hamba2han's Quranic challange

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
Do you remember giving us the Musnad Ahmad hadith? Do you stand by it? Why don’t you tell us the rest of the hadith?

Here it is in Arabic in case you don’t remember:

Do you mean that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) told him to writes God’s names as he wants? Well, this was what is called “the seven letters” of the Quran, and another hadith clarifies that point, it is in Sunan Abi Dawood, but unfortunately I didn’t find the translation as non the whole book is translated so this is my translation, it says:

The Prophet (Peace be upon him) says: "O Obay (the narrator), I was recited the Quran (By Gabriel), it was said to me:“On one letter”? The angel with me said:“On 2 letters”, I said:“on 2"It was said to me:“on 3?” The angel with me said:“On 3 letters”, I said:“on 3” till He reached 7 letters, then He said:“All of them are enough, if you said” All Hearing All Knowledgable” “All Mighty All Wise” unless a verse of punishment is ended with mercy or that a verse of mercy is ended with punishment. (To avoid inconsistency of the verse).

hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=4&Rec=1783
So the hadith is telling that this was a type of the “Seven Letters” that were sanctioned for the ease of reading the Quran between Muslims especially when Arabs had different accents. To change between God’s names in the verses was only the authority of Muhammad (Peace be upon him) as we are ordered to follow him, in that hadith of the Christian, Muhammad (Peace be upon him) agreed on what he changed, and this was from his authority according to the hadith of Abi Dawood.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
Sorry but that is not the hadith you posted earlier. The hadith I posted is the Musnad Ahmad hadith you translated as this:

"There was a man writing for the Prophet(Peace be upon him), and he had read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

Obviously you didn’t finish the translation as you only translated less than 1/3 of the hadith. I think the remainder of the hadith is very important.

I wonder where this bit “(the custom at their time)” came from in the hadith I posted. Remember that is the hadith you linked to in your post - which I have referred to. It is only page 7 of this thread.

and:
where you got this translation:
and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

I have given you the Arabic.

Thank you very much.
Rodrigo

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
Sorry but that is not the hadith you posted earlier. The hadith I posted is the Musnad Ahmad hadith you translated as this:

"There was a man writing for the Prophet(Peace be upon him), and he had read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

Obviously you didn’t finish the translation as you only translated less than 1/3 of the hadith. I think the remainder of the hadith is very important.

I wonder where this bit “(the custom at their time)” came from in the hadith I posted. Remember that is the hadith you linked to in your post - which I have referred to. It is only page 7 of this thread.

and:
where you got this translation:
and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

I have given you the Arabic.

Thank you very much.
Rodrigo

I didn’t finish the translation because I was only concerned with the part that I gave, if you want me to translate the whole hadith I have no problem, but the part I was concerned with is that one which you later gave me:
“it is considered to be a great thing that one of us learns the Surahs of al-Baqarah and aali-Imran (The Cow and the Family of Imran).”
This was within the context of that hadith, which is a proof that the 2 Suras were present before that guy comes. The one I gave before was my own translation because I don’t know a translation for Musnad Ahmad, but you served me with the other one, and I don’t see a clear difference between both.
As for the rest of the hadith, here is my translation:
فَكَانَ النَّبِيُّ عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاة وَالسَّلَامُ يُمْلِي عَلَيْهِ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا فَيَكْتُبُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا فَيَقُولُ لَهُ النَّبِيُّ عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاة وَالسَّلَامُ اكْتُبْ كَذَا وَكَذَا اكْتُبْ كَيْفَ شِئْتَ وَيُمْلِي عَلَيْهِ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا فَيَقُولُ أَكْتُبُ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا فَيَقُولُ اكْتُبْ اكْتُبْ كَيْفَ شِئْتَ فَارْتَدَّ ذَلِكَ الرَّجُلُ عَنْ الْإِسْلَامِ فَلَحِقَ بِالْمُشْرِكِينَ وَقَالَ أَنَا أَعْلَمُكُمْ بِمُحَمَّدٍ إِنْ كُنْتُ لَأَكْتُبُ مَا شِئْتُ فَمَاتَ ذَلِكَ الرَّجُلُ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لَمْ تَقْبَلْهُ
So the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was dictating him “All Forrgiving All Merciful”, he writes it “All Knowledgable All Wise”, he tells him:“Write so and so, write what you want”, and he dictates him:All Knowledgable All Wise", he says:“Shall I write it All Hearing All Seeing”, he says:“Write, Write what you want”(See my last post to understand what this meant), this man apostatised from Islam and went to the idolators, and said: “I am the most knowing of you about Muhammad, I was writing what I want”, this man died, the Prophet(Peace be upon him) said:“Earth didn’t accept him”.
The rest is the same hadith with a different Isnad.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
You seem very reluctant to translate the whole hadith. Even now you have not done so and ignored some bits.

This is what you translated earlier:
"There was a man writing for the Prophet(Peace be upon him), and he had read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

My issues with your translation are these:

1. The bit about the (custom at their time) was your own addition. It seems to be missing in the hadith, unless I’m mistaken.
2. Your translation of this bit, if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us, may not be the correct translation at all.
3. You missed this bit earlier: I am the most knowing of you about Muhammad, I was writing what I want".

If you want to accept the hadith, let us accept the hadith. The man was saying he wrote whatever he wanted. This is clear proof that the suras-like-it challenge had been met.

From Bukhari we see him say, “Muhammad knows nothing except what I wrote for him.”

Here he says, “I was writing what I wanted.”

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Putting both together we see that Muhammad only knew what this fellow wrote which he did as he wanted.

Hence the suras-like-it challenge had been met.

The issue remaining is whether the 2 surahs were written before the man came into Muhammad’s service. You provided your own translation with an addition in parentheses and implied that this was so.

Another translation says otherwise:

Yazid bin Harun related to us: Humayd informed us from Anas that a man used to write for the Prophet. He had read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran. And the man when he read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran became important among us. But when the Prophet would dictate to him “forgiving, merciful” he would write “knowing, wise”. The Prophet would say, Write thus and thus. Write as you like. He would dictate to him, “knowing, wise” and he would say, I will write “hearing, seeing”. He would say: Write. Write as you want. Then this man turned away from Islam and joined the mushrikun. And he said I know Muhammad more than you do. I used to write what I wanted. Then this man died. The Prophet said, the earth will not accept this man. Anas said, Abu Talha told me that he went to the land where this man died and found him thrown out. So Abu Talha said (to the people), What is the matter with this man. They said, We buried him many times, but the earth does not accept him. (Ahmad 11769; see also Ahmad 13084) quranicstudies.com/printout86.html

Here there is no (the custom at their time) added. It seems to be just a straight translation of the text.

This part is interesting and differs from your translation:

And the man when he read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran became important among us.

If shows that the man BECAME important to the Muslims when he read the 2 surahs. Not that he was merely one of several (or many) who had read the 2 surahs.

Why did he BECOME important when he read/recited the 2 surahs? Probably because nobody had read/recited them before. If there were others who had read the 2 surahs before him, then there would be no need of his importance upon reading them.

Hence I think your argument is unsustainable given more straightforward readings of the hadiths.

Chau
Rodrigo

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Rodrigo,
my translation wasn’t wrong as you said, I only explained what the Arabic expression meant, besides, I didn’t see that translation in the link you gave me, this translation isn’t that correct, look again at it:

He had read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran. And the man when he read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran became important among us.

The word “the man” can’t be referring to that guy, otherwise, this won’t be right English, because the word “when” doesn’t give consequence, but it gives the condition, and this is much clear in the Arabic origin, otherwise there is no need to write it that way, it would have been written:
“He read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, this made him great among us”, there was no reason to that circle. Besides, google translation uses the word if, yes it may not be that good, but a simple Arabic word like this is not that mistake:
The man writes of the prophet peace be upon him was read out, and the Cow Imran The man, if he read Al Omran cow us very mean bone .
This is clear through the Arabic itself, and as I said, this is an expression giving custom:
**وكان **رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا سر **استنار وجهه****‏وكان **الرجل إذا قرأ ‏ ‏ البقرة ‏ ‏ وآل ‏ ‏ عمران ‏ ‏جد فينا

If you looked carefully on what I underlined, you’ll see that they are the same expression, look at how this is translated here:
Book 037, Number 6670:
and it was common with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) that as he was happy his face brightened up

What I mean that this translation you gave is neither clear nor accurate, you may not like that, but this is the truth, and this can happen much. If you don’t believe me, I have nothing to do with you,

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Rodrigo:

Why did he BECOME important when he read/recited the 2 surahs? **Probably because nobody had read/recited them before.**If there were others who had read the 2 surahs before him, then there would be no need of his importance upon reading them.

You yourself admit it without feeling, “because nobody had read/recited them before.”, and “if there were others who read the 2 Surahs before him”, this means that the 2 Surahs were present but that someone memorizes them, this was great.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
I have provided a perfectly good translation of the Musnad Ahmad hadith.

Why do you insist on a Google translation? Can’t you see how absurd that is? if you want to pin your hopes on google then tell us what this means?

if he read Al Omran cow US VERY MEAN BONE.

What does US VERY MEAN BONE mean?

There is no custom here.

Secondly, your second hadith 37:6670 is a totally different hadith. It just says, ‘guided by the man’.

How you can construe what you claim from this is beyond me. I think you read far too much into the hadiths in your attempt to stretch your point.

Ka’b said that he never forgot (this good gesture of) Talha. Ka’b further said: I greeted Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) with Assalam-o-'Alaikam and his face was glistening because of delight, and he said: Let there be glad tidings and blessings for you, the like of which (you have neither found nor you will find, as you find today) since your mother gave your birth.

See the relevance of this hadith to the other? The words are not the same. The subject is not the same.

I think I will stick with my translation - at least it is coherent.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

You yourself admit it without feeling, “because nobody had read/recited them before.”, and “if there were others who read the 2 Surahs before him”, this means that the 2 Surahs were present but that someone memorizes them, this was great.

How can you construe that the 2 surahs were present from what I wrote? I said, IF there were others who had read the 2 surahs before him - he wouldn’t be important.

Since he BECAME important this is evidence that nobody had read the 2 surahs before him.

You have now read too much into what I wrote, and not just into the hadiths. Please don’t stretch anymore. Just read the text as written and not add your own stuff.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Rodrigo
First of all you admitted that the 2 Suras were present:

How can you construe that the 2 surahs were present from what I wrote? I said, IF there were others who had read the 2 surahs before him - he wouldn’t be important.

And these others would read (memorize) something which is not present? If the narrator really meant to write, he would have said “to write”, but he said “to read”. Again the car example:
There was a man who bought the car. And the man when he bought the car he became very important among us.
Does this mean that the car wasn’t present before the man comes? No. The man only came and bought it, but the car was present from the beginning.

The hadith is in Arabic, and if I read the hadith, I would read it in Arabic. I won’t depend on a translation(which I even didn’t find in your link, I don’t know from where you got it), yes the google translation is poor, but the word “‏إذا” (eza) means if and can mean when, it’s a conditional word in Arabic.
‏وكان الرجل إذا قرأ ‏ ‏ البقرة ‏ ‏ وآل ‏ ‏ عمران ‏ ‏جد فينا

Arabic old إذا if, tomorrow
websters-online-dictionary.org/translation/arabic/%25D8%25A5%25D8%25B0%25D8%25A7

إذا = If
dicts.info/2/english-arabic.php?e=mc2

**If إذا **http://www.tps.edu.ee/nastik/ar-en/index.php?q=إذا

We can conclude that the meaning of the sentence is conditional not the way you thought.
" the man if he read Al Baqara and Al Imran, he would be great among us"
Which would have no meaning if he was talking about the same man, but he was talking about the general custom.

I used the other hadith because it is the same expression used, yes it’s another hadith, another subjects, but it is the same exact expression. And this expression clearly means that.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

ibn taymiya:

First of all you admitted that the 2 Suras were present:

Quote:
How can you construe that the 2 surahs were present from what I wrote? I said, IF there were others who had read the 2 surahs before him - he wouldn’t be important.

And these others would read (memorize) something which is not present? If the narrator really meant to write, he would have said “to write”, but he said “to read”. Again the car example:
There was a man who bought the car. And the man when he bought the car he became very important among us.
Does this mean that the car wasn’t present before the man comes? No. The man only came and bought it, but the car was present from the beginning.

First of all, please don’t twist my words. Read my posts carefully. I did not say that the 2 surahs were before this man came along. You keep on saying I admitted it but I never did.

Which others? The hadith does not mention any other people.
ibn taymiya:

The hadith is in Arabic, and if I read the hadith, I would read it in Arabic. I won’t depend on a translation(which I even didn’t find in your link, I don’t know from where you got it), yes the google translation is poor, but the word “‏إذا” (eza) means if and can mean when, it’s a conditional word in Arabic.
‏وكان الرجل إذا قرأ ‏ ‏ البقرة ‏ ‏ وآل ‏ ‏ عمران ‏ ‏جد فينا

Arabic old إذا if, tomorrow
websters-online-dictionar…25B0%25D8%25A7

إذا = If
dicts.info/2/english-arabic.php?e=mc2

If إذا tps.edu.ee/nastik/ar-en/index.php?q=%D8%A5%D8%B0%D8%A7

We can conclude that the meaning of the sentence is conditional not the way you thought.
" the man if he read Al Baqara and Al Imran, he would be great among us"
Which would have no meaning if he was talking about the same man, but he was talking about the general custom.

I used the other hadith because it is the same expression used, yes it’s another hadith, another subjects, but it is the same exact expression. And this expression clearly means that.

Sorry my mistake. Copied the wrong link. This is the right link:
islamicperspectives.com/PunishmentOfApostasy_Part2.html

Yazid bin Harun related to us: Humayd informed us from Anas that a man used to write for the Prophet. He had read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran. And the man when he read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran became important among us. But when the Prophet would dictate to him “forgiving, merciful” he would write “knowing, wise”. The Prophet would say, Write thus and thus. Write as you like. He would dictate to him, “knowing, wise” and he would say, I will write “hearing, seeing”. He would say: Write. Write as you want. Then this man turned away from Islam and joined the mushrikun. And he said I know Muhammad more than you do. I used to write what I wanted. Then this man died. The Prophet said, the earth will not accept this man. Anas said, Abu Talha told me that he went to the land where this man died and found him thrown out. So Abu Talha said (to the people), What is the matter with this man. They said, We buried him many times, but the earth does not accept him. (Ahmad 11769; see also Ahmad 13084)

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

First of all, please don’t twist my words. Read my posts carefully. I did not say that the 2 surahs were before this man came along. You keep on saying I admitted it but I never did.

Which others? The hadith does not mention any other people.

I mean by others: the other disciples of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) whom you say that this man was important among them.
The second thing I didn’t twist your words or say that you say so, but your exegesis of why the man became important clearly implies this.
Besides, read my explanation again, not everyone who translates must be accurate, the sentence is clearly a conditional statement, and I proved to you that the word used in Arabic is a conditional one, but I think that the translator of the hadith you got your translation from was confused between the word "إذا " which is used and means “if”, and the word “إذ” which can give the meaning you want, it’s only a letter difference can change the meaning:
Arabic - English
إِذْ حــــــــــــرف أَداةُ تَحْقِيقٍ واسْتِدْراك
and suddenly
حَرْف تَعْلِيل (giving a reason)
**for , as , since **
dictionary.sakhr.com/idrisidic_2MM.asp?Lang=E-A&Sub=%c5%d0
Using one of these words would give that meaning.
“the man since he read Al Baqara and Al Imran he became important among us”
See using that word gave the meaning you understood, but that word wasn’t the one present in the hadith, it was the other word "إذا " meaning “if”.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Okay, Ibn Taymiya. You are the Arabic speaker and I will defer to your expertise on this issue. You have your translation and I have mine but since you are the expert here I will concede to you.

However, it still raises the issue that the hadiths show that this Christian scribe altered the Quran (whichever surah he wrote) at his will. Hence, also nullifying the sura-like-it challenge.

This is what is reported in the Bukhari hadith:
Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.

This is what is reported in the Musnad Ahmad hadith:
I know Muhammad more than you do. I used to write what I wanted.

which incidentally gives examples of his changes.

With these changes it is clear the Quran has been altered by man and hence the sura-like-it challenge has been invalidated.

I hope you will see this point.

Gracias
Rodrigo

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

As for what you say about the changes in the Quran, you can read my message 163

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
I take it that you’re saying that Jibril gave Muhammad carte blanche to choose various epithets for God in response to various situations.

This, however, is not what the hadiths are saying - they said:

I used to write what I wanted.

Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.

It shows that the Quran was changed on the whim of a Christian scribe, not Muhammad. You cannot arrogate the writing of the supposed Word of God to a Christian scribe and still consider it not invalidating the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge.

Please bear in mind that a ‘sura-like-it’ challenge implies that the entire surah was written by Allah, not man. Once a man has a hand in altering the surah - the challenge is immediately invalidated.

I hope you will see this point.

Chau
Rodrigo

 

[DB_AND_ALI]

Hamba, you’re doing it again! Have you lost your powers of reasoning? Quoting from the Quran will do no good, since we do not accept what the Quran states!

Vickie

Exactly !!! I would far rather put my trust and faith in what was recorded by FIRST HAND WITNESSES to the life , miracles and resurrection of Jesus , than to an ordinary man who claimed to have received divine revelation over a 23 year period.
It is also worth noting that the early christian disciples were prepared to be killed for their faith , when they could easily have denied christianity.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
I take it that you’re saying that Jibril gave Muhammad carte blanche to choose various epithets for God in response to various situations.

Well, it is not me who is saying so, it is the hadith, and it clearly specifies it with God’s names.

This, however, is not what the hadiths are saying - they said:

I used to write what I wanted.

Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.

This is what the man claims, not every claim should be right.

It shows that the Quran was changed on the whim of a Christian scribe, not Muhammad. You cannot arrogate the writing of the supposed Word of God to a Christian scribe and still consider it not invalidating the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge.

Writing doesn’t mean that this scribe is the author, Jibril sends the Quran to Muhammad (Peace be upon him), he knows it by heart, then he lets one of his scribes to write what Jibril sent. The scribe was only recording not authoring.

Please bear in mind that a ‘sura-like-it’ challenge implies that the entire surah was written by Allah, not man. Once a man has a hand in altering the surah - the challenge is immediately invalidated.

He doesn’t have a hand in altering the Sura, this was only the case with God’s names who were present before in different Suras, so he didn’t come with something new, and he asked the Prophet (Peace be upon him) to write it that way, the Prophet(Peace be upon him) has the authority to accept this as mentioned in the other hadith, so this doesn’t invalidate the challenege at all.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I’m sorry but the hadith clearly shows the man writing what he liked. By the way, waqidi says this Christian was Ibn Qumta.

Yazid bin Harun related to us: Humayd informed us from Anas that a man used to write for the Prophet. He had read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran. And the man when he read al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran became important among us. But when the Prophet would dictate to him “forgiving, merciful” he would write “knowing, wise”. The Prophet would say, Write thus and thus. Write as you like. He would dictate to him, “knowing, wise” and he would say, I will write “hearing, seeing”. He would say: Write. Write as you want. Then this man turned away from Islam and joined the mushrikun. And he said I know Muhammad more than you do. I used to write what I wanted. Then this man died. The Prophet said, the earth will not accept this man. Anas said, Abu Talha told me that he went to the land where this man died and found him thrown out. So Abu Talha said (to the people), What is the matter with this man. They said, We buried him many times, but the earth does not accept him. (Ahmad 11769; see also Ahmad 13084)

See these phrases?
Write as you like.
I used to write what I wanted.

Also see the changes Ibn Qumta made?

That is evidence that Ibn Qumta changed the Quran or wrote the Quran as he liked.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

The context of the hadith clearly shows that this was particular with God’s names, otherwise there would have been no meaning to ask the Prophet(Peace be upon him) especially about this, otherwise it would be the case that he asked him about everything else in the Quran, which the hadith doesn’t say. That man was only deceiveing the people of the book.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I think those are just examples. He also said this, “Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him” which doesn’t suggest it was only the epithets.

BTW: even changing epithets shows that the Surah was not divine but had been altered by Ibn Qumta - which invalidates the sura-like-it test. Don’t forget Ibn Qumta was not a prophet and had no right to even alter one word.