5 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Repeating old Fabrications

Reader comment on item: Friendless in the Middle East
in response to reader comment: Deconstructing surat al-ikhlas and Allah meets Aristotle and it is a disaster

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Mar 18, 2012 at 00:58

"Our dear Amin your Allah says is surat al-ikhlas that he is "one of" so who are the other gods besides Allah any guesses? and what a disaster the word ahad is a loan word from either Syriac or Hebrew in a book that claims to be Qurana 3Arabiyya (sic)"

You claimed previously that the word AHAD is Syriac. Yet when I looked at Syriac - it turned out your claim was wrong. Syriac had some other word for one. Now you have added Hebrew to soften the claim up.

This is a pretty common noun. Its root is same as Arabic one - Wahid. The word also means "someone".

Even proving this to be wrong - after giving it time - you have chosen to repeat this ....

-----

"1. He says that the word ahad should be wahid right our dear Amin? What a disaster he is correcting the author's poor Arabic"

Again this is a mere repeat. Tabari does NOT say the word should have been Wahid. Else where does he say that. I have asked this before. You are unable to answer so you repeat it.

Conveniently you did not bother to paste what Tabari is saying.

-----

"2. Then we have the funny story that is supposed to be sabab al-nuzul or the reason for revelation for this little gem and here we go

الْقَوْل فِي تَأْوِيل قَوْله تَعَالَى : { قُلْ هُوَ اللَّه أَحَد } ذُكِرَ أَنَّ الْمُشْرِكِينَ سَأَلُوا رَسُول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ نَسَب رَبّ الْعِزَّة , فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّه هَذَا السُّورَة جَوَابًا لَهُمْ . وَقَالَ بَعْضهمْ : بَلْ نَزَلَتْ مِنْ أَجْل أَنَّ الْيَهُود سَأَلُوهُ , فَقَالُوا لَهُ : هَذَا اللَّه خَلْق الْخَلْق , فَمَنْ خَلَقَ اللَّه ؟

So al-Tabari is saying that it was either the polythiests or may be the Jews that asked your so called prophet so which group was it the jews or the polytheists oh let me guess al-Tabair has no clue"

Huh? This tops the "weird" scale. What has Tabari and which group got to do with anything here? All he does is relates the question.

-----

"{ قُلْ هُوَ اللَّه أَحَد

What a disaster Allah is one of! and not one!"

One of? In Arabic if it was One of then it would require the preposition MIN من

Or it requires 2 nouns to form the Idafa. Kitabu Amin - Amin's book.

Using the above word. هو احد منك He is one of you. Without it - you cannot have "One of".

I have been through this - explaining Ism Tafdheel - Superlative and Comparative.

Yet you choose to repeat this lie again. Without adding anything new. Just because sometime has passed - it doesn't make this any more correct.

I have explained this thoroughly previously. Rather than answering to that you have repeated this lie. Mistake was yours - not understanding Arabic.

----

"You see our dear Amin it is your sources that tell us about these disasters so if you do not like it then destroy them and good riddance"

No they don't - else which ones are telling what. This Ahad we have been through previously. I proved it wasn't Syriac. No response from.

Now you have added some other rubbish - completely unrelated and slipped in the same lie, fabrication, fiction.

You had nothing more to say. You cannot account for your lies. Especially the one you attribute to Tabari. Nowhere does he claim that Ahad should have been Wahid. Here you did not even bother to paste the Arabic.

---

As for the "One of" ... originally this was your ignorance - you claimed the same thing over Allahu Akabr. But I pointed out that this mistake is from your lack of Arabic.

Now it is your lie. Else I have explained REPEATEDLY what Ism Tafdheel is - in Arabic. Other than repeating... you have no response.

Another way this is simply idiotic is that - no other Academic has picked this up really? And neither have the Arabs... whose language it is?

But this is the case often with your claims... that the Arabs do not know their language. How convenient. So which grammar book are you using?

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Repeating old Fabrications by Amin Riaz

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)