammatical errors in Quran say: "Its
                                           ��eloquence is so High that we cannot reach it?"

                                           ��Most sincerely, do you think it is the right
                                      ���an swer?

                    �����D id    you pay attention to your own spellings even when the
                    �����s pe ll   check is marking your bad spellings? and you have a
                    �����g al l   picking the errors in Arabic Quraan when there was no
                    �����s uc h   thing as grammar in those days or any where for that
                    �����m at te r

I apologize that I made errors. It is human to make errors. I�ll try to correct them in the future. Will you please adopt the same gesture as I have done? To err is human, not Godly.

                    �����T he   re have been countless Arabic scholars in the western world
                    �����s in ce   the Prophet's time but none have come up with
                    �����g ra mm atical error criticism.

You sound negligent. Why would a Muslim Arabic Scholar attempt to pick errors? Obviously, a non Muslim or a righteous one will try to see if what he is following is good. There have been many sites and books indicating those errors. And the one going sure about those errors and highlighting them would of course be called non-Muslim by others.

                    �����S o& nbsp;��I suppose, you should have a Phd at least in the Arabic
                    �����l an gu age in order to qualify you; which would let you do the
                    �����c ri ti que on Quraanic language

Do you infer there was a PhD degree or a university offering such a degree for non-Muslims in the prophet�s era? Or are you saying that Quran is not in simple Arabic? Or are you saying that Quran�s claim of being �easy to understand� is wrong? Why have the existing PhD�s been unable to answer these error based allegations beyond saying �the Quran is the source of Arabic Grammar�? Still, a good suggestion. But I�m afraid it�s going to add to Saudi revenues through language learning and tourism above everything else.

                    �����A re    you some where close to the level of Allama Mashriqi being
                    �����a &n bsp;��Pakistani!!

                    �����I    f that is the case why your post indicates such lack of
                    �����s ch ol astic finesse?

Hope I answered this question above.

                    �����A s& nbsp;��we say here there are no dumb questions but there are looks
                    �����w hi ch   have come through

Pardon?

CONCLUSION:
1.     If Quran is the word of the prophet, why use a different source? Let this be the question.
2.     Why Humiliate other religions in the name of humility?
3.     Why try to justify something on human grounds that is claimed to be from God?



Edited by QheQ

 

 

 

 

QheQ wrote: Without referring to the writers of the answers, I�ll try to refute all the points you guys made as follows (Please find your responses in bold and my refutations in normal text. Will try to follow the ethics next time. Sorry for the inconvenience):                           S in ce   you claim Pakistan as your place of residence, I find it                           a t& nbsp;  least "puzzeling" that you have not been able to find your                           a ns we rs. This is more a point of pondering than puzzling.

And you are quibbling. AT least I can see that if you went out of yoru way to make such a rediculous point, that you sincereity to ask a question will play out to be even mor rediculous!

VERB:
puz�zled , puz�zling , puz�zles
VERB:
tr.

1.       To baffle or confuse mentally by presenting or being a difficult problem or matter.

2.       To clarify or solve (something confusing) by reasoning or study: He puzzled out the significance of the statement.

VERB:
intr.

1.       To be perplexed.

2.       To ponder over a problem in an effort to solve or understand it.

NOUN:

1.       Something, such as a game, toy, or problem, that requires ingenuity and often persistence in solving or assembling.

2.       Something that baffles or confuses.

3.       The condition of being perplexed; bewilderment.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/puzzle

As I said, it is "puzzling�. Call it what you like and play semantics until the cows come home, its your own time to waste.

 

I &n bsp;  am only aware of one hadith that is sound and makes                           r ef er ence to "not writing" hadith.                           F ir st   lets us take the "responsible" context and derive a                           p la us able interpretation that follows all of the rules of "the                           c ha ri ty principle" which is a principle in rhetoric which                           s ta te s in basic terms that we are to render or interpret a                           w ri ti ng assuming the most reasonable "interpretation (not to                           f or ce   a rendering that assumes something absurd)".                           a )& nbsp;  There are hadiths that permit the writing of hadith That a source in question validates itself, is it an acceptable premise?

That you would attempt to use a source as a bases for your premise that you indeed reject implies your rhetorical obfuscation. In other words, you used a hadith to try and make your claim, but now you want to reject it. This is typical of the convoluted diatribe permeates the rhetoric ignorant. If your replies go on in this manner, then I will stop and shut this thread down, as your original reasoning for being here is a lie. Let�s see.

 

b )& nbsp;  Companions and their followers and their followers wrote                           a nd    transmitted hadith without incident and point of serious                           c on te ntion So we are to rely on companions and their followers and their followers and not on what the book claiming to be from God says? What, then, is the problem with the Bible which is comes through a similar traditional process?

No, we are proving your original argument as �fallacious�. Your attempted deflection is a �strawman�. Please pay attention to what we are talking about.

 

W e& nbsp;  have one authenticated narrative that speaks of a                           p ro hi bition of writing hadith.                           D on �t   write what I say. Whoever has written anything I have                           s ai d   other than the Qur�an must erase it. But relate from me:                           t he re   is no harm in that. And whoever deliberately lies in                           o rd er   to falsely attribute something to me, then let him prepare his                           s ea t   in the Fire." (Muslim) The last part of the Hadith opens up the possibility that false Hadith MAY be fabricated.

You ignored point a and b from my original reply. Please read it.

a) There are hadiths that permit the writing of hadith

b) Companions and their followers and their followers wrote and transmitted hadith without incident and point of serious contention

With a and b, your conclusion is not only implausible, but does not hold up to any reasonable conclusion based upon the evidence (you, like the rest of your ilk, are obfuscating this issue and arguing from pure conjecture).

So the last part does not open the idea that hadith may be falsified. A baseless assertion. Furthermore, why are you even discussing the hadith since you tried to convolute the thread with, �That a source in question validates itself, is it an acceptable premise?� when I even brought the hadith up. Your reasoning is fallacious, and you need to make up your mind how you want to try and argue your case.

This infers that even among the followers of the prophet, there could have been some who could fabricate the Hadith. Or else, who was the prophet addressing to?

The hadith does not even mention the word �fabricate�. You have just asserted something that is not found even remotely in the narrative (which you rejected to begin with), and with simple �hand waving�, you are now invoking your assertion as if it is fact.

There is no �inference� in the narrative. There is only the irrational assertion you are trying to put off as fact.

To who the prophet (saw) was addressing this to is not in question, and is irrelevant, but your contorted conclusion is.

The people to come who couldn�t have narrated anything from the prophet? Do you see any rationale in it?

That made absolutely no sense what so ever. It appears that it is a �complex question� (a fallacy) that is dressed in really bad grammar. Please clean it up.

 

G iv en   a) and b), and the wording of the hadith, whether we                           i nv ok e Occam's Razor (entities should not be multiplied beyond                           n ec es sity) and the Charity principle (rational accomidation                           p ri nc iple), we arrive at two rational conclusions:                           1 )& nbsp;  A prohibition to write on the same page as the quran is                           w ri tt en on                           o r,                               2) It is a prohibition to write hadith but later abrrogated by                           t he    various hadiths that permit the writing and copying of                           h ad it h.                            But the hadith cannot be used to make a conclusive argument                           t ha t   the hadith are invalid. This only infers that a Hadith can ALSO not be used to validate a Hadith.

Please halt your use of logic; you are abusing the discipline of logic as you are the sciences of Islam. First learn something before you attempt to use it. You have just invented some new �inference� out of pure �hand waving�. An argument does not work like that. You cannot just make up what you like and fill it in where you are having problems. Prove it!

The hadith infers no such thing. I gave you the context (which you dismissed in such a cursory and irrational way that I suspect some kind of juvenility on your part) and then provided you with the only authenticated narrative (which you introduced as your evidence but disliked when I used the same type of evidence), and then based upon the context (which you have not argued against) I provided two sound conclusions. You have managed to distort the thread with meaningless assertions and irrelevant speculation. So far, you have been a waste of time.

Translation: "Indeed this (Quran?) is the Saying                                                of the Rasool e Kareem"                                                            You will have to further argue or explain your use of this as                           a n& nbsp;  evidence. If the verese was as clear as you think it might                           b e& nbsp;  to prove your unexplained conclusion, then we would not be                           h av in g this discussion. (everyone would see it) Interestingly, a Muslim needs further argument about a Laa Raib Quran while quite authoritatively confronts an AYAH using some sayings about which no one can surely say whether they are from the prophet. And when a Hadith goes in clear contradiction with the Quran, they prefer the Hadith. Whereas the Quran says: �But they love the things that can be attained quickly�.

No, I need you to prove your use of the verse. And like the deviated, you refuse to argue your use of the Quran. You have �buried� some interpretation in the verse based solely on your deviant opinions, which stands in great contrast to actually making an argument, and then using a verse from the Quran as evidence with a clear presentation of its interpretation. You plaster verses up abusing the Quran and then conclude, out of no where with simply �hand waving�, that it proves your deviant ideas.

The argument is not about who authored the Quran, and your attempt to befuddle this thread even more with such a juvenile point speaks volumes about you. The verse does not state that the Prophet is the author. And this does not prove that there is no Sunnah.

And Quran describes itself in 12:111 as                                               "Detailed, to be thought into, not a self-made                                               Hadith"                           T hi s   does not invalidate the hadith of the prophet (saw). In                           o th er   words, it does not offer anything in the verse which                           a ll ow s you to extend its meaning to conclude there is a                           p ro bl em with the Hadith. If Quran is the word of the prophet, why use a different source? Let this be the question.

Complex question (fallacy), since no one has argued that the Prophet (saw) is the author.

I &n bsp;  find no solid rational reason based upon what you have                           p ro vi ded that would argue that I am wrong in my worship.                           R at he r, it would appear that you have buried many unargued                           a ss um ptions into them which simply does not allow you or me or                           a n   yone to deduce that Islam, as practiced by Muslims for the                           l as t   1200 years, have been wrong. And what is it that invalidates what Christians have been following for 2000 years?

Numerous things, but an irrelevant question. Please go to interfaith dialogue and ask the Christians.

Y ou    final statement is simply fallacious, we have written                           n ar ra tives (extant) that date from a student of a companion.                           T he    collection was of narrative that had already been in                           p la ce , so collecting something does not make them "untrue". Agreed. Neither does it make something �True�.

Your statement was wrong, period. Collecting what was already in existence does not invalidate the collection. I did not argue contrary.

 

" Lo !   It may well be that my hadith reaches a man who is                           r ec li ning on his luxurious bed, and he replies, �We have                           b e   tween us the Book of Allah: we permit whatever it permits                           a n d   we forbid whatever it forbids,� but in truth, whatever the                           M es se nger of Allah forbids is like what Allah has forbidden."                           ( Ti rm idhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Darimi) For a long time I kept referring to the same tradition as a reason to reject alleged Muslim groups like Ahle Quran and Parvezis. But it sounds fallacious to quote a Hadith to validate a Hadith.

LOL Is that what they call themselves now, Ahl Quran! I guess they are now so desperate they want a new name to give themselves �legitimacy� so someone will take them serious.

1)      I did not use the narrative to validate hadith. I did not argue one way or the other about the narrative. Your rejection is a knee jerk reaction to something that did not exist.

2)      The narrative was for �information value� only, for those who do believe in them.

3)      The reasoning to accept it is much stronger than any grounds you have thus provided to reject them.

Secondly, anti Islamists of the near-prophet age must be trying to spread invalid traditions so that quick fix seekers would get away from the Quran (Islamic history does report such an era when fabrication was common.).

Speculation, imagination, and simply ignorance.

One of the first rumors they would have logically spread must have been something like what you have quoted here so that Muslims stopped trying to understand the Quran and grab �what can be quickly accessed�.

More speculation, conjecture, etc, etc. I know what you believe, and that is not in question.

 

M y& nbsp;  dear QheQ. The Quran can not have grammatical mistakes                           b e   cause Arabic grammer is derived from the Quran. So you                           d er iv e the grammer from the Quran and then from the grammer                           y ou    derived from the Quran you say there are grammatical                           m is ta kes in the Quran based on the Quran, thats impossible.                           T he   se are ies spread by people who want to make Muslims who                           a re    not Arab doubt the Quran especially since many of them                           d on t   know that Arabic grammer is derived from the Quran. A logical fallacy. If I make a table which has defects and just to validate my own table, I scribe rules that validate these defects, will my rules be valid? Will this table serve as a valid table?

 

This is a logical fallacy. The Quran is not a table. No one made rules to validate the Quran, since we believe it is the source of what we see as Standard Modern Arabic. The Arabic language was not a heavily �written� language at the time of the Quran. The Quran �defined� Arabic.

If the Arabic grammar is derived from Quran, why does an Arabic grammar text not have rules that can validate the Quranic language? If you add more to grammar to validate Quranic language, you know you are committing false justification.                           L a& nbsp;  raiib means no doubt.

 

Because the Arabic language in a modern text is called (Standard Modern Arabic), not its parent, �Quranic Classical Arabic�.

We may pick up this issue later.       The prophet said dont write down what                           I &n bsp;  say because he was afraid it would get mixed with the Quran                           a n d   the Quran and his sayings would be one and people wouldnt                           k no w   the difference. Can you prove this from the Hadith or am I obliged to take your words for granted?

This is more of your games, since you just rejected my use of a hadith, after you used them, and you simply rejected it (my argument in my reply) to obfuscate the argument which as already been given to you that shows that the Prophet (saw) did not want people to mix up the hadith on the same page as the Quran. Instead of distorting the threads, try reading them.

 

Nottice he forbade his sahaba, his sayings wrent written by the sahaba but                                     later on. This further complicates the issue.                           T he    sources of sharia are the Quran, the sunnah (hadiths) and                           i jt ih ad. Self-driven conclusion.                                                           QheQ wrote: I hope to become a devout Muslim. ....Why do                           M us li ms, in response to questionning of the grammatical errors                           i n& nbsp;  Quran say: "Its eloquence is so High that we cannot reach                           i t? ". .... Also, what does it exactly mean tha Quran is Laa                           R ai b?                              S in ce rely this is my answers....                           W e& nbsp;  need to realize humility,�we are mere human beings who are                           a cc or ded limited understanding of the Divine. �All Knowledge                           i t& nbsp;  is only a little that is communicated to you O men� (Quran                           1 7: 85 ) and therefore we should not insist to completely know                           t he    complete interpretation in revelation and tradition. �We                           b e   lieve in the Book (Quran); the whole of it is from our Lord�                           ( Qu ra n 3:7) This all is valid once you presume that the book IS from God. At another instant the Quran quotes: Context: Who is more ZAALIM than the one who says something and says �This is from God�. When you say the Quran is from God, what valid reasons do you have to validate your statement? Why don�t you show the same humility for Bible, Vedas and Upanishads? Why don�t you say this Quran MAY BE from God, which will be more true.                           L a& nbsp;  raib means 'no doubt (therein)'. You will find the phrase                           i n& nbsp;  the Holy Quran in Surah Al-Baqarah (Chapter of The Cow) in                           t he    second verse: [2.2] This Book (Quran), there is no doubt                           i n& nbsp;  it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).                           T he    Sharia'h has a priority system which goes as follows:                           d ep en ding upon the issues of the day: So if Sharia�h is dependent, why do Muslims impose that strictly? Should I conclude that the Sharia�h CAN CHANGE?                           1 .& nbsp;  Quraan and it's Commentaries explaining the immediate                           r ea so ns for the revelations and figures of speech, as                           u nd er standin g would vary from person to person. so the                           P ro ph et(s)ma de additional comments.                           T he   n the test for the true believers who will look for the                           m an if est verses vs meaning in allegorical.                           2 .& nbsp;  Sunnah: if the subject is not mentioned in Quraan lookup in                           S un na h that how the Prophet managed the issues not mentioned                           i n& nbsp;  Quran, you don't need to run 200 years later for Bukhari                           f or    that. If you read the history of the Islamic schools of                           l aw    by the second generation (Tabiun) to handle issues                           b ri dg ing the Ummayad and Abaside dynasties, the schools of                           I    mams Jafer, Hanifah, Malik, Shafie and Ahmad (all-r)you will                           f in d   the quality control kept on the hadith transmission by                           t he re   prodigious scholarship with great integrity. The Imam                           H an if ah accepted prison rather than become the accomplice                           c hi ef    Qazi for the unjust ruler.                           3 .& nbsp;  Ijmaa (the consensus) the established schools of                           a fo re mention ed Islamic Jurisprudence had prerogative to find                           a n    answer to the new problems faced by the community.                           " Wh os oever contends with the Aposle after guidance been                           p la in ly conveyed to him, and follows the path other than that                           o f& nbsp;  the belivers, we shall leave him in the path he has chosen                           a n d   land him in hell. What an evil refige! (4:115)                           4 .A l   Qiyas(Anology) A jurist to apply a solution to a new case                           w hi ch   has been given in the previous three sources cuz of some                           a pp ar ent similarity between the the two. Example if booze is                           f or   bidden cuz it's intoxicating, deleterious and bad health                           e ff ec ts; all such drugs like cocaine and heroin ingested for                           s uc h   effects will be prohibited.                                You missed out one: �Fiqh�. I don�t know why. But weren�t the above principles made by human figures? Can you prove that these principles have been authenticated by God? Beside this, there is a sect among Muslims who says �Quran only� another says �Quran and Hadith only� another says �Quran Hadith and Ijma� another says �Quran and Ijtihad� another says �Quran, Hadith, Fiqh and Ijma�� you can see this fact right in this forum and you still claim that Islam is one! I am not criticizing Islam. Just asking why Muslims reject other faith while they are themselves not sure what the right source of their religion is.                                  QheQ wrote:                                           This   is where Quran says that it is the                                               "Qaul-e-Rasool" (69:40)                                               Also, what does it exactly mean tha Quran is Laa                                           Raib?                                                   Why do Muslims, in response to questionning of                                           the   grammatical errors in Quran say: "Its                                               eloquence is so High that we cannot reach it?"                                               Most sincerely, do you think it is the right                                           an swer?                           D id    you pay attention to your own spellings even when the                           s pe ll   check is marking your bad spellings? and you have a                           g al l   picking the errors in Arabic Quraan when there was no                           s uc h   thing as grammar in those days or any where for that                           m at te r I apologize that I made errors. It is human to make errors. I�ll try to correct them in the future. Will you please adopt the same gesture as I have done? To err is human, not Godly.                           T he   re have been countless Arabic scholars in the western world                           s in ce   the Prophet's time but none have come up with                           g ra mm atical error criticism. You sound negligent. Why would a Muslim Arabic Scholar attempt to pick errors? Obviously, a non Muslim or a righteous one will try to see if what he is following is good. There have been many sites and books indicating those errors. And the one going sure about those errors and highlighting them would of course be called non-Muslim by others.                           S o& nbsp;  I suppose, you should have a Phd at least in the Arabic                           l an gu age in order to qualify you; which would let you do the                           c ri ti que on Quraanic language Do you infer there was a PhD degree or a university offering such a degree for non-Muslims in the prophet�s era? Or are you saying that Quran is not in simple Arabic? Or are you saying that Quran�s claim of being �easy to understand� is wrong? Why have the existing PhD�s been unable to answer these error based allegations beyond saying �the Quran is the source of Arabic Grammar�? Still, a good suggestion. But I�m afraid it�s going to add to Saudi revenues through language learning and tourism above everything else.                           A re    you some where close to the level of Allama Mashriqi being                           a &n bsp;  Pakistani!!                           I    f that is the case why your post indicates such lack of                           s ch ol astic finesse? Hope I answered this question above.                           A s& nbsp;  we say here there are no dumb questions but there are looks                           w hi ch   have come through Pardon? CONCLUSION: 1.     If Quran is the word of the prophet, why use a different source? Let this be the question. 2.     Why Humiliate other religions in the name of humility? 3.     Why try to justify something on human grounds that is claimed to be from God?

postamble();

 

Ok, let me admit and try to be in a more learning stance. Just please clarify why Hadith should be believed as authentic in the presence of the following Quranic assertions:

1. Indeed this is the saying of the prophet
2. (45:4-6): Then which 'hadith' after Allah and His verses do they believe?
3. (47:24): Then do they not ponder over the Quran...

Waiting for the answer.

Regards