69 million page views

For Mustapha: read Q 20:63 and "ina hadhan la sahiran" Part deux

Reader comment on item: [Pew Poll on] How Muslims Think
in response to reader comment: Reply to: dhimmi no more

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jul 11, 2006 at 06:49

So did you check your Qur'an and the above aya? And what do you think of this poor grammar my dear Mustapha? and this is the rasm: alif nuun (ina) heh dhal nuun (hadhan) lam seen hah reh nuun (sahiran).

Notice that the long alifs in sahiran are missing in this defective rasm and was added by the 'Ulama that worked on the masora. And now you read sahiran (which is poor Arabic) and it becomes saahiraan (2 alifs added above the seen and the reh) and who says that the Qur'an was unedited? And no this has nothing to do with lahja! And it is hadhan or hadhayin? Food for thought as they say.

I'm shocked that you did not know of the above aya. This is the most celebrated grammatical problem in the Qur'an.

It seems that we proud kuffar know more about the Qur'an than you seem to know.

For the readers: anyone interested for an excellent scholarly review of this grammatical problem please see Wansbrough's Quranic Studies pages 222-223.

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 For Mustapha: read Q 20:63 and "ina hadhan la sahiran" Part deux 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: © 1968-2022 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.)