Reality of Islam

Home » Response To Gramatical mistakes In Qur’an

Response To Gramatical mistakes In Qur’an

For more details, read the below article:

The article (Newton’s) is a flimsy argument that can be summarized as several
false hypotheses as follows:

  1. Every prophet’s prophethood is attested to by divine miracles. [what were
    Noah’s miracles that were evident while his ummah still lived? how about
    Isaac’s? Jacob’s? Lot’s?]
  2. The Qur’an is God’s only miracle confirming the prophethood of
    Mohammad (saas). [also not true which has been addressed in many other articles]
  3. It’s miracle lies in that it is gramatically perfect. [another
    misconception–it is a miracle (even a literary one) in many other senses,
    including the fact that it doesn’t contradict itself [As does the Bible]
    << …wa law kana min 2indi ghair ILLAHI lawajadoo fihi ikhtilaafan
    katheera…>> << and if it were from other than Allah then they
    would have found within it many contradictions/errors…>> (surat
    al-nisaa’) as well as the fact that it was revealed to Mohammad, (asws) who was
    illiterate
  4. There are grammatical errors in the Qur’an. [followed by a list of supposed
    grammatical errors that are either: – errors due to ignorance of the
    Arabic language and/or Qur’an – correctly used grammatical exceptions or
    (accepted but) irregular style that had a precedence of use among the Arabs]
  5. Thus, it is either not divine and/or it has been changed, as have the rest
    of the books of the Jews and Christains. [this hypothesis fails since it is
    based on the previous one, which fails also.]

If these presumptions of errors are the best people can do after 1400 years,
this is clearly a testament to the Qur’an’s truth and validity.

The article also overlooks the fact that there are seven different
readings “qira’aat””of the Qur’an.The essential meaning is not changed among
the seven.
The only thing that is changed is the way it is read
(pronunciation), meaning something that is read with a “u” (nominative or
marfoo2) in one reading may be read with an “a” (accusative or manSoob) in
another reading. In fact, some of the things the author thinks are “errors” are
actually read the “correct” way in other readings. however, there is at
least one authentic and grammatically correct usage and explanation for all ways
of reading.

In addition, every respected and accepted tafseer of the Qur’an puts forth
multiple possible meanings for a given verse, none of which are mutually
incompatible. In fact, this is something to be expected for something is the
final revelation for all mankind–something that has eternal
applicability and all-encompassing extent. Some meanings may refer to a
particular situation for which the ayah was revealed, while other ones may
exhibit the broader and contemporary relevance of the meaning.

However, there must be a sound source and basis for the explanation of
the meaning(s). As Ibn Katheer states in the introduction to his infamous
classical work on tafseer al-Quran, hadeeth 2an Sa2eed ibn Jabair 2an ibn Abbas
2an al-Nabiyy (saaws) “man qaala fil-qur’aani bi-ra’yihi aw bi-maa laa ya2lam
fa-yatabawwa’ maq2adahu min al-naar.” (al-Tirmidhi [Hadeeth Hassan], al-Nisaa’i,
and also ibn Jarir). “Whosoever says regarding the Qur’an [something that is
based on] his opinion or something he does not know can [prepare to] take his
place in the Hell-fire.”

At the end of the day, every one of the supposed errors are either
manifestations of ignorance of grammar or the meaning of the verse, things taken
incompletely or out of context, or exceptions in usage or style that has a
precedence in Arabic linguistics. (Read More).

%d bloggers like this: