Sacred Scriptures

[JJWhite]

I've just visited الكتاب الأقدس - Kitab-i-Aqdas.

On the home page it says:

Baha'Allaah says:

... لا تزنوا كتاب الله بما عندكم من القواعد والعلوم ...

Translated, that means, "Do not weigh the Book of God with what you have of principles and sciences", and then it says that the lady reciting the verses (in a clear imitation of Qur'aanic recitation style) was only trying her best, and that she doesn't claim that it's mistake free.. so not to judge the book by her mistakes.

When listening to recitation, there are clear grammatical mistakes. I can give the benefit of the doubt for some and say that it is the fault of the lady reciting for putting the wrong vowel markings... but there's a couple that can't be her fault, because the word is spelled in a way that can't take the correct vowel markings.

In one verse, I saw: Laysa haadhaa amr. In proper Arabic, that would have to be Laysa haadhaa amra... ((if continuing amrun (incorrect) VS amran (correct). )) There's an alif missing at the end of the word. Amr is the khabar of the word laysa... it has to carry fat-hahs at the end. I studied that in my 5th grade grammar book.

 

[smaneck]

I do not find Muhammad alleged illiteracy to be much of an argument for or against the validity of the Qur'an.

In Islam the miracle never proves the Message, rather the Message proves the miracle.

 

[smaneck]

JJ.. You may want to check your sources but from what I gather the Kitab-i-Iqan was revealed in Persian.

I'm guessing that JJ is still learning Arabic . I made this mistake with the Iqan when I first started studying Arabic but hadn't yet learned Persian. The Iqan had so many Arabic words I assumed it was written in Arabic.

 

[JJWhite]

No, no.. I was reading a translation of Al-Iqan.

My mother is Arab. I could speak Arabic when I was one year old. I've studied Arabic all through school, from preschool to high school. I'm fluent.
-----

Anyway... I think I've said enough. I don't like to bring things up that make people uncomfortable. I'm not confrontational by nature, and I don't like to upset people.

I'll just leave it as this. Al-Kitab Al-Aqdas is claimed to be revelation from God in Arabic to Baha'ullah. The book sounds like a child or non-native speaker of Arabic wrote it. It contains grammatical errors. If you are a Baha'i, please investigate into this matter. Don't take my word for it. You owe it to yourself. The end.

 

[smaneck]

I'm studying Hebrew and reading Torah slowly and carefully with commentary now. Really enjoying it.

I once taught at a Christian college where even most of the faculty attended Bible classes, including the Jews. The Jews invited me to join their classes and while, unlike everyone else, I couldn't read the Hebrew I found my Arabic helped a lot when they read the passages out loud. Also, I was surprised to find out how similar Baha'i prayers were to Jewish ones.

I tried doing searches. All I can find are three fabricated (mawdoo') ahadith where it is claimed that Muhammad (pbuh) said he was the seal of the prophets and ALI was the seal of the saints. I can't seem to find anything like you mention in the hadith encyclopedias online. Do you have a reference?

It has been years since I read this hadith but I think I found it in a book entitled *Jesus in the Qur'an* by Geoffrey Parrinder.

One Jewish guy said that, btw, according to traditional commentary I've read on the verses. I believe he was objecting to something so he called God a miser (hand tied up) and because the other Jews didn't rebuke him for his statement, the verse was revealed rebuking the whole group present there at that time. Jews don't say or believe that, and it has nothing to do with revelation.. it was regarding money.

I think you are quite wrong about this. It is in reference to Jews believing that God would not send a Prophet outside of the Hebrew people. Read the passage along with the lines which immediately follow:

"The Jews say: "Allah's Hand is tied up.'' Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for what they uttered. Nay, both His Hands are widely outstretched. He spends as He wills. Verily, the revelation that has come to you from your Lord makes many of them increase in rebellion and disbelief."

I think the meaning is clear. God could not have revealed Himself through an Arab like Muhammad.

What about Al-Aqdas?

The Aqdas is in Arabic.

 

[smaneck]

No, no.. I was reading a translation of Al-Iqan.

Sorry, I misunderstood you. I thought you had found mistakes in Arabic grammar in the Iqan. I figured you didn't realize you were reading Persian, not Arabic.

The 'ulama used to criticize the Bab for making mistakes in Arabic grammar, but his so-called errors were always for a reason. He was sometimes inventing new forms to express what he had to say. As the Bab pointed out, Arabic grammar comes from the Qur'an, not the other way around. Hence, grammar itself should be based on revelation. Baha'u'llah, on the other hand, tended to avoid eccentric grammatical forms, though he will sometimes use rare ones.

Anyway... I think I've said enough. I don't like to bring things up that make people uncomfortable. I'm not confrontational by nature, and I don't like to upset people.

Sorry, if I offended you. You haven't made me uncomfortable. It is just that when you criticized the Arabic of the Iqan when it was actually written in Persian, I assumed your knowledge of the language was somewhat limited. It was just a misunderstanding.

I'll just leave it as this. Al-Kitab Al-Aqdas is claimed to be revelation from God in Arabic to Baha'ullah. The book sounds like a child or non-native speaker of Arabic wrote it. It contains grammatical errors.

I think you are wrong about this. I read the Aqdas as a graduate student and found several grammatical usages I did not understand. When I took the text to my professor he wasn't familiar with them either. Finally, we checked W Lane-Poole's lexicon and sure enough, they were there. They were just rarely used verb forms.

 

[smaneck]

When listening to recitation, there are clear grammatical mistakes. I can give the benefit of the doubt for some and say that it is the fault of the lady reciting for putting the wrong vowel markings... but there's a couple that can't be her fault, because the word is spelled in a way that can't take the correct vowel markings.

When Iranian Baha'is recite Baha'u'llah's Arabic writings they tend to use the Persian pronunciation which does indeed change the vowel sounds. If the mistakes were from what you heard and not from the actual reading of the text I would presume the mistake is with the reciter or whoever wrote in the vowels. The original text would not have contained those.

There's an alif missing at the end of the word.

That of course, will be more than the hearing. I would put it in the same category of those verses of the Qur'an which spell kitab with a dagger alif rather than the one normally used.

 

[smaneck]

بسم ربِّنا العليّ الأعلى

"الباب المذكور في بيان أنّ العباد لن يصلوا إلى شاطئ بحر العرفان إلاّ بالانقطاع الصّرف عن كلّ من في السّموات والأرض. قدّسوا أنفسكم يا أهل الأرض لعلّ تصلنّ إلى المقام الّذي قدّر الله لكم وتدخلنّ في سرادق جعله الله في سمآء البيان مرفوعًا"

جوهر هذا الباب هو أنّه يجب على السّالكين سبيل الإيمان والطّالبين كؤوس الإيقان أن يطهّروا أنفسهم ويقدّسوها عن جميع الشؤونات العرضيّة - يعني ينزّهون السّمع عن استماع الأقوال، والقلب عن الظّنونات المتعلّقة​

Wiki says it was composed partly in Persian and partly in Arabic.

Ah, I see what happened now. That passage which introduces the Iqan *is* written in Arabic, but I think Baha'u'llah is quoting the Bab. What follows is his commentary on that passage, which is written in Persian. As I indicated before, the Bab did use grammatical forms that were uniquely his own and he did so deliberately. The Iqan was written before Baha'u'llah had made any claims of his own.

 

[JJWhite]

That of course, will be more than the hearing. I would put it in the same category of those verses of the Qur'an which spell kitab with a dagger alif rather than the one normally used.

I feel like that's comparing apples to oranges. Yes, there are differences between the Uthmanic script and the regular written Arabic of modern times. Remember that the Qur'an was revealed in seven different Ahruf. 'Uthman is said to have written the Qur'aan upon the Harf of Quraysh, but I believe that these unique spellings (missing out a long vowel in the middle of the word) are reflective of the different variations within the revealed text. Kutub, for instance, is "books", while "Kitab" is book. I would have to look it up, but I am hypothesizing that in a case where a dagger alif was used, that was a spot where a variant acceptable narration read it in the plural. When it comes to words with dagger alifs, I know examples of where there are alternate acceptable recitations, such as in the case of maliki VS maaliki in Al-Faatihah. I never got to take the in depth class on 'Uthmaanic script that was offered at the Qur'aan school I attended though, so I'm not an expert in that area.

The amr vs amra is a totally different scenario. It's a difference of whether the word is mansoob or marfoo'... like, if it's in the nominative or accusative grammatical case.

Anyhow... I guess your main argument is that Arabic grammar as we know it is based on the Qur'aan. You are going on the premise that new revelation can invent different basic grammatical structures here and there than those found in all Arabic writings including pre-Islamic poetry, so I suppose that's where your argument is.

 

[smaneck]

These “Churches” were not around before the NT Letters were written. The indwelling Holy Spirit is not “tradition”.

There was certainly a "church" by then:

"18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this arock I will build my bchurch; and the gates of chell shall not dprevail against it.

19 And I will agive unto thee the keys of the ckingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt dbind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 16

 

[Rationalt]

In Islam the miracle never proves the Message, rather the Message proves the miracle.

Hmmm.What i see in the Quran is the ideas of a 7th century man of Arabian desert who wanted to be in charge of people.

 

[smaneck]

Anyhow... I guess your main argument is that Arabic grammar as we know it is based on the Qur'aan. You are going on the premise that new revelation can invent different basic grammatical structures here and there than those found in all Arabic writings including pre-Islamic poetry, so I suppose that's where your argument is.

Yes, that would be my main argument. To be honest, I don't think it would ever occur to a Western believer to judge the validity of revelation based on grammar. The first Baha'i book I ever read was *Release the Sun*, a popular history of the Bab. I was only thirteen at the time and still a Christian. When I got to the part where the Bab was tried before the 'ulama, I remember the issue of his grammar came up. I was astounded they could be so superficial. It was the Pharisees all over again.

 

[JJWhite]

This is what I'm thinking. The Qur'aan was revealed in the language of the people of the locality, right? It was normal Arabic, just in a new style and rhythm, read in what was considered awesomely beautiful composition (considering all the ahadith we have talking about the polytheists' reactions are accurate). Why would the Bab and Baha'ullaah write things using what sounds like horrible Arabic by the standard of the time they are writing in?

 

[smaneck]

Hmmm.What i see in the Quran is the ideas of a 7th century man of Arabian desert who wanted to be in charge of people.

How much of the Qur'an have you read?

 

[Rationalt]

How much of the Qur'an have you read?

All of it.Why?.

 

[smaneck]

Why would the Bab and Baha'ullaah write things using what sounds like horrible Arabic by the standard of the time they are writing in?

It was the Bab, not Baha'u'llah who wrote Arabic in ways that were unique. Remember, he was writing to Persians who knew Arabic as a second language to begin with. Obviously a lot of people did not find his verses 'horrible' or they would not have become Babis to begin with. Indeed, most of his earliest followers members of the 'ulama themselves.

 

[smaneck]

All of it.Why?.

Because your representation of the text bears no resemblance to its actual contents.

 

[Arthra]

Hmmm.What i see in the Quran is the ideas of a 7th century man of Arabian desert who wanted to be in charge of people.

Consider that before the Revelation of Mount Hira Muhammad was already "in charge of people". He was in charge of caravens and had wealth and position in society. When the revelation came to Him He was rejected and condemned.. insulted and His tribe boycotted ..A serious attempt was made on His life and He had to flee from Mecca.

 

[Rationalt]

Because your representation of the text bears no resemblance to its actual contents.

Perhaps you can point out my mistakes.

 

[Rationalt]

Consider that before the Revelation of Mount Hira Muhammad was already "in charge of people". He was in charge of caravens and had wealth and position in society. When the revelation came to Him He was rejected and condemned.. insulted and His tribe boycotted ..A serious attempt was made on His life and He had to flee from Mecca.

He was never in charge of people but he was given some respect .

Perhaps you can read the condensed biography atleast once instead of copy pasting from blogs as you always do.

Btw, muhammad was expelled from mecca because he was ridiculing the religious practices of Meccan arabs.

Back to Quran.