PDA

View Full Version : When was the first OT and NT translated into Arabic?



Danish
05-07-2006, 01:01 PM
:sl:
Does any1 know when was When was the first OT and NT translated into Arabic?

pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee quote ur references and concrete evidences for ur answer.

If u can quote a certain book then it will be most appreciated
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Trumble
05-07-2006, 01:38 PM
Originally Posted by Danish
:sl:
Does any1 know when was When was the first OT and NT translated into Arabic?

pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee quote ur references and concrete evidences for ur answer.

If u can quote a certain book then it will be most appreciated

Interesting question, so I had a quick hunt. According to Margolis, M. (1917) The Story of Bible Translations, The Jewish Publication Society of America, it seems to have been by a Jewish scholar called Gaon Saadya in the tenth century, although that seems to have been only the Jewish scriptures.

Caution.. I've only skimmed the book, so its more than possible I've missed something. I know some have claimed that translation occured rather earlier than that, and I wouldn't discount that without much more thorough research.

I suggest, if you haven't already, that you visit the brilliant online academic library, Questia. It's well worth the money, trust me, but even if you don't sign up (you can't access the books unless you do, course) you can still use the search engine and then ask your library to get hold of the book you want. There are many other references on this subject there - it would take days to even skim all of them!
Reply

HeiGou
05-07-2006, 01:43 PM
Originally Posted by Danish
:sl:
Does any1 know when was When was the first OT and NT translated into Arabic?

pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee quote ur references and concrete evidences for ur answer.

If u can quote a certain book then it will be most appreciated
Doesn't the Sahih Bukhari talk of Khadija's cousin who was translating the Bible (although whether that is OT or NT or both I don't know) into Arabic?

And there were Arab Christians in Yemen so they must have had Arab Bibles.
Reply

Danish
05-07-2006, 03:13 PM
:sl:
thanks for the answers guys

One comapritive religion scholar (Dr Zakir Naik) has to say:

The Arabic version of the Bible was not present at the time of Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). The earliest Arabic version of the Old Testament is that of R. Saadias Gaon of 900 C.E. - more than 250 years after the death of our beloved Prophet. The oldest Arabic version of the new Testament was published by Erpenius in 1616 C.E. - about a thousand years after the demise of our Prophet.
i research on Saadias Gaon and Erpenius now
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
HeiGou
05-07-2006, 03:27 PM
Originally Posted by Danish
:sl:
thanks for the answers guys

One comapritive religion scholar (Dr Zakir Naik) has to say:
The Arabic version of the Bible was not present at the time of Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). The earliest Arabic version of the Old Testament is that of R. Saadias Gaon of 900 C.E. - more than 250 years after the death of our beloved Prophet. The oldest Arabic version of the new Testament was published by Erpenius in 1616 C.E. - about a thousand years after the demise of our Prophet.
i research on Saadias Gaon and Erpenius now
Then he would have to explain why the Sahih Bukhari makes it clear that Muhammed's wife's cousin was working on a copy of the Bible himself. If you see Dr Naik ask him about these:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 478:

Narrated Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) The commencement (of the Divine Inspiration) to Allah's Apostle was in the form of true dreams in his sleep, for he never had a dream but it turned out to be true and clear as the bright daylight. >deletions< Khadija then took him to Waraqa bin Naufil, the son of Khadija's paternal uncle. Waraqa had been converted to Christianity in the Pre-lslamic Period and used to write Arabic and write of the Gospel in Arabic as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. >deletions<

Sahih Muslim Chapter 74: THE BEGINNING OF REVELATION TO THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM), Book 001, Number 0301:

A'isha, the wife of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him), reported: The first (form) with which was started the revelation to the Messenger of Allah was the true vision in sleep. >deletions< Khadija then took him to Waraqa b. Naufal b. Asad b. 'Abd al-'Uzza, and he was the son of Khadija's uncle, i. e., the brother of her father. And he was the man who had embraced Christianity in the Days of Ignorance (i. e. before Islam) and he used to write books in Arabic and, therefore, wrote Injil in Arabic as God willed that he should write. He was very old and had become blind Khadija said to him: O uncle! listen to the son of your brother. >deletions<

There is obviously some sort of sub-text to Dr Naik's claims but I can't see it. Anyone know why it matters when the Bible was translated into Arabic?
Reply

Bittersteel
05-07-2006, 03:40 PM
Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3:

Narrated 'Aisha:

(the mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright day light, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continuously for many days before his desire to see his family. He used to take with him the journey food for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadija to take his food like-wise again till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read.

The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?' Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, 'Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous." (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah's Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your Kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones."

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Apostle described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while.

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari while talking about the period of pause in revelation reporting the speech of the Prophet "While I was walking, all of a sudden I heard a voice from the sky. I looked up and saw the same angel who had visited me at the cave of Hira' sitting on a chair between the sky and the earth. I got afraid of him and came back home and said, 'Wrap me (in blankets).' And then Allah revealed the following Holy Verses (of Quran):

'O you (i.e. Muhammad)! wrapped up in garments!' Arise and warn (the people against Allah's Punishment),... up to 'and desert the idols.' (74.1-5) After this the revelation started coming strongly, frequently and regularly."
Reply

HeiGou
05-07-2006, 03:49 PM
Originally Posted by Emir Aziz
Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3:

Narrated 'Aisha:

>deletions<

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight.
Well as they all have to be true, it is likely that Waraqa wrote the Bible in Arabic but using the Hebrew alphabet - as it says Hebrew letters. Which he must have been able to speak.

What is the problem here?
Reply

Bittersteel
05-07-2006, 03:57 PM
Anyone know why it matters when the Bible was translated into Arabic?
you know the usual allegation that the BIble was used as the text for the Quran.
And there were Arab Christians in Yemen so they must have had Arab Bibles.
There were Arab Christians.In fact I asked the same question.
The thing is there were no Bible ,there were gospels,small pieces of translated work not the Bible in its entirety. The entire thing was translated after the 9th or 10th Century.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
05-07-2006, 04:21 PM
:sl:
According to all scholarly sources, there was no arabic bible at the time of the Prophet saws.
The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics admits
there is no evidence of any parts of the Bible having been translated into arabic before Islam. (Hastings, James. The Encyclopedia of Rleigion and Ethics. Vol. X, p. 540)
Hastings Dictionary of the Bible attributes the first arabic translation of the Bible to the tenth century, (Hastings, James. Dictionary of the Bible. p. 105). Meanwhile, Encyclopedia Judaica attributes the frst arabic translation of the OT either to Hunayn Ibn Ishaq (800-873CE) or to Saadiah b. Joseph Gaon (882-942CE), (Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 4, p. 863).

The Christian and Jewish traditions that were circulating in Arabia were oral traditions. But the Christian and Jewish groups in arabaia were not orthodox at all, and there were numerous heretical groups. Paul Wegner writes:
The Scriptures do not seem to have been extant in an Arabic version before the time of Muhammad (570-632), who knew the gospel story only in oral form, and mainly from Syriac sources. These Syriac sources were marked by Docetism (believed that Jesus had only a divine nature and only appeared to be incarnate - they thought the material world and thus one's body was inherently evil)... (Wegner, Paul D. The Journey from Texts to Translations. 1999. Grand Rapids: Baker Books. p. 250)
And according to the New Catholic Encyclopedia:
Neither Arabian Jews not Arabian Christians, unfortunately, were to be classed among the better representatives of their faiths at the time. The former had lived in comparative isolation possibly since the middle of the 1st millenium B.C., although they had been mildly successful in proselytism and the latter were mainly heretical Monophysites, remote in every sense from the centers of Christian learning. (New Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol 9, p.1001)
For more info, please see The First and Final Commandment by Dr. Laurence Brown MD.

:w:
Reply

HeiGou
05-07-2006, 04:24 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
According to all scholarly sources, there was no arabic bible at the time of the Prophet saws.
So, out of curiousity, do you reject the hadith from Bukhari and Abu Muslim?

For more info, please see The First and Final Commandment by Dr. Laurence Brown MD.
And he would be a Muslim?
Reply

Trumble
05-07-2006, 04:25 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
And there were Arab Christians in Yemen so they must have had Arab Bibles.
I'm not so sure that follows. It was an awfully long time before the Bible was translated into the existing Western languages from the Latin. Would Christian clerics in Yemen have had the scriptures available in Coptic, Latin or Greek and just passed on the contents verbally? I assume the vast majority of followers would have been illiterate.

As a matter of interest, when was Arabic itself first used as a literary language? Are there any preserved pre-Qur'anic Arabic histories or works of philosophy, science or religion?
Reply

Danish
05-07-2006, 10:31 PM
:sl:
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."
and
Sahih Muslim Chapter 74: THE BEGINNING OF REVELATION TO THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM), Book 001, Number 0301:

A'isha, the wife of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him), reported: The first (form) with which was started the revelation to the Messenger of Allah was the true vision in sleep. >deletions< Khadija then took him to Waraqa b. Naufal b. Asad b. 'Abd al-'Uzza, and he was the son of Khadija's uncle, i. e., the brother of her father. And he was the man who had embraced Christianity in the Days of Ignorance (i. e. before Islam) and he used to write books in Arabic and, therefore, wrote Injil in Arabic as God willed that he should write. He was very old and had become blind Khadija said to him: O uncle! listen to the son of your brother. >deletions<
yes i find this quite interesting too. From the hadiths it is quite clear that waraqah used to read and write gospel into arabic. But did he wrote the WHOLE thing which was OFFICAL translation ACCESSIBLE to public? or was it merely a PERSONAL reference of FEW BITS which he chose to write out of interest? I think the answer is to be found in the following hadith:
Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 478:

Narrated Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) The commencement (of the Divine Inspiration) to Allah's Apostle was in the form of true dreams in his sleep, for he never had a dream but it turned out to be true and clear as the bright daylight. >deletions< Khadija then took him to Waraqa bin Naufil, the son of Khadija's paternal uncle. Waraqa had been converted to Christianity in the Pre-lslamic Period and used to write Arabic and write of the Gospel in Arabic as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. >deletions<
So he wrote as much as Allah wished him to write and yet he was an old man who had lost his sight. That statements might indicate that he did not write the WHOLE gospel but as much as god wished him to write. And since he had lost his sight it would have restricted him from writing/reading more gospel. Greater point of interest is, historically speaking was his gospel translation official and accurate and accesible to public?
Reply

HeiGou
05-08-2006, 08:56 AM
Originally Posted by Danish
yes i find this quite interesting too. From the hadiths it is quite clear that waraqah used to read and write gospel into arabic. But did he wrote the WHOLE thing which was OFFICAL translation ACCESSIBLE to public? or was it merely a PERSONAL reference of FEW BITS which he chose to write out of interest? I think the answer is to be found in the following hadith:
I am sure if it existed it was a personal thing as the Meccans did not have a proper government as such and so no such thing as an official translation could exist - nor, of course, is there any sign any Church endorsed Waraqa's work.

So he wrote as much as Allah wished him to write and yet he was an old man who had lost his sight. That statements might indicate that he did not write the WHOLE gospel but as much as god wished him to write. And since he had lost his sight it would have restricted him from writing/reading more gospel. Greater point of interest is, historically speaking was his gospel translation official and accurate and accesible to public?
Well possibly. It might. Or he might have been old and the task of doing so much reading and writing destroyed his eyesight. For Muslim and Christian purposes I do not think it matters. If a Christian wanted to make a case that Muhammed cribbed from what little Waraqa did translate, they could. If a Muslim wished to deny it was even possible by asserting that no Jewish or Christian texts existed, they could not as Bukhari clearly shows that they were. So it is of interest to historians only and as no such copies have survived, it is not of much interest to historians.
Reply

Danish
05-08-2006, 09:25 AM
:sl:
I am sure if it existed it was a personal thing as the Meccans did not have a proper government as such and so no such thing as an official translation could exist - nor, of course, is there any sign any Church endorsed Waraqa's work.
i would agree with this

Well possibly. It might. Or he might have been old and the task of doing so much reading and writing destroyed his eyesight. For Muslim and Christian purposes I do not think it matters. If a Christian wanted to make a case that Muhammed cribbed from what little Waraqa did translate, they could. If a Muslim wished to deny it was even possible by asserting that no Jewish or Christian texts existed, they could not as Bukhari clearly shows that they were. So it is of interest to historians only and as no such copies have survived, it is not of much interest to historians.
I see many flaws in stating that Prophet Muhammed copied waraqah:

1) Prophet Muhammed was illiterate, so he couldnt have just read/wrote waraqah's work even in secrecy. So this restricts his access to even the small portion of the bible which was translated

2) In hadith in sahih bukhari Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3, waraqah said "wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa!" So waraqah did not live long to teach and give personal lessons to the Prophet. He died after few days, yet the revelation continued for 23 years.

3) In the above hadith waraqah also stated that he would support prophet Muhammed if he lived longer. However, if waraqah had been giving Muhammed private lesson or been giving him the knowldge, then waraqah being a wise man would have easily caught Prophet Muhammed out and proved him to be a liar; waraqah was a pious man.

4) Prophet Muhammed only met waraqah twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Kaaba (before the Prophetic Mission) and he kissed the Prophet’s forehead affectionately and the second occasion was when the Prophet went to meet Waraqa after receiving the first revelation.
Reply

HeiGou
05-08-2006, 09:47 AM
Originally Posted by Danish
I see many flaws in stating that Prophet Muhammed copied waraqah:
Well I would not assert that Muhammed did copy from anyone. There is no evidence of it. However if you read the post by Ansar Al-Adl you can see that some Western scholars clearly imply it.

1) Prophet Muhammed was illiterate, so he couldnt have just read/wrote waraqah's work even in secrecy. So this restricts his access to even the small portion of the bible which was translated
I often wonder when the idea arose that Muhammed was illiterate. He is described as "Ummi" but I would have thought that meant he was sent to the Nation of the Arabs. After all there are hadith which seem to show, clearly, that he could read and write. Which is odd because you would think that Bukhari would have thrown them out immediately. However I have enough black marks against my name and so I do not care to discuss it.

So waraqah did not live long to teach and give personal lessons to the Prophet. He died after few days, yet the revelation continued for 23 years.
Yes but clearly Muhammed lived in an environment where Biblical stories were around. Presumably he heard them being told, presumably Waraqa would have talked about his Faith - just try and shut Christians up. Not that there is anything much else to say about that.

4) Prophet Muhammed only met waraqah twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Kaaba (before the Prophetic Mission) and he kissed the Prophet’s forehead affectionately and the second occasion was when the Prophet went to meet Waraqa after receiving the first revelation.
Well come on now. Waraqa was his wife's cousin who was in her turn his cousin as well. Mecca was a small place. Presumably everyone knew everyone else. Just because only two meetings are mentioned, doesn't mean that only two meetings took place.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
05-08-2006, 01:00 PM
Hello HeiGou,
Originally Posted by HeiGou
So, out of curiousity, do you reject the hadith from Bukhari and Abu Muslim?
No of course not. It is always amusing how some Christians bring up two hadith and forget their own scholarly sources about the translation of the Bible - the hadith they bring up are always the hadith of Waraqa and the hadith of Umar.

But neither of these contradict what historians have said. Waraqa used to study the Hebrew scriptures and he had his personal writings in arabic.
And he would be a Muslim?
A convert, yes.
After all there are hadith which seem to show, clearly, that he could read and write.
No, none of them do. Signing one's name does not prove literacy, there are many illiterate people who know how to sign, and one can dictate letters, they don't have to be hand-written, and being a tradesman does not prove anything about literacy. I have heard this nonsense several times, believe me.
Yes but clearly Muhammed lived in an environment where Biblical stories were around.
Can you name some other Christians in Makkah whom Prophet Muhammad pbuh would have heard the stories from? We agree it cannot be Waraqa since he died within a few days yet the revelation continued for 23 years.

Regards
Reply

HeiGou
05-08-2006, 01:25 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
It is always amusing how some Christians bring up two hadith and forget their own scholarly sources about the translation of the Bible - the hadith they bring up are always the hadith of Waraqa and the hadith of Umar.
Really? I thought I had come across it as a brand new discovery. What a shame. But what relevance does the translation of the Bible have?

But neither of these contradict what historians have said. Waraqa used to study the Hebrew scriptures and he had his personal writings in arabic.
Except the historians you cited claimed that the Bible was not translated into Arabic until much later. Now I agree if you discount the aHadith, the first texts are much much later. But if you believe the aHadith are historically valid texts then there must have been Arabic Bibles, perhaps only partial, well before Gaon.

No, none of them do. Signing one's name does not prove literacy, there are many illiterate people who know how to sign, and one can dictate letters, they don't have to be hand-written, and being a tradesman does not prove anything about literacy. I have heard this nonsense several times, believe me.
Well I am not interested in arguing what is bound to be a highly emotive subject that can only get me into trouble. But there are Hadith that say he did more than sign his name. He crossed bits out for instance

Volume 3, Book 49, Number 863:

Narrated Al-Bara:

When the Prophet intended to perform 'Umra in the month of Dhul-Qada, the people of Mecca did not let him enter Mecca till he settled the matter with them by promising to stay in it for three days only. When the document of treaty was written, the following was mentioned: 'These are the terms on which Muhammad, Allah's Apostle agreed (to make peace).' They said, "We will not agree to this, for if we believed that you are Allah's Apostle we would not prevent you, but you are Muhammad bin 'Abdullah." The Prophet said, "I am Allah's Apostle and also Muhammad bin 'Abdullah." Then he said to 'Ali, "Rub off (the words) 'Allah's Apostle' ", but 'Ali said, "No, by Allah, I will never rub off your name." So, Allah's Apostle took the document and wrote, 'This is what Muhammad bin 'Abdullah has agreed upon: No arms will be brought into Mecca except in their cases, and nobody from the people of Mecca will be allowed to go with him (i.e. the Prophet ) even if he wished to follow him and he (the Prophet ) will not prevent any of his companions from staying in Mecca if the latter wants to stay.' When the Prophet entered Mecca and the time limit passed, the Meccans went to 'Ali and said, "Tell your Friend (i.e. the Prophet ) to go out, as the period (agreed to) has passed." So, the Prophet went out of Mecca. The daughter of Hamza ran after them (i.e. the Prophet and his companions), calling, "O Uncle! O Uncle!" 'Ali received her and led her by the hand and said to Fatima, "Take your uncle's daughter." Zaid and Ja'far quarrel ed about her. 'Ali said, "I have more right to her as she is my uncle's daughter." Ja'far said, "She is my uncle's daughter, and her aunt is my wife." Zaid said, "She is my brother's daughter." The Prophet judged that she should be given to her aunt, and said that the aunt was like the mother. He then said to 'All, "You are from me and I am from you", and said to Ja'far, "You resemble me both in character and appearance", and said to Zaid, "You are our brother (in faith) and our freed slave."

Can you name some other Christians in Makkah whom Prophet Muhammad pbuh would have heard the stories from? We agree it cannot be Waraqa since he died within a few days yet the revelation continued for 23 years.
Except that Muhammed must have known Waraqa quite well. Mecca was a small place after all. They were related. And there were other "hanif" around who had studied Christianity. The ideas were in the air. Which is not to say that Muhammed copied them or anything like that. It is just that it is not true that it was impossible for him to have heard Biblical stories. For instance,

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 169:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Prophet met Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail in the bottom of (the valley of) Baldah before any Divine Inspiration came to the Prophet. A meal was presented to the Prophet but he refused to eat from it. (Then it was presented to Zaid) who said, "I do not eat anything which you slaughter in the name of your stone idols. I eat none but those things on which Allah's Name has been mentioned at the time of slaughtering." Zaid bin 'Amr used to criticize the way Quraish used to slaughter their animals, and used to say, "Allah has created the sheep and He has sent the water for it from the sky, and He has grown the grass for it from the earth; yet you slaughter it in other than the Name of Allah. He used to say so, for he rejected that practice and considered it as something abominable.

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail went to Sham, inquiring about a true religion to follow. He met a Jewish religious scholar and asked him about their religion. He said, "I intend to embrace your religion, so tell me some thing about it." The Jew said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you receive your share of Allah's Anger." Zaid said, "'I do not run except from Allah's Anger, and I will never bear a bit of it if I have the power to avoid it. Can you tell me of some other religion?" He said, "I do not know any other religion except the Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He said, "Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian, and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" Then Zaid went out and met a Christian religious scholar and told him the same as before. The Christian said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you get a share of Allah's Curse." Zaid replied, "I do not run except from Allah's Curse, and I will never bear any of Allah's Curse and His Anger if I have the power to avoid them. Will you tell me of some other religion?" He replied, "I do not know any other religion except Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He replied, Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" When Zaid heard their Statement about (the religion of) Abraham, he left that place, and when he came out, he raised both his hands and said, "O Allah! I make You my Witness that I am on the religion of Abraham."

Narrated Asma bint Abi Bakr: I saw Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail standing with his back against the Ka'ba and saying, "O people of Quraish! By Allah, none amongst you is on the religion of Abraham except me." He used to preserve the lives of little girls: If somebody wanted to kill his daughter he would say to him, "Do not kill her for I will feed her on your behalf." So he would take her, and when she grew up nicely, he would say to her father, "Now if you want her, I will give her to you, and if you wish, I will feed her on your behalf."

So clearly Muhammed met people who had heard about Christian and Jewish ideas. Their concerns were, no surprise, often his concerns as well. This does not mean that Muhammed copied anything from anyone or anything like that. Let me distance myself from such claims utterly as there is no proof or evidence of such claims. But he did live in an environment that was not entirely unacquainted with such accounts.
Reply

Bittersteel
05-08-2006, 02:56 PM
Originally Posted by IslamToday.com
`&#194;’ishah relates how the revelation started: “Revelation first came to Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) in the form of good dreams that would come true as clear as day. Then, he began to love seclusion. He would go to the cave of Hir&#226;’ wherein he used to worship Allah continuously for many days and nights before he would return to see his family. He used to take with him provisions for his stay and then come back to his wife Khad&#238;jah to gather more provisions. This continued until the truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hir&#226;’. The angel came to him and commanded him to read. The Prophet replied: “I do not know how to read.”



The Prophet (peace be upon him) told me: “The angel caught me and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again commanded me to read and I replied: ‘I do not know how to read.’ Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time until I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again commanded me to read but again I replied: ‘I do not know how to read.’ Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said: “Read in the name of your Lord, who has created. Who has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous”. [S&#251;rah al-`Alaq: 1-3]’



Then Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) returned with the revelation and with his heart pounding. He went to Khad&#238;jah bint Khuwaylid and said: “Cover me! Cover me!” She covered him until his fear subsided. After that, he told her everything that had happened and said: “I fear that something may happen to me.”



Khad&#238;jah replied: “Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your kinfolk, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously, and assist those in distress.”



So Khad&#238;jah took him to her cousin Waraqah b. Nawfal. He was a man who had converted to Christianity during the days of ignorance. He was able to write in Hebrew and wrote from the Bible in Hebrew what Allah blessed him to be able to write. He was a very old man and had gone blind. Khad&#238;jah said to him: ‘My cousin, listen to what your nephew has to say.’ Waraqah said: ‘My nephew, what do you see?’ Allah’s Messenger told him about what he had seen. Then Waraqah said to him: ‘This is the prophecy that Allah revealed to M&#251;s&#226; (Moses, peace be upon him). If only I were a young man, I would live to see the day your people cast you out.’ Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: ‘Are they going to cast me out?’ Waraqah replied: ‘Yes, no man has ever come with the likes of what you bring without treated with hostility. And if I live to see that day I will give you my support.” But after a few days, Waraqah died. [Sah&#238;h al-Bukh&#226;r&#238; (1/3, 4/124)]
Mecca was a small place after all. They were related.
dear dear I know people in Mecca currently residing and even today according to them its a big city.they were related but they met very few times only on special occasions.

Just because only two meetings are mentioned, doesn't mean that only two meetings took place.
[/QUOTE]
in those times in some cases it happened.People didn't always have time to visit each other.Distances were quite great.life in those times in Arabia were a lot different than nowadays.
read the story about Hashim,for instance.
Reply

north_malaysian
05-09-2006, 08:21 AM
Yemeni Jews are Arabs converted to Judaism. I think they might translated Torah (or OT) years before Waraqah Naufal.
Reply

north_malaysian
05-09-2006, 08:35 AM
According to Ethnologue website, NT was translated into:

1) Algerian Arabic (1872)
2) Tunisian Arabic (1903)
3) Egyptian Arabic (1932)
4) Moroccan Arabic (1932)
5) Palestinian-Jordanian Arabic (1940)
6) Chadian Arabic (1967)
7) Sudanese Arabic (1978)
8) Standard Arabic (1984)
Reply

HeiGou
05-09-2006, 09:18 AM
Originally Posted by north_malaysian
According to Ethnologue website, NT was translated into:

1) Algerian Arabic (1872)
2) Tunisian Arabic (1903)
3) Egyptian Arabic (1932)
4) Moroccan Arabic (1932)
5) Palestinian-Jordanian Arabic (1940)
6) Chadian Arabic (1967)
7) Sudanese Arabic (1978)
8) Standard Arabic (1984)
That is really interesting. First of all because I had no idea that modern Arabic vernaculars were so different - a Tunisian and Algerian version? Aren't they, well, the same? Second, they are all so late. Are you sure that is right? I would have thought that the Christian missionaries would have put in a lot more effort to convert Muslims a lot earlier. They mostly post-date colonialism!

Do you know when was the first NT translated into Malay?
Reply

north_malaysian
05-09-2006, 09:41 AM
From what I've heard Munshi Abdullah (1796 - 1854), a muslim translated part of bible into Malay.

Abdullah served as as copyist and scribe for Sir Stamford Raffles, the founder of Singapore, tramslated the Gospels into Malay Language for London Missionary Society in Malacca.

He died in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Known s 'Father of Modern Malay Literature'
Reply

north_malaysian
05-09-2006, 09:46 AM
According to Ethnologue

Bible translated into:

* Standard Malay (1733)
* Ambonese Malay (1877)
* Baba Malay (1913)
* Pattani Malay (1981)
* Kupang Malay (1999)
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
05-09-2006, 08:29 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Really? I thought I had come across it as a brand new discovery.
I must have heard these claims at least hundreds of times.
But what relevance does the translation of the Bible have?
That is a different topic altogether.
Except the historians you cited claimed that the Bible was not translated into Arabic until much later. Now I agree if you discount the aHadith, the first texts are much much later. But if you believe the aHadith are historically valid texts then there must have been Arabic Bibles, perhaps only partial, well before Gaon.
Not so - the hadiths indicate that while Waraqa ibn Nawfal had read Hebrew scriptures, he only had a small collection of personal writings in arabic - not considered a translation of the Bible at all. Thus, the historical evidence is not contrary to the hadith in any way.

But there are Hadith that say he did more than sign his name. He crossed bits out for instance

Volume 3, Book 49, Number 863:

Narrated Al-Bara:

When the Prophet intended to perform 'Umra in the month of Dhul-Qada, the people of Mecca did not let him enter Mecca till he settled the matter with them by promising to stay in it for three days only. When the document of treaty was written, the following was mentioned: 'These are the terms on which Muhammad, Allah's Apostle agreed (to make peace).' They said, "We will not agree to this, for if we believed that you are Allah's Apostle we would not prevent you, but you are Muhammad bin 'Abdullah." The Prophet said, "I am Allah's Apostle and also Muhammad bin 'Abdullah." Then he said to 'Ali, "Rub off (the words) 'Allah's Apostle' ", but 'Ali said, "No, by Allah, I will never rub off your name." So, Allah's Apostle took the document and wrote, 'This is what Muhammad bin 'Abdullah has agreed upon: No arms will be brought into Mecca except in their cases, and nobody from the people of Mecca will be allowed to go with him (i.e. the Prophet ) even if he wished to follow him and he (the Prophet ) will not prevent any of his companions from staying in Mecca if the latter wants to stay.' When the Prophet entered Mecca and the time limit passed, the Meccans went to 'Ali and said, "Tell your Friend (i.e. the Prophet ) to go out, as the period (agreed to) has passed." So, the Prophet went out of Mecca. The daughter of Hamza ran after them (i.e. the Prophet and his companions), calling, "O Uncle! O Uncle!" 'Ali received her and led her by the hand and said to Fatima, "Take your uncle's daughter." Zaid and Ja'far quarrel ed about her. 'Ali said, "I have more right to her as she is my uncle's daughter." Ja'far said, "She is my uncle's daughter, and her aunt is my wife." Zaid said, "She is my brother's daughter." The Prophet judged that she should be given to her aunt, and said that the aunt was like the mother. He then said to 'All, "You are from me and I am from you", and said to Ja'far, "You resemble me both in character and appearance", and said to Zaid, "You are our brother (in faith) and our freed slave."
Yes, you've quoted the abridged version of the hadith. The full version states that Ali refused to erase the name so he took the paper from him, asked where it was on the paper and then erased it (Sahih Muslim 1783). Then he continued to dicate. The wording in arabic does not necessitate the actual writing by an individual as it is also used for 'decree', 'dictate', and 'prescribe'. Even in the english language, if a person of status says, "I will write to you" it doesn't necessarily mean they will pick up a pen and write themselves - they may dictate the letter addressed from themselves. So the phrase is So Allah's Apostle took the document [from Ali, and erased the words in question] and dictated..., and this is in light of the other narrations which provide a more definite description of the incident in question.

Like I've said before, this isn't anything new. Non-muslims just pick the isolated narration that appears to support their view without doing the background research, examining the text or similar narrations. The conclusive evidence establishes that the Prophet Muhammad pbuh could not read or write. If I get time later, inshaa'Allah I may post something on the topic from Shaykh Muhammad Mohar Ali's book.
Except that Muhammed must have known Waraqa quite well.
And yet, this would suggest that Muhammad pbuh had recorded enough information from Waraqah to derive arguments and stories from it for the next 23 years! Would Prophet Muhammad pbuh have the confidence to challenge the Christian and Jewish tribes on the basis of faint memories of their teachings from decades ago?

Actually, see my post here for an excellent refutation of the whole notion that Prophet Muhammad pbuh learned from Waraqa ibn Nawfal.

Mecca was a small place after all.
By which standards?
For instance,
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 169:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Prophet met Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail in the bottom of (the valley of) Baldah before any Divine Inspiration came to the Prophet. A meal was presented to the Prophet but he refused to eat from it. (Then it was presented to Zaid) who said, "I do not eat anything which you slaughter in the name of your stone idols. I eat none but those things on which Allah's Name has been mentioned at the time of slaughtering." Zaid bin 'Amr used to criticize the way Quraish used to slaughter their animals, and used to say, "Allah has created the sheep and He has sent the water for it from the sky, and He has grown the grass for it from the earth; yet you slaughter it in other than the Name of Allah. He used to say so, for he rejected that practice and considered it as something abominable.

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail went to Sham, inquiring about a true religion to follow. He met a Jewish religious scholar and asked him about their religion. He said, "I intend to embrace your religion, so tell me some thing about it." The Jew said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you receive your share of Allah's Anger." Zaid said, "'I do not run except from Allah's Anger, and I will never bear a bit of it if I have the power to avoid it. Can you tell me of some other religion?" He said, "I do not know any other religion except the Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He said, "Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian, and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" Then Zaid went out and met a Christian religious scholar and told him the same as before. The Christian said, "You will not embrace our religion unless you get a share of Allah's Curse." Zaid replied, "I do not run except from Allah's Curse, and I will never bear any of Allah's Curse and His Anger if I have the power to avoid them. Will you tell me of some other religion?" He replied, "I do not know any other religion except Hanif." Zaid enquired, "What is Hanif?" He replied, Hanif is the religion of (the prophet) Abraham who was neither a Jew nor a Christian and he used to worship None but Allah (Alone)" When Zaid heard their Statement about (the religion of) Abraham, he left that place, and when he came out, he raised both his hands and said, "O Allah! I make You my Witness that I am on the religion of Abraham."

Narrated Asma bint Abi Bakr: I saw Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail standing with his back against the Ka'ba and saying, "O people of Quraish! By Allah, none amongst you is on the religion of Abraham except me." He used to preserve the lives of little girls: If somebody wanted to kill his daughter he would say to him, "Do not kill her for I will feed her on your behalf." So he would take her, and when she grew up nicely, he would say to her father, "Now if you want her, I will give her to you, and if you wish, I will feed her on your behalf."

So clearly Muhammed met people who had heard about Christian and Jewish ideas.
And yet, from the narrations
-Zayd ibn Amr did not spend time studying Jewish or Christian sources but rather after his inital meeting with the religious leaders he abandoned all that and chose the religioin of Prophet Abraham
-Zayd ibn Amr was persecuted by Al-Khattab for his religious views so he went to the heights of Makkah; Al-Khattab hired a young group of Qurayshi thugs to ensure that Zayd did not reenter the city
-Zayd ibn Amr died 3 years prior to the Prophethood of Muhammad pbuh, and he spent much of his time travelling
-If Prrophet Muhammad pbuh had learned anything from Zayd, he would be challenging the religion of Christianity and Judaism on the basis of third-party hearsay
-And still, there are no recorded incidents of the two consulting eachother on religion, anyway!

Regards
Reply

Danish
05-10-2006, 11:14 AM
:sl:
I often wonder when the idea arose that Muhammed was illiterate. He is described as "Ummi" but I would have thought that meant he was sent to the Nation of the Arabs. After all there are hadith which seem to show, clearly, that he could read and write. Which is odd because you would think that Bukhari would have thrown them out immediately. However I have enough black marks against my name and so I do not care to discuss it.
No, prophet Muhammed indeed was illiterate as described in many places of the quran such as 7:158. Also it is stated in quran he couldnt read nor write in 29:48:

And thou wast not (able) to recite a Book before this (Book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand: In that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted.

And which hadith were u referring to? Do u mean the hadith when PRophet Muhammed was on his deathbed and said bring me paper so i can write something?

Yes but clearly Muhammed lived in an environment where Biblical stories were around. Presumably he heard them being told, presumably Waraqa would have talked about his Faith - just try and shut Christians up. Not that there is anything much else to say about that.
i agree that there could be minor knowldge of christianity & judaism in the region of Mekkah, for example there lived certain christians in Mekkah, isolated though. But the majority were pagans and idol-worshippers. Therefore the stories of christians and jews, if any, must have not been very popular -- history testifies to this.

Quran goes in very much detail about the life of the prophets, such as yusuf/jesus/moses etc. it mentions 25 prophets by name out of which 23 r mentioned in bible, unless i am mistaken. Therefore we cant just say he made the quran up from those random stories, which would be contraty to both logic and history.

Well come on now. Waraqa was his wife's cousin who was in her turn his cousin as well. Mecca was a small place. Presumably everyone knew everyone else. Just because only two meetings are mentioned, doesn't mean that only two meetings took place.
I doubt it, Mekkah by no means is as small as u r stating. Back in the days, it would take very long to travel from one place to another. they had to walk or use camels. And as far as i know there is no mention of Waraqah knowing prophet muhammed very well. Sure there might have been occasional and brief meetings, consisting mostly of greetings. But logically speaking it would be foolish to say those random meetings were the source of Quran.

And if they were very well aquainted, or there was any connection between prophet and waraqah then the Pagans would have realised it immediately and exposed the prophet -- they were very watchful over him. Indeed, why would waraqah have promised to help the prophet if he was the one who was teaching him the Quran, him being a pious and noble and wise man?
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 50
    Last Post: 02-21-2009, 05:15 PM
  2. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-07-2008, 04:30 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-26-2008, 09:10 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-14-2007, 04:02 PM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-18-2006, 01:52 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!