Can you prove that the Quran has been altered yaa ayyuhaal kafiroon?

[Basirah]

All
Your knowledge about Quran is highly poor.The Holy Quran was given shape of a book by Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique first Kaliph.Then it was put on one dialect by Hazrat Uthmaan.
If the Holy Quran could be memorized word by word from Hazrat Uthman to present day why cannot it be memorized from Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Hazrat Abu Bakr or Hazrat Uthman.

The proof is always with Claimant.If there had been some addition or reduction in the Holy Quran ,then other Companions and also those who asassinated Hazrat Usmaan in enmity would have blamed him for this crime.But none of them did it.
If you have proof bring forward.
Best of luck

Dearest asad, I am afraid it is not as simple as you may believe it to be. Suyuti, the great muslim commentator was able to find five passages whose attribution to Allah is disputable. Ali Dashti also pointed to several passages which the speaker cannot have been Allah. (See: "Twenty-three years: A study of the prophetic career of Mohammad)

The second part of your argument is incorrect because you are the one claiming the Quran is divine, so you are the one who must offer up proof. Not the other way around. Therefore, you are the one who must offer up proof that the Quran was memmorized in the same way it is today, and YOU have to prove that there is a 0% chance any type of outside influence could have entered the Quran.

 

[جوري]

Peace:/

Best of luck

This fellow basirah has been answered and extensively by bros. Ansar. This is a mere ploy for a dull rework of an ailing argument. I don't see caustic remarks as a presentable way to a refutation or to defend an argument-- rather just making the course unbearably pointless as well as indolent . I'd hope you see the transparency of this charade and not loan it further credence..

 

[asadxyz]

Dearest asad, I am afraid it is not as simple as you may believe it to be. Suyuti, the great muslim commentator was able to find five passages whose attribution to Allah is disputable. Ali Dashti also pointed to several passages which the speaker cannot have been Allah. (See: "Twenty-three years: A study of the prophetic career of Mohammad)

The second part of your argument is incorrect because you are the one claiming the Quran is divine, so you are the one who must offer up proof. Not the other way around. Therefore, you are the one who must offer up proof that the Quran was memmorized in the same way it is today, and YOU have to prove that there is a 0% chance any type of outside influence could have entered the Quran.

Here is the point where all the non Muslims and some of Muslims have misconception.
All narrations are not equally acceptable and that why Muhaditthin have formulated a criteria for correctness of those narrations.
Above all narrations ,Quran is proved by Khabar-e-Mutawaatar and preserved by Memorization of millions of the Huffaaz.
This is what I have told earlier.If there was some change in the Quran by Hazrat Usmaan then his enemies would have blamed him right away and this could be a very genuine blame.Why didn't it happened??
Was there no muslim existing at that time? A question of common sense{Unfortunately common sense is very uncommon}.
There are /were many muslims who could easily sacrifice their lives for the honor and dignity of the Holy Quran.
Don't you think it is miraculous even if all books are destroyed in the world right now then the Holy Quran is the only book which will survive??.Think over it.

For the second part of my post please look at the topic of the thread.
Mabrook

 

[Basirah]

Dear Ansar Al'-Adl, I'm sorry your post was lost. I hope my presence did not cause you to spend a huge amount more time.

By such standards children would be considered 'forced' to learn in virtually every school in the world, 'forced' to memorize vocabulary, laws of arithmetic, material relating to science, art, etc. Children are no more 'forced' to memorize the Qur'an than are those forced to memorize historical facts or those forced to learn a second language in bilingual countries. Needless to say, such an appeal to ridicule does not improve your case.

Under my experience of Quran memmorization, it cannot be compared to other types of learning. Quran memmorization had no aspect of critical thinking to it. You merely memmorized the verses. If we were aloud to think critically of each passage, it might have been benefitial.

It is a common fallacy amongst non-muslims to make the mistake of confusing the authentic Qira'ât with variants, when the reality is they are all authentic recitations of the same verse revealed to the Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself, and transmitted from him to us through mutawâtir chains of transmission. They are not 'variants' as they do not arise from textual uncertainty. This is explained by Azami on page 154 and he examines and refutes in great detail the conjecture of Godziher, Jeffery and others on the issue.

It is your tradition I believe which says:



Ibn Sirin writes, "the reading on which the Qur’an was recited out to the prophet in the year of his death is the same according to which people are reading the Qur’an today." (al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran)



So, does this not contradict the fact that the verse I posted: 2:125 in the Hafs version وَاتَّخِ ُ ذوْا “WatakhIzu” (You shall take), but in the Warsh version, it is وَاتَّخَ ُ ذوْا “WatakhAzu” (They have taken/made). One is in the future ("shall") and the other is in the past ("have"). The above shows that although they seem the same, they are refering to a future action and a past action. Two different things. There are both valid Ahrûf?

A strawman is a sham argument set up to be defeated. Please show me by what form of reasoning or logic my analogy can be considered a straw man fallacy!

You compare the Sunni - Shia dispute with the analogy of one being convential medicine, while the other being "witch doctor", making the Shia outlook (under my interpretation of your post, correct me if i'm wrong), to be some type of "witchcraft" faith that is not comparable to convential medicine. Such a comparison is a straw man fallacy because your setting up a sham representation of Shia Islam using an analogy that is is what a "witch-doctor" is, compared to "convential medicine". That is a straw man fallacy my friend!

 

[asadxyz]

Peace;

Dear Ansar Al'-Adl, I'm sorry your post was lost. I hope my presence did not cause you to spend a huge amount more time.


So, does this not contradict the fact that the verse I posted: 2:125 in the Hafs version وَاتَّخِ ُ ذوْا “WatakhIzu” (You shall take), but in the Warsh version, it is وَاتَّخَ ُ ذوْا “WatakhAzu” (They have taken/made). One is in the future ("shall") and the other is in the past ("have"). The above shows that although they seem the same, they are refering to a future action and a past action. Two different things. There are both valid Ahrûf?
!

Peace.
I am really shocked to see that you are so poor at Arabic.More and above with this much arabic knowledge you are criticizing the Holy Quran.
How can you translate what I have highlighted ??
Secondly what is your objection ?
Mabrook

 

[Basirah]

Peace;


Peace.
I am really shocked to see that you are so poor at Arabic.More and above with this much arabic knowledge you are criticizing the Holy Quran.
How can you translate what I have highlighted ??
Secondly what is your objection ?
Mabrook

You're being very vague in your post. Why not suggest another traslation, or openly suggest what is wrong with the translation?

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

I'm asking only once more that people desist with the off-topic posts.

Greetings

Under my experience of Quran memmorization, it cannot be compared to other types of learning. Quran memmorization had no aspect of critical thinking to it. You merely memmorized the verses. If we were aloud to think critically of each passage, it might have been benefitial.

Memorization of Qur'an is comparable to memorization of any other material in any other subject. If you are asking about critical thinking with respect to the Qur'an, than that occurs in tafseer classes where students reflect on the meanings of the passages of the Qur'an. There are over 750 verses in the Qur'an which encourage thinking, pondering, contemplation and reflection.

It is your tradition I believe which says:

Ibn Sirin writes, "the reading on which the Qur’an was recited out to the prophet in the year of his death is the same according to which people are reading the Qur’an today." (al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran)

The example you quoted shows two valid recitations (Qira'ât) authentically transmitted from the Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

You compare the Sunni - Shia dispute with the analogy of one being convential medicine, while the other being "witch doctor", making the Shia outlook (under my interpretation of your post, correct me if i'm wrong), to be some type of "witchcraft" faith that is not comparable to convential medicine. Such a comparison is a straw man fallacy because your setting up a sham representation of Shia Islam using an analogy that is is what a "witch-doctor" is, compared to "convential medicine". That is a straw man fallacy my friend!

I'm afraid not, because that is not the argument. The argument is that to ask for a simple answer as to which is 'right or wrong' in as detailed an issue as any sectarian divisions (not necessarily shia-sunni split) is like asking for a simple answer to conventional vs. witch-doctor medicine. Now it would be a straw man if I was criticizing a point or argument that my opponent never made. However, I never criticized an argument unless it was advanced by my opponent.

Hope that clarifies,

Regards

 

[asadxyz]

You're being very vague in your post. Why not suggest another traslation, or openly suggest what is wrong with the translation?

Peace;
This word واتّخذوا
is under discussion.Let me know its grammatical (صرفي’ نحوي ) analysis from you so that I should know where do you stand in Arabic so I can talk accordingly.
Mabrook

 

[doorster]

And He hath made subject to you the sun and the moon, both diligently pursuing their courses; and the night and the day hath he (also) made subject to you. 14:33

...........................

where did you graduate in Arabic? from University of Liars?

[FONT=&quot]and He has made the sun and the moon, both constantly pursuing their courses, to be of service to you; and He has made the night and the day, to be of service to you.[/FONT]

 

[Trumble]

And He hath made subject to you the sun and the moon, both diligently pursuing their courses; and the night and the day hath he (also) made subject to you.

That's the Yusuf Ali translation.

and He has made the sun and the moon, both constantly pursuing their courses, to be of service to you; and He has made the night and the day, to be of service to you

That's the 'Noble Qur'an' (Hilali-Khan) translation.

 

[Basirah]

Peace;
This word واتّخذوا
is under discussion.Let me know its grammatical (صرفي’ نحوي ) analysis from you so that I should know where do you stand in Arabic so I can talk accordingly.
Mabrook

I'm afraid beyond memmorization during childhood, I have not had a huge amount of study in arabic, so therefore, I understand words but for me to give you the morphological analysis of the grammar is beyond me. However, please tell me how I mistranslated it wrong!

أراك في مابعد
and Regards

 

[doorster]

That's the 'Noble Qur'an' (Hilali-Khan) translation

Is it another name for Mohsin Khan or is he someone else? ( or may be it is 2 people's surnames?? Hilali-Khan)

 

[doorster]

never mind God bless Google as it knows more than I do.
it is 2 people

Hilali Khan Quran translation

[SIZE=-1]Interpretation of the Meaning of The Noble Quran Translated into the English Language By Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali Ph.D. & Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan ...
www.quranm.multicom.ba/translations/Hilali Khan.htm[/SIZE]

 

[Basirah]

Dear Ansar,

Memorization of Qur'an is comparable to memorization of any other material in any other subject. If you are asking about critical thinking with respect to the Qur'an, than that occurs in tafseer classes where students reflect on the meanings of the passages of the Qur'an. There are over 750 verses in the Qur'an which encourage thinking, pondering, contemplation and reflection.

I’m afraid in my experience, it was mindless memorization. There was no critical thinking process; mere “reflections” have nothing to do with critical thinking. Critical thinking consists of the mental process of analyzing and evaluating statements or propositions that have been offered as true.

The example you quoted shows two valid recitations (Qira'ât) authentically transmitted from the Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

All I can do is give a big sigh!

I'm afraid not, because that is not the argument. The argument is that to ask for a simple answer as to which is 'right or wrong' in as detailed an issue as any sectarian divisions (not necessarily shia-sunni split) is like asking for a simple answer to conventional vs. witch-doctor medicine. Now it would be a straw man if I was criticizing a point or argument that my opponent never made. However, I never criticized an argument unless it was advanced by my opponent.

Okay, so let us look at the analogy you’re using. If one is to convert to Islam, which side should they pick? It is very relevant, because if such a truth exists in the Quran, we surely want to be saved! I know of some very knowledgeable Shia scholars who would say Sunni Islam is completely wrong. I know of Sunni scholars who believe the same. No one is asking you who is right or wrong, you’re misunderstanding the question. What the question is about in my understanding of it, is that key things about Islam are disagreed on and that there is a Sunni Shia split, leads to the question that when someone is trying to prove the Quran, which view of the Quran should one take? Which Hadith? All these questions are relevant, because the ‘true religion’, gets a bit complicated when looking at the various beliefs held by its layman.