2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Ibn Warraq and Allah is a grandfather? and there really was no Battle of Badr!

Reader comment on item: Study the Koran?

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Sep 9, 2014 at 13:58

Dr. Pipes

In this post I will introduce Christoph Luexenberg and in more than 200 pages he takes the Islamic tradition, the Muslim Ulama and the Western scholars of the Qur'an to task and he proves again and again that we really do not know what the Qur'an is really saying and that we cannot discount the significance of the Syriac layer of the Qur'an

John Wansbrough indeed alerted the students of the Arabic language and the Qur'an and the history of early Islam that the so called classical Arabic is a derivative of the spoken Arabic before the rise of Islam and to quote Herbert Berg:

it is wrong to see classical Arabic as standing at the beginning instead of at the end of long and varied linguistic evolution

This really means that Quranic Arabic is not the same as classical Arabic a language that no one ever spoke but it was supposed to be the language of the Qur'an. This also very well explains why would mountain in the Qur'an be called Tura or طور and not Arabic جبل or Jabal and the fact that a mountain in classical Arabic is only جبل and not the Quranic Tur or طور

This also explains that the celebrated Quranic grammatical mistake Inna Hadhan Lasahiran ان هذان لساحران would not be a grammatical error in Quranic Arabic but would for sure be a grammatical mistake in the third century of Islam

This time I will pick three mistakes in the Qur'an and they are

1. Check Q72:3 where it says

وانه تعلى جد ربنا مااتخذ صحبة ولاولد

This verse means: And our Lord may he be exalted Gadd (I left this word untranslated) he did not take a female companion nor a child

Well this is a paraphrasing of Q112 as you shall see later

I left the word Gadd or جد untranslated because the Ulama had no clue what this word means and they tell us that this word could mean

1. Grandfather yes Grandfather (Allah the grandfather?)

2. Seriousness

3. Eagerness

4. Happiness

Luxenberg believes that the word جد or Gadd was misread and it should be Arabic حد or Hadd by dropping the dot in the letter jeem

Now let us turn to the Shima in the Peshitta in Mark 12:29 in Syriac ܐܳܡܰܪ ܠܶܗ ܝܶܫܽܘܥ ܩܰܕ݂ܡܳܝ ܡܶܢ ܟ݁ܽܠܗܽܘܢ ܦ݁ܽܘܩܕ݁ܳܢܶܐ ܫܡܰܥ ܐܺܝܣܪܳܝܶܠ ܡܳܪܝܳܐ ܐܰܠܳܗܰܢ ܡܳܪܝܳܐ ܚܰܕ݂ ܗ݈ܽܘ and I will concentrate on the last three words

ܡܳܪܝܳܐ ܚܰܕ݂ ܗ݈ܽܘ

Or Mar Yah Khad Hu or our Lord himself is one and notice the word Khad in Arabic it is Hadd! Or one

And here is the word in Syriac again

ܚܕ or Khad (Arabic Hadd)

Now let us go back to the above verse and read it replacing this strange word Gadd with the Syriac Hadd and this is how Luxenberg reads it

And the most high is ONE our lord neither took a female companion not adopted a child

And it now fits very well with Q112

He makes lots of sense

2. This one is far more fun Fred Donner presents a very convincing case that there was really no Battle of Badr and the Quranic allusions about it are really about the exodus of Moses and the Jews from Egypt and the parting of the sea and for the readers here is Fred Donner's article and that Q8:41 is no more than Q26:61 and that the word al-Jami3an is really parting of the sea

http://www.academia.edu/1013511/Quranic_Furqan

In the rest of the article he proves that the Arabic word al-Furqan or الفرقان is really from Syriac Purqana or salvation ܦܘܪܩܢܐ and the word Puqdana (to render the commandments of God) is Syriac ܦܘܩܕܢܐ or Puqdana and both words indeed cover the Quranic meaning of the word al-Furqan

Luxenberg's contribution to the subject is very intersting and I will leave it to a future post

3. More fixing of Quranic exegesis and as most readers should know the Ulama the likes of al-Tabari were not linguists and their knowledge of other languages other that Arabic was mediocre at best and much of it was guessing and here is an example and it is Q12:23 where we have the strange word Hayta as in هيت لك or Hayta to you.

The Ualma had no clue what this word really means but they realized that it is a foreign word and because the speaker was an Egyptian woman then they tell us that this word is a loan word from اللغة القبطية or the Coptic (sic) language which is not true as you will not find such word in Crum Coptic dictionary so where does it come from?

Luxenberg suggests that it must be the Aramaic Hayn or הין and it really means: Hey

So what does all of this mean? it just means that the Qur'an's Arabic is not classical Arabic and it really means that much of the Quranic exegesis was no more than guessing

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 Ibn Warraq and Allah is a grandfather? and there really was no Battle of Badr! by dhimmi no more

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

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.)