From kh55011@emirates.net.ae (Khalid...)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: They claim the Quran has a grammatical errors
Organization: *
Date: Thu Jan 16 10:02:29 EST 1997
Message-Id: arielE43wG6.JGt@netcom.com
Asalam Alaykum
I have followed this link in one of Jochen Katz messages it is a
homepage of Newton
and found this funny page of " grammatical errors in the Quran" .
written by M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton , so ,I as an Arab decided
to reply to this garbage :
It is quit funny , how two non-arabs try to evaluate the Quran
structure this hard and only come up with 18 grammatical errors
to prove that Quran is not the word of Allah ,I am totally surprised ,
because the Arabic grammar is very complex subject of study , even the
ordinary Arab people themselves nowadays are not fully familiar to
the grammar of their own language .
but I believe that it is a positive sign for the Quran , and a thing
that should upset the enemies of this Holy book , why ?
because when two non-Arab people or even non knowledgeable Arabs try
find grammatical errors in the Quran which is considered that standard
of the Arabic grammar they should come up with much higher number of
errors than only 18 minor stuff , the number should be in hundreds ,
but I guess these guys have tried very hard , right ?and thats all
they can come up with .
But unfortunately and to the contrary these tiny 18 errors they
descovered a long with their dreams and efforts will vanish when they
will learn that there are no errors at all , and all that they have
done is to emphasize the importance of this Holy Book .
I have took a quick look at these errors and looked it up , and this
what I came out with ; these errors which was *descovered* now let say
1996-97 after more than hundreds of years by two amateur foreign
*researchers* , could not even be considered a work of science , it
is merely a work of speculation from an unprofound student of foreign
language
### so if you decided reading my reply to the end you should open this
page and compare my
replies to the so called errors mentioned in it .
error #1
The word Saabi'uuna has been declined correctly
after the use of too many of letter "wa" or (and) ,in the
English language, it is quit acceptable and considered to be a nice
change to use it in that form .
error #2 The word muqiimiin is declined with "fath"for the use of
"madh" which means the praise for them , do you know how the praise
works in the arabic grammar , will look it up , and learn !!
here is another example from the arabic poetry from those days
----------------------------------------------------------------------
" la yubidun qawmi alazeen homo usd ul udati wa afat al juzuri
alnazeeleen bekul muaatarakin wa altaiboon maaqeda aluzuri
>~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The most important thing to us of the above poetry is the underlined
words; the poet chose to decline with "fath" when he praised his
people as great fighters "alnazeeleena" and declined what came after
the "wa" or (and) with "rafaa" , where Newton and his friend says it
should be declined the in the same manner . will it is quite
acceptable and a known issue for the Arabic language usage .
error#3
>The word saahiraan should be saahirayn
will perhaps in your language it should , the usage here for the word
saahiraan which means the two magicians was based upon a known Arabic
dialect of that time and have been declined based on it , for a
purpose only Allah almighty knows . perhaps an indication for the
place !!! , and again it is grammatically correct .
error #4
No error at all , it is only the misunderstanding of these tow people
who might have tried to deal with Arabic language in similar way to
they deal with the English language , which clearly show , that they
are not will informed of the Arabic language and that was obvious when
they tried to ignore the deferences in the use of the time forms ,
look the next error for more info
error#5
surprisingly they have admit it themselves , it is a mistake in
translation to english ,but it should be translated this way Again due
the deference between the usage of time forms in the two languages you
are dealing with two languages professors !!
and you can't apply the English grammar to Arabic text ,again I
repeat there are a lot of deferences in the use of time forms in the
two languages . got it ?
erro#6
you say the word 'asarru should be 'asarra because he verb comes
before the subject , will that is not correct , the subject was
mentioned in the previous two Ayahs ,smart guys, and it is "alnas"
which means the people ,check it back and you will be relieved .
...........
and the errors go on like that ,with more emphasis on what we call in
the Arabic Grammar " alaatf wa almaatoof " which means the use of the
letter "Wa" (and) , repeating the same mistakes used in the
inaccurate approach of the two men !!!!
this was a quick look from an Arabic speaking net surfer , so be
warned , these two people dont really know how the Arabic grammar
works .
I couldn't complete the list of the so called errors because of the
lack of time and the repetition of the alleged errors but it can be
done even in more details upon request .
This message have been sent to the authors and the Islamic related
Newsgroups.
--------------
Khalid......
--------------
And the response to the ridicule.