Quran says Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his body.

[Moayidd]

(Quran 33:4)
“Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body…”

مَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِرَجُلٍ مِنْ قَلْبَيْنِ فِي جَوْفِهِ
​

Alkurtubi commentary:

تفسير القرطبي:
قال مجاهد : نزلت في رجل من قريش كان يدعى ذا القلبين من دهائه , وكان يقول : إن لي في جوفي قلبين , أعقل بكل واحد منهما أفضل من عقل محمد
​

But in the following cases we find that humans can have two hearts!!!

Case #1:
“*George Lippert was born in Germany in 1844. In addition to being born with three legs, he was also born with two functioning hearts although that condition was unknown until is autopsy in 1906.”

“In the summer of 1906 George Lippert died of tuberculosis at the age 62. The autopsy revealed his two hearts and also showed that one heart died two to three weeks before his eventual death.*”

Case #2:
“Doctors in the Georgian capital Tbilisi have discovered that little Goga Diasamidze from the Black Sea port of Batumi “has two hearts, one in its normal place and the other in the stomach area,” Interfax said.”

Case #3:
“Up to a few years ago Durr did not know he possessed two hearts. This was discovered when he called a physician to treat him for a slight illness.”

Doesn’t that suppress any claimed miracle for that verse?

Although I already responded to this, (or to a post responding to this post), I will do so again briefly here because I hadn’t seen this post or maybe hadn’t read it carefully.
If you are saying that this verse does not carry a scientific miracle, then I agree with you. There is no anatomical intent in this verse and hence no associated miracle. But If you meant there is an error in the verse because a man can have to hearts then I will re-respond, this time very briefly and more to the point because I have already addressed this issue in another post.

A) QALB is only taken to mean heart because it means ‘the inside’ of a thing, it also means to switch/revolve etc. It is a function not an Organ.
B) Fu’aad means Heart - the Actual Organ.

A Qalb to the Fu’aad is what Hearing is to the Ears,
Vision is to the Eyes,
smelling is to the nose
thinking is to the brain.

One is the function the other is the actual Organ.

When Mohammad (saaws) received revelation from Allah this is how it is described by the Verses
026.193 نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الأمِينُ
026.193 With it came down the spirit of Faith and Truth-
026.193 Nazala bihi a(l)rroo[h]u al-ameen(u)

---

026.194 عَلَى قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنْذِرِينَ
026.194 To thy heart and mind, that thou mayest admonish.
026.194 AAal[a] qalbika litakoona mina almun[th]ireen(a)

---

026.195 بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُبِينٍ
026.195 In the perspicuous Arabic tongue.
026.195 Bilis[a]nin AAarabiyyin mubeen(in)

The actual arabic verse doesn’t contain ‘and mind’ this is just a translators attempt to translate his interpretation. The verse says Revelation was sent to Mohammads (saaws) Heart (Qalb). Does this mean it was sent to the Organ or to the Function f the Organ ?
Naturally it means the Function of that Organ, the thoughts/comprehension etc.

Now if we look at the verse in question. The verses before it are referring to the Revelation sent to Mohammad just like in 26.194 above.

033.002 But follow that which comes to thee by inspiration from thy Lord: for Allah is well acquainted with (all) that ye do.
033.003 And put thy trust in Allah, and enough is Allah as a disposer of affairs.
033.004 Allah has not made for any man** two hearts** in his (one) body: …

In other words, follow inspiration because you can only follow what was sent to your heart (function) and you have no other inspiration to follow since you do not have another heart to receive it in - IE, you can only follow what Allah sends you.

If the intention of the verses was to say no one can have two physical hearts as in Organs then it would not have said man specifically, it would have said
Allah has not made for any Human** two hearts** by using the term Bashar, or Insaan or Bani Adam even not man specifically.

Also, let me use your own quote from Al Qurtubi.

تفسير القرطبي:
قال مجاهد : نزلت في رجل من قريش كان يدعى ذا القلبين من دهائه , وكان يقول :** إن لي في جوفي قلبين , أعقل بكل واحد منهما أفضل من عقل محمد**
​

What does it say ? إن لي في جوفي قلبين , أعقل بكل واحد منهما أفضل من عقل محمد
The man concerned says: Verily I have two hearts inside me with which i comprehend with each one of them better than Mohammad.
Do people use their physical hearts to comprehend with ? Is there still any doubt that Qalb is the function of the physical organ the Fu’aad and not the organ itself ?

 

[Moayidd]

.

There are a few words that refer to the ‘heart’, but wheter any of them direct our attention the cardio vascular system is another question. It does have an answer. I’ll examine the two words that have been used here, which are ‘QLB’ and ‘FAD’. Both can be found in enough instances to exegete properly. In 6:110, ‘fuad’ is found to mean the anatomical heart. Here, Allah is confounding both heart and eyes as torture [blindness and coronary disease]. The word appears again in 6:113, but is the ‘train if thought’ that leads to joy in disbelief. So, FAD has both an anatomical meaning and a poetic one just as it does in english.

‘QLB’ is also common, and in 26:227 the word is assigned a meaning of repentence and turning, as is often the case in other verses. However, in 33:4, the word QLB specifically refers to the human body as the place of the heart. It is not here meant to be poetic, but a plain fact that no man has two cardio vascular systems. Muhamamd is using the illustration as a plain fact to make more clear the allegory he is then going to state. So, any example of a human being with two hearts would be an obvious refutation of Muhammad’s scientfic error.

I answered that below in forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5807154&postcount=41 and in forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5807154&postcount=40

In 33:4 the intention is the ‘inside’ of a person. In Islam the heart is not the place for emotions and love etc, it is the place for receiving knowledge/revelation. I suspect that was the Aramaic intention too (I’ll check that later.).
If the organ was intended then the verse would have said ‘no human has two hearts’ not ‘no man has two hearts’. Also read the verses before it, it is referring to Revelation and has revelation in mind. It is saying you only have one ‘container’ for revelation and hence cannot follow two inspirations, one from Allah and the other from somewhere else. Clearly this is not the Organ.

Also, the very quote Sam_777 is using as proof for the meaning of Qalb (Heart) contains the very refutation for his claim.

Here is what he typed (I’ll translate it)

تفسير القرطبي:
قال مجاهد : نزلت في رجل من قريش كان يدعى ذا القلبين من دهائه , وكان يقول : إن لي في جوفي قلبين , أعقل بكل واحد منهما أفضل من عقل محمد

Al Qurtoby’s explanation:
Mujahid said: It (verse 33.4) was revealed in/for a man Quraysh (a tribe) who was called 'He of two Hearts" because of his shrewdness/intelligence, and he used to say: Verily I have in me two hearts, I comprehend with each one of them better than Mohammads** comprehension**.

This is speaking QALB as a vehicle of intelligence and comprehension NOT as an Organ.
This is from the very sentence sam_777 provides as proof that there is an error. In fact what he did was provide the proof FOR not against.

Let me just explain something about Arabic. Arabic words come from roots or stems. Then words are formed from them. Some times, words from one stem can assume meanings from a word from another stem for various reasons. In the case of the root QLB the words emanating from this root are all to do with the primary meaning of this stem which is to revolve, switch, over turn AND the inside of something. Very much the same way you use the term ‘The HEART of the matter’. You mean the Core or the inside of the matter not the organ of the matter. A persons Qalb (inside) is used to mean his inner thoughts, feelings, beliefs etc and is the place that receives revelation(which is what verse 33.4 and others are refering to).
Some centuries ago there was a phrase in use which says: “Ma summiya bil QALB illa lia’annahu MutaQalib”. translated this says" It was not named the Qalb for a reason other than that it changes". In other words, Qalb assumed the meaning Heart at a later stage and is not the primary meaning of the word. From that point onwards it assumed the meaning heart but not in a sensory or Organ fashion but rather as a function (revolves/receives revelation/thoughts/doubts etc).
At the expense of repeating myself, The Qalb to the Fu’ad is what Hearing is to the ears, vision is to the Eyes etc. It is a function not an Organ.

 

[Sam_777]

The English commentary for “Tafsir al-Tustari” quote the following :
“[That is, he does not have] one heart (qalb) with which he approaches God, and another heart with which he manages the affairs of this world.”
So heart = qalb as seen above.

Moreover, some Muslims clerics are using that quote as one of the scientific miracles in Quran, per the following:

موقع عبد الدائم الكحيل للاعجاز العلمي في القران والسنة:
ولذلك تُعتبر هذه الآية معجزة طبياً، لأنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يقرر أنه لا يمكن العيش بقلبين!

الشيخ عبد المجيد الزنداني.عالم الأعجاز العلمي للقرآن الكريم والسنة:
“…فكر وفكر ووجد الاجابه التي تحمل اعجاز علمي باهر من المستحيل التوصل اليه الا بالتأمل والتفكير العميق بآيات الله …
قال الدكتور للطالب : نعم الرجل هو الوحيد الذي من المستحيل أن يحمل قلبين في جوفه ولكن المرأة قد تحمل قلبين بجوفها اذا حملت فيصبح بجوفها قلبها وقلب الطفل الذي بداخلها”

د. يحيى إبراهيم محمد:
…ولله المثل الأعلى، ففي مطلع هذه الآية المباركة إعجاز قرآني علمي يتحدى به الله ـ سبحانه وتعالى ـ خلقه إلى يوم القيامة ويضرب مثلاً حِسِّيٌّا للبشر كافة ويقطع باستحالة وجود قلبين في صدر أي رجل! ولدقة المعنى المراد الوصول إليه بأقصر السبل، جاء اختيار كلمة (رجل) وليس بشرًا أو بني آدم أو مؤمنًا أو إنسانًا، حتى لا يحتمل تفسيرها مشاركة الأنثى في القسم
​

Moayidd, no matter how you and other modern Islamic clerics strive to hide the scientific errors in Quran, it is just not going to happen , the Internet and satellite broadcasting have exposed Islam to a greater extent, people now have many ways to hear and search for the truth …:shamrock2:

 

[Lothair]

In 33:4 the intention is the ‘inside’ of a person. In Islam the heart is not the place for emotions and love etc, it is the place for receiving knowledge/revelation. I suspect that was the Aramaic intention too

As I pointed out, FAD and QLB have more than one meaning, both anatomical and allegorical. However, the QLB mentioned in 33:4 is indeed the coronary organ inside the ventral portion of the body. Muhammad is just stating the obvious, but it looks like Allah should have known better.

Also, since Muslims like so much to ride the argument that the Quran is a book packed with scientific miracles, then consider this. The heart is neither a reveiever of revelation nor the storehouse of emotion. The coronary vascular system plays no such part in mystical experiences. Once again, the Islamic response lacks clarity and consistency.

 

[Moayidd]

The English commentary for “Tafsir al-Tustari” quote the following :
“[That is, he does not have] one heart (qalb) with which he approaches God, and another heart with which he manages the affairs of this world.”
So heart = qalb as seen above.

Moreover, some Muslims clerics are using that quote as one of the scientific miracles in Quran, per the following:

موقع عبد الدائم الكحيل للاعجاز العلمي في القران والسنة:
ولذلك تُعتبر هذه الآية معجزة طبياً، لأنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يقرر أنه لا يمكن العيش بقلبين!

الشيخ عبد المجيد الزنداني.عالم الأعجاز العلمي للقرآن الكريم والسنة:
“…فكر وفكر ووجد الاجابه التي تحمل اعجاز علمي باهر من المستحيل التوصل اليه الا بالتأمل والتفكير العميق بآيات الله …
قال الدكتور للطالب : نعم الرجل هو الوحيد الذي من المستحيل أن يحمل قلبين في جوفه ولكن المرأة قد تحمل قلبين بجوفها اذا حملت فيصبح بجوفها قلبها وقلب الطفل الذي بداخلها”

د. يحيى إبراهيم محمد:
…ولله المثل الأعلى، ففي مطلع هذه الآية المباركة إعجاز قرآني علمي يتحدى به الله ـ سبحانه وتعالى ـ خلقه إلى يوم القيامة ويضرب مثلاً حِسِّيٌّا للبشر كافة ويقطع باستحالة وجود قلبين في صدر أي رجل! ولدقة المعنى المراد الوصول إليه بأقصر السبل، جاء اختيار كلمة (رجل) وليس بشرًا أو بني آدم أو مؤمنًا أو إنسانًا، حتى لا يحتمل تفسيرها مشاركة الأنثى في القسم
​

Moayidd, no matter how you and other modern Islamic clerics strive to hide the scientific errors in Quran, it is just not going to happen , the Internet and satellite broadcasting have exposed Islam to a greater extent, people now have many ways to hear and search for the truth …:shamrock2:

I told you right at the start, there is no miracle in that verse and Islamic scholars sometimes jump the gun with ‘miracles’. This wasn’t a part of anything i was proving so theres no need ot re-state it.
However, my explanation was more than sufficient to prove (to those who are unbiased) that the word QALB in no way implies heart as in Organ. It defines the function of the heart which is to ‘comprehend’. As I mentioned before, QALB to the heart is what Vision is to the Eyes, what Hearing is to the ears. One is the intended function and the other is the actual Organ.
If you can’t see it then its because you don’t want to. Actually, if you were unbiased you would have seen my point in the very element of proof you yourself presented. I noticed you haven’t addressed THAT part at all Would you care to clarify that you were wrong with that ‘proof’ to the non-Arabic speaking posters ? That would be the least amount of honesty you could display here. Just state that you were wrong. I doubt you will do that though

people now have many ways to hear and search for the truth …:shamrock2:

And is truth what you are really searching for ? If so then why did you pretend that what you presented was truth ? Surely as an Arabic speaker you could read that it said ‘a heart to Comprehend with’ and that this in no way refers to the Organ. You must also know that Fu’aad means the organ not Qalb.
So what truth were you trying to propagate ? Perhaps you were just trying to mislead non-Arabic speaking Muslims like missionaries and preachers ?
Please just avoid using the word ‘truth’. It doesn’t for with you efforts at all.

BTW, I’m not a scholar or a cleric.

 

[Moayidd]

The English commentary for “Tafsir al-Tustari” quote the following :
“[That is, he does not have] one heart (qalb) with which he approaches God, and another heart with which he manages the affairs of this world.”
So heart = qalb as seen above.

Moreover, some Muslims clerics are using that quote as one of the scientific miracles in Quran, per the following:

موقع عبد الدائم الكحيل للاعجاز العلمي في القران والسنة:
ولذلك تُعتبر هذه الآية معجزة طبياً، لأنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يقرر أنه لا يمكن العيش بقلبين!

الشيخ عبد المجيد الزنداني.عالم الأعجاز العلمي للقرآن الكريم والسنة:
“…فكر وفكر ووجد الاجابه التي تحمل اعجاز علمي باهر من المستحيل التوصل اليه الا بالتأمل والتفكير العميق بآيات الله …
قال الدكتور للطالب : نعم الرجل هو الوحيد الذي من المستحيل أن يحمل قلبين في جوفه ولكن المرأة قد تحمل قلبين بجوفها اذا حملت فيصبح بجوفها قلبها وقلب الطفل الذي بداخلها”

د. يحيى إبراهيم محمد:
…ولله المثل الأعلى، ففي مطلع هذه الآية المباركة إعجاز قرآني علمي يتحدى به الله ـ سبحانه وتعالى ـ خلقه إلى يوم القيامة ويضرب مثلاً حِسِّيٌّا للبشر كافة ويقطع باستحالة وجود قلبين في صدر أي رجل! ولدقة المعنى المراد الوصول إليه بأقصر السبل، جاء اختيار كلمة (رجل) وليس بشرًا أو بني آدم أو مؤمنًا أو إنسانًا، حتى لا يحتمل تفسيرها مشاركة الأنثى في القسم
​

Moayidd, no matter how you and other modern Islamic clerics strive to hide the scientific errors in Quran, it is just not going to happen , the Internet and satellite broadcasting have exposed Islam to a greater extent, people now have many ways to hear and search for the truth …:shamrock2:

Also, would you care to point out what errors there are in the Qur’aan. Don’t just make allegations, back them up with proof so I show you that there are no errors.
It’s fine to sit there pretending there are errors without presenting them or dismissing proof for the lack of error as in this case (Al Qalb) but then who will end up in hell ? You or me ?

Show me those Alleged errors and I will respond - Inshaa’allah.

 

[famdigy]

(Quran 33:4)
“Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body…”

مَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِرَجُلٍ مِنْ قَلْبَيْنِ فِي جَوْفِهِ
​

Hi Sam,
a few issues with your interpretation, first, heart the organ is called Fou’ad in Arabic. Qalb is used to describe feelings, beliefs, convictions and is often associated with the intangible heart. For example, the common expressions of love, whether phrases “to love with all my heart” or symbols of love during Valentine season are both ethereal metaphysical expressions.

In the same metaphysical sense, this verse points to the impossibility of coexistence between let’s say love and it’s antithesis. The following hadith describes this relationship in more detail: (I apologize for my poor translation)

Narrated Abu Hamza Al-thumali:
“I entered into the presence of the commander of the faithful Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) when he was at RAHBA, so I greeted him, Peace be with you O, Commander of the faithful, how did you fare this morning?”

He lifted his head and answered me saying "I awoke, loving those who love us, and with patience against the hatred of those who hate us. The one who loves us awaits the spirit and a happy outcome every day and night, while the one who hates us has built a building, founded on the tip of a sinking steep slope. When the building collapses, it sinks along with him into the hellfire.

O, Abu Muta’amir, indeed our lover is incapable of hating us, and our hater is incapable of loving us. Allah, Glory be to him modeled the hearts of his servants on our love and humiliated whoever hates us, therefore our lover is not able to hate us, and our hater to love us. The love of us and our enemies will never join together in a single heart “Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body” to love a group of people, while at the same time loving their enemies."

Source: Al-Amali, Shaikh Mufid, Page. 333, Hadith #4.

The reference to two hearts in a single body here is understood as the coexistence of two opposing beliefs, convictions. The intangible heart here only has room for one, faith can only occupy it in the absence of rebelliousness. If the heart is rebellious, then faith leaves.

The Imam’s words to Abu Hamza and his direct quote of Surah 33:4, is directed at those people who claimed to love the Imam yet in the same breath were loyal to those who oppressed, hated, and fought him at every opportunity. Including but not limited to Abu Bakr, Omar, Aisha. The Imam’s words are also directed to our sunni brethren today. They claim to love Ali (as) while supporting Aisha at the same time. The Imam says this expression of love is not true and can not be, because Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body.

 

[Sam_777]

The reference to two hearts in a single body here is understood as the coexistence of two opposing beliefs, convictions. The intangible heart here only has room for one, faith can only occupy it in the absence of rebelliousness. If the heart is rebellious, then faith leaves.

Hi **famdigy,

**Firstly, long-time no seen , you didn’t reply to my PM regarding the Shiat fatwa…

Secondly, even if I agree with you, the following Arabic Islamic scholars don’t agree with that concept, those scholars are the ones who come up in front of TVs and make a propaganda for Islam:

موقع عبد الدائم الكحيل للاعجاز العلمي في القران والسنة:
ولذلك تُعتبر هذه الآية معجزة طبياً، لأنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يقرر أنه لا يمكن العيش بقلبين!

الشيخ عبد المجيد الزنداني.عالم الأعجاز العلمي للقرآن الكريم والسنة:
“…فكر وفكر ووجد الاجابه التي تحمل اعجاز علمي باهر من المستحيل التوصل اليه الا بالتأمل والتفكير العميق بآيات الله …
قال الدكتور للطالب : نعم الرجل هو الوحيد الذي من المستحيل أن يحمل قلبين في جوفه ولكن المرأة قد تحمل قلبين بجوفها اذا حملت فيصبح بجوفها قلبها وقلب الطفل الذي بداخلها”

د. يحيى إبراهيم محمد:
…ولله المثل الأعلى، ففي مطلع هذه الآية المباركة إعجاز قرآني علمي يتحدى به الله ـ سبحانه وتعالى ـ خلقه إلى يوم القيامة ويضرب مثلاً حِسِّيٌّا للبشر كافة ويقطع باستحالة وجود قلبين في صدر أي رجل! ولدقة المعنى المراد الوصول إليه بأقصر السبل، جاء اختيار كلمة (رجل) وليس بشرًا أو بني آدم أو مؤمنًا أو إنسانًا، حتى لا يحتمل تفسيرها مشاركة الأنثى في القسم

and for the newbie Moayidd, we discussed the scientific errors of Quran in many threads on this forums, use the search function of CAF to find them.

​

 

[Moayidd]

Hi **famdigy,

**Firstly, long-time no seen , you didn’t reply to my PM regarding the Shiat fatwa…

Secondly, even if I agree with you, the following Arabic Islamic scholars don’t agree with that concept, those scholars are the ones who come up in front of TVs and make a propaganda for Islam:

موقع عبد الدائم الكحيل للاعجاز العلمي في القران والسنة:
ولذلك تُعتبر هذه الآية معجزة طبياً، لأنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يقرر أنه لا يمكن العيش بقلبين!

الشيخ عبد المجيد الزنداني.عالم الأعجاز العلمي للقرآن الكريم والسنة:
“…فكر وفكر ووجد الاجابه التي تحمل اعجاز علمي باهر من المستحيل التوصل اليه الا بالتأمل والتفكير العميق بآيات الله …
قال الدكتور للطالب : نعم الرجل هو الوحيد الذي من المستحيل أن يحمل قلبين في جوفه ولكن المرأة قد تحمل قلبين بجوفها اذا حملت فيصبح بجوفها قلبها وقلب الطفل الذي بداخلها”

د. يحيى إبراهيم محمد:
…ولله المثل الأعلى، ففي مطلع هذه الآية المباركة إعجاز قرآني علمي يتحدى به الله ـ سبحانه وتعالى ـ خلقه إلى يوم القيامة ويضرب مثلاً حِسِّيٌّا للبشر كافة ويقطع باستحالة وجود قلبين في صدر أي رجل! ولدقة المعنى المراد الوصول إليه بأقصر السبل، جاء اختيار كلمة (رجل) وليس بشرًا أو بني آدم أو مؤمنًا أو إنسانًا، حتى لا يحتمل تفسيرها مشاركة الأنثى في القسم

and for the newbie Moayidd, we discussed the scientific errors of Quran in many threads on this forums, use the search function of CAF to find them.

​

I’m hardly a newbie or is this your strategy to** not** respond to me directly ? Why not try addressing me directly and responding to my post ? No these scholars don’t disagree with me their only error is considering it a miracle which it is not. This part was done with right at the start.

As for not presenting the alleged errors of the Qur’aan I understand your predicament, after all over 90% of all alleged errors are actually mistranslations. You and I both being Arabic speakers limits your effort to the remaining 10% which are purely ** mis concepts**.
Wouldn’t you like to give it a try sam ?
If you are so sure of the many errors in the Qur’aan this should be very easy for you shouldn’t it? Especially since I’m a newbie too

Go ahead and give it a try. I’ll be checking this page to see what you come up with but remember, Errors in the real Qur’aan - the Arabic Qur’aan that is not English mistranslations.

 

[Sam_777]

I’m hardly a newbie or is this your strategy to** not** respond to me directly ? Why not try addressing me directly and responding to my post ? No these scholars don’t disagree with me their only error is considering it a miracle which it is not. This part was done with right at the start.

Okay newbie, it seems you are on CAF to defend Islam and not to search for the true path, anyway, Bukhari is the criterion between you and me.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 49:
Narrated An-Nu’man bin Bashir:
I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, 'Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.

صحيح البخاري:
سمعت رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يقول ‏ ‏الحلال بين والحرام بين وبينهما مشبهات لا يعلمها كثير من الناس فمن اتقى المشبهات ‏ ‏استبرأ ‏ ‏لدينه وعرضه ومن وقع في ‏ ‏الشبهات ‏ ‏كراع يرعى حول ‏ ‏الحمى ‏ ‏يوشك أن ‏ ‏يواقعه ‏ ‏ألا وإن لكل ملك ‏ ‏حمى ‏ ‏ألا إن ‏ ‏حمى ‏ ‏الله في أرضه ‏ ‏محارمه ‏ ‏ألا وإن في الجسد ‏ ‏مضغة ‏ ‏إذا صلحت صلح الجسد كله وإذا فسدت فسد الجسد كله ألا وهي القلب ‏
​

(E) (A)

The authentic Bukhari hadith clearly stated QALB “القلب” for the actual organ " في الجسد ‏ ‏مضغة" and not “فواد” FUAAD as you claim .

By that authentic hadith the subject of QALB & FUAAD issue is closed for me, go wake-up Bukhari from his grave and argue with him:coffeeread:.

 

[famdigy]

Hi **famdigy,

**Firstly, long-time no seen , you didn’t reply to my PM regarding the Shiat fatwa…

Secondly, even if I agree with you, the following Arabic Islamic scholars don’t agree with that concept, those scholars are the ones who come up in front of TVs and make a propaganda for Islam:

Hi Sam, I replied to your question here, I’m just over a month late but better late than never right?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5813948&postcount=10

Second, the links you provided only prove there is a difference of opinion, some scholars opinion. However, I can say for certain that according to the commentary and hadiths I have read, the reference to the heart here is metaphysical not literal.

 

[Moayidd]

Okay newbie, it seems you are on CAF to defend Islam and not to search for the true path, anyway, Bukhari is the criterion between you and me.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 49:
Narrated An-Nu’man bin Bashir:
I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, 'Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.

صحيح البخاري:
سمعت رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏يقول ‏ ‏الحلال بين والحرام بين وبينهما مشبهات لا يعلمها كثير من الناس فمن اتقى المشبهات ‏ ‏استبرأ ‏ ‏لدينه وعرضه ومن وقع في ‏ ‏الشبهات ‏ ‏كراع يرعى حول ‏ ‏الحمى ‏ ‏يوشك أن ‏ ‏يواقعه ‏ ‏ألا وإن لكل ملك ‏ ‏حمى ‏ ‏ألا إن ‏ ‏حمى ‏ ‏الله في أرضه ‏ ‏محارمه ‏ ‏ألا وإن في الجسد ‏ ‏مضغة ‏ ‏إذا صلحت صلح الجسد كله وإذا فسدت فسد الجسد كله ألا وهي القلب ‏
​

(E) (A)

The authentic Bukhari hadith clearly stated QALB “القلب” for the actual organ " في الجسد ‏ ‏مضغة" and not “فواد” FUAAD as you claim .

By that authentic hadith the subject of QALB & FUAAD issue is closed for me, go wake-up Bukhari from his grave and argue with him:coffeeread:.

Your anger and impolitness betrays a deep frustration Don’t attack me, attack my argument.

So this is it ? Lisaan Al 3arab states that too you didn’t need to delve into Bukhari for this. Besides this was the first thing i said in my first post here - Qalb can be taken to MEAN heart.
In medical books you will find titles like ‘Jiraahatu Al Qalb’ - ‘Heart Surgery’.
Has this registered yet ? I’ll repeat ‘QALB has been taken to mean heart’.

However, we are not discussing how a term ‘was’ used in a particular place, we are discussing the entire range of correct usages. This is an easy concept surely, if not allow me to tell you how its done briefly.

1- The Qur’aan itself is the** final **criteria. You check how that term is used in the Qur’aan and its consitency.
2- You check the **entire range **of meanings for the word not just one that suits you in various sources in case the above is not conclusive.

For item (1) usage of QALB
002.097 Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel-for he brings down the (revelation) to thy heart …
026.193 With it came down the spirit of Faith and Truth- 026.194 **To thy heart **and mind, that thou mayest admonish.
042.024 What! Do they say, “He has forged a falsehood against Allah”? But if Allah willed, He could seal up thy heart.

As you can see from the few example of verses in the Qur’aan how QALB is used. It is a medium for belief, comprehension, contemplation etc as opposed ot Fu’aad which is the organ.

now for (2) I am going to use your very own statement.
Let me remind you (again) of your very own proof (because you seem to have an extremely short memory. Your proof stated that the man concerned said - i have two HEARTS (QLB) to** comprehend** with…

قال مجاهد : نزلت في رجل من قريش كان يدعى ذا القلبين من دهائه , وكان يقول : إن لي في جوفي قلبين , أعقل بكل واحد منهما أفضل من عقل محمد

Translation (of the relevant part)
Verily I have two hearts (QALBayn) inside me with which i comprehend…
This is how heart (QLB) was used - to comprehend.

For future discussions about this try to remember that we have been through the above and that getting more quotes from various places where Qalb is used to mean the physical heart proves nothing as I have already shown you- why ? Because it can be** TAKEN** to mean heart. At the very Minimum, if you refuse to accept this then, then it can be used BOTH ways.

To simplify this for you its akin to using vision to mean eyes. People will use them interchangeably but this does not mean that this is the right way to use them.

I hope you were able to understand this time.

Now, show me errors in the Qur’aan in Arabic. You said there were many so I’m waiting.

 

[Sam_777]

Now, show me errors in the Qur’aan in Arabic. You said there were many so I’m waiting.

This could be my last reply to you, because it seems you are manipulating what I’ve written http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon13.gif, firstly, I didn’t say “there were many”, secondly, I’ve said “scientific errors” not just “errors” :dts:, so please don’t use your Islamic Taqiyya with me…, this was my post:

no matter how you and other modern Islamic clerics strive to hide the scientific errors in Quran, it is just not going to happen

Moreover, as I told you before here, use the search function of CAF to find the threads such as:
(1), (2), (3), (4).

PS., Enjoy this link about the Arabic grammatical errors in Quran…

 

[planten]

Sam_777 has backed out from presenting any scientific errors in the Quran.

Let us see the topic under discussion. It was explained that it means a person cannot serve two masters or really love two persons. It could all be a symbolic verse needing interpretation. It need not be literal. There are some persons of neutral gender too. So if any one had two hearts in his body long ago, it could not mean any harm to Islam or Quran.

Jesus said he was a shepherd and he had many sheep. He said he had other sheep too. Could Sam please show some of Jesus’s sheep to us or to the world? I feel there is no need to attack Quran for saying " Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his body. "

 

[Moayidd]

This could be my last reply to you, because it seems you are manipulating what I’ve written http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon13.gif, firstly, I didn’t say “there were many”, secondly, I’ve said “scientific errors” not just “errors” :dts:, so please don’t use your Islamic Taqiyya with me…, this was my post:

Moreover, as I told you before here, use the search function of CAF to find the threads such as:
(1), (2), (3), (4).

PS., Enjoy this link about the Arabic grammatical errors in Quran…

I can understand why you want this to be the last reply
Concerning me manipulating isn’t ‘there are many scientific errors in the Qur’aan’ and ‘there are errors in the Qur’aan’ the same thing ?

To be honest, when you make an allegation in your own thread, its is a readers right to ask you to back it up or take it back, you obviously don’t have the sincerity to do either and seem to rely entirely on slander.

About the grammatical errors in the Qur’aan they have been answered more times that I can remember but i am SURE you know that and you know all the answers to these claims too. One of the so called experts on Arabic Grammer - Newton - cites an error by confusing Inn and Inna. This is equivilant to confusing ‘were’ and ‘Where’ in English.

Btw, you are a Copt aren’t you ?

Well heres the response to the ‘Grammatical’ errors from this Egyptian Christian (Coptic) site:
the first allegation:

الأخطاء اللغوية والنحوية فى القرآن
1 - أخطاء القرآن النحوية - رفع المعطوف على المنصوب : جاء في ( سورة المائدة 5: 69) : " إِنَّ الذِينَ آمَنُوا وَالذِينَ هَادُوا وَالصَّابِئُونَ " . وكان يجب أن ينصب المعطوف على اسم إن فيقول : والصابئين في كما فعل هذا ورد فى البقرة 2: 62 والحج 22: "
"
Note how the person who wrote this ‘pretends’ there is an error just to confuse people.
Ina Allatheena Kafaroo (Billaahi In Allah) which is the implied Dameer here and the target of Inna, and it is that (Billahi) which demands Al Kasr not Al SSaabioon.

They are ALL like that and all are totally within the reach of a high school student. There is no excuse for a grown up pretending to be an expert on Arabic to pretend they don;t know the Rules of Arabic grammer.
Want me to go through the rest ? I warned you, you are going to be extremely frustrated now that an Arabic speaker with a good background in the Qur’aan is posting here.

Until you can come up with an allegation of an error that Non-Arabic speakers can understand, allow me give you a scientific accuracy and prediction in the Qur’aan.

030.002 غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ
030.002 The Roman Empire has been defeated-
030.002 Ghulibati a(l)rroom(u)

---

030.003 فِي أَدْنَى الأرْضِ وَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَ
030.003 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
030.003 Fee adn[a] al-ar[d]i wahum min baAAdi
ghalabihim sayaghliboon(a)

The Rum (Roman Empire) was defeated at the Lowest part of Earth, and they will return victorious in some years.

A- How did the Qur’aan know that the part of land was the lowest part on earth ( adn[a] al-ar[d]i)

B- How and why would Mohammad (saaws) know this would happen in that time frame ?

I’m still awaiting the alleged errors.

 

[jakasaki]

Until you can come up with an allegation of an error that Non-Arabic speakers can understand,** allow me give you a scientific accuracy and prediction **in the Qur’aan.

030.002 غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ
030.002 **The Roman Empire has **been defeated-
030.002 Ghulibati a(l)rroom(u)

---

030.003 فِي أَدْنَى الأرْضِ وَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَ
030.003 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
030.003 Fee adn[a] al-ar[d]i wahum min baAAdi
ghalabihim sayaghliboon(a)

The Rum (Roman Empire) was defeated at the Lowest part of Earth, and they will return victorious in some years.

A- How did the Qur’aan know that the part of land was the lowest part on earth ( adn[a] al-ar[d]i)

B- How and why would Mohammad (saaws) know this would happen in that time frame ?

I’m still awaiting the alleged errors.

30:2 The Roman Empire HAS been defeated. This clearly states that it is already done with and therefore it is not a prediction of a future even to occur.

It does not state the “Roman Empire WILL be defeated”

It also fails to state “who” defeated the Roman Empire

It also fails to state “where” was the Roman Empire defeated.

30:2 in the koran is NOT a prediction.

This stuff you posted is something you’ll find in answering Christianity web site and most likely you have been styding Osama Abdallah.

Koran chapter 30:2 & 3

2 The Roman Empire **has **been defeated-
3 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
Yusuf Ali

2 The Romans **are **vanquished,
3 In a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome
Shakir

2 The Romans **have been **defeated
3 In the nearer land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious
Pickthal

2 The Romans have been defeated.
3 **In the nearest land **(Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine), and they, after their defeat, will be victorious.
Khan

 

[Moayidd]

30:2 The Roman Empire HAS been defeated. This clearly states that it is already done with and therefore it is not a prediction of a future even to occur.

It does not state the “Roman Empire WILL be defeated”

It also fails to state “who” defeated the Roman Empire

It also fails to state “where” was the Roman Empire defeated.

30:2 in the koran is NOT a prediction.

This stuff you posted is something you’ll find in answering Christianity web site and most likely you have been styding Osama Abdallah.

Koran chapter 30:2 & 3

2 The Roman Empire **has **been defeated-
3 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
Yusuf Ali

2 The Romans **are **vanquished,
3 In a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome
Shakir

2 The Romans **have been **defeated
3 **In the nearer **land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious
Pickthal

2 The Romans have been defeated.
3 **In the nearest **land (Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine), and they, after their defeat, will be victorious.
Khan

Hold on not so fast Thats what happens when you read anti-islamic sites and believe them enthusiastically.
If you had thought it even briefly you would have seen how that site is hopelessly wrong.

First the prediction inst abut the Rum being defeated its about them returning Victorious in some years (less than 10).
Second, it makes an IMPOSSIBLY accurate prediction. - it says in the lowest point on earth.

There are three predictions here. That (1) Al Rum will return Victorious, (2) in some years (less than 10) and (3) the precise location non earth - the** lowest point on earth**.

You probably can’t see some of this in the English translation so let me explai nthe real Qur’aanic verses (the Arabic verses) using the same colors.
030.002 غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ
030.002 The Roman Empire has been defeated-
030.002 Ghulibati a(l)rroom(u)

---

030.003 فِي أَدْنَى الأرْضِ وَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَ
030.003** In a land close by**; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
030.003 Fee adn[a] al-ar[d]i wahum min baAAdi
ghalabihim sayaghliboon(a)

Fee ** adn[a] al-ar[d]i**. The lowest point on earth. Adna means Lowest. If you want proof from the Qur’aan itself I can give you plenty. It can mean closest but in context what would ‘closest point on earth’ mean ? These aren’t islands with one island being closer to the the location of the verse.

sayaghliboon(a) They (The Rum) will be victorious/will prevail/will win.

030.004 Fee bi[d]AAi sineena lill[a]hi al-amru min qablu wamin baAAdu wayawma-i[th]in yafra[h]u almu/minoon(a

Fee bi[d]AAi sineena Means in ‘some’ years. It is defined as less than 10.

Now for some proof of what Adna (lowest) means:

032.021 وَلَنُذِيقَنَّهُمْ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ الأدْنَى دُونَ الْعَذَابِ الأكْبَرِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ
032.021 And indeed We will make them taste of the Penalty of this (life) prior to the supreme Penalty, in order that they may (repent and) return.
032.021 Walanu[th]eeqannahum mina alAAa[tha]bi al-adn[a] doona alAAa[tha]bi al-akbari laAAallahum yarjiAAoon(a)

The Verse actually says: … we will make them taste the Lower torment below the upper/bigger torment.

Now from Lissan al3arab:
دُونُ: نقيضُ فوقَ، وهو تقصير عن الغاية، ويكون ظرفاً.
Doon (the root of Adna): The opposite of Above …

almost 90% + of all alleged errors and lost meanings in the Qur’aan are due to translation errors and the inherent loss of meaning in the process of translation itself. Icould tell you all about that IF you want but doubt your interested.

Here you go, do you see the scientific miracle/prediction there ?

Also, Answering-Islam is as hopeless as the one owned by Ibn Sina. Nothing there can even be considered an intelligent error in reasoning. They are all simple translation errors which Islam-haters rely on.
If you want to use that site be my guest, I’ll check this thread everyday to see answer your allegations.

 

[Moayidd]

Sam_777 has backed out from presenting any scientific errors in the Quran.

Let us see the topic under discussion. It was explained that it means a person cannot serve two masters or really love two persons. It could all be a symbolic verse needing interpretation. It need not be literal. There are some persons of neutral gender too. So if any one had two hearts in his body long ago, it could not mean any harm to Islam or Quran.

Jesus said he was a shepherd and he had many sheep. He said he had other sheep too. Could Sam please show some of Jesus’s sheep to us or to the world? I feel there is no need to attack Quran for saying " Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his body. "

His dilemma is he can’t use the errors in translation like non-Arabic speakers do. He has shown that he is an Arabic speaker and hence his is cornered after all the pretense that there are errors in the Qur’aan. He can no longer use the usual allegations like ‘how many angels were present’ and ‘the setting in a pool of murky water’ and all these obvious translation errors. Him and others have adopted the exact same approach of most anti-Islamic sites and the COPTIC site that has the allegations of Grammatical errors on it. They got their allegations from a book **responding **these allegations. Instead of realizing there are no grammatical errors when reading the book, they pick out the problem and present it on their site as if there was no answer to it in that book !!

If they have to fake errors in the Qur’aan what does that tell you ? That they couldn’t find any real errors otherwise thats what they would have been using.
I have no problem with people who are sincerely wrong because they simply don’t know, but its the others who exhibit a substantial amount of insincerity that I deeply disrespect.

Now you know why he backed out quickly

 

[Hadi]

Moayidd, I admire your patience with Sam, he’s been in my ignore list long time ago.

please stay in this forum.

 

[Sam_777]

Sam_777 has backed out from presenting any scientific errors in the Quran.

Which statement in all my posts shows that I backed out!!!

You and other Muslim members on this thread are exactly doing like what Muhammed told you to do:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 623:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.”

صحيح البخاري:
قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏انصر أخاك ظالما أو مظلوما ‏
​

(E) (A)

But I’m expecting such behaviour of Muslim members here particularly after I knew what Jesus said in the Bible “By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?”, (Matthew 7:16).