Deobandi Donkey Tariq Masood Claiming Mistake in the Qur'an

as an aside, isn't it the case that Arabic grammar and language rules are derived from the Quran itself - so, by definition, the Quran dictates Arabic grammar and linguistics and not vice versa, there can't be a "mistake" in Quranic grammar?

I know of worse real life examples, but that's like alleging Abu Hanifa wasn't a proper Hanafi!

 

as for other insults, will refute one by one in sha'Allah.

 

====

how stupid!

he should do tawbah and seek forgiveness of Allah, but the moron is saying: "i will apologise"

apologise to who?

he should say: i do tawbah and repeat my shahadah and nikah from the sarih kufr that i uttered which i regret.

---
his justification that: "outwardly it is against grammar" is patently wrong. it is a well known exception among grammarians, which you cannot term it as a mistake.

it is clear that the moron thinks that grammar books were written 2000 years ago and the qur'an has to be measured against those treatises. the imbecile does not know that rules of grammar were laid down based on the usage of the qur'an!

this is like a wannabe astronomer claiming that the planets are incorrectly placed, because they do orbit in perfect concentric circles.

 

it is common practice among arabs to change the nun to alif - according to ibn hisham.

according to farra' لن لم negators were actually لا and the alif (after laam) was changed to nun and mim. ibn hisham disagrees and says, the practice is to change nun to alif not vice-versa, as in the verses: لنسفعا and ليكونا

see mughni al-labib 1/313.


====

the other example is in surah yusuf, verse 32.



====

qurtubi says:

in the mus'haf it is written: "wa liyakuna(n)" with alif, though it is recited with single nun (mukhaffafah) for emphasis (ta'kid).
the nun of ta'kid [emphasis] is both single and doubled;

stopping at the word: "la yusjananna", one stops at nun because it is doubled (lit. heavy)
and stopping on "la-yakuna(n)", one stops with alif because it is single (mukhaffafah) and it resembles the ending nun as you would say: "ra'aytu rajulan wa zaydan wa amran"

and it is similar to the verse: "la nasfa'an bi'n nasiyah" and other such instances where upon stopping [nun] becomes alif as a'ashaa has said:

wa laa ta'abudi'sh shayTana wAllaha fa'budaa

i.e. he intended: fa'abudan - but when he stopped at the word, the stopping [changed it to] alif.​

 

as for the devbandi's disrespectful statements about RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

if his recording cited below is bona fide, it is explicit disrespect and therefore kufr. apart from his explicit accusation on the qur'an that there is a grammar mistake. he insists that there is a grammar mistake in it, when he says: "what about those verses in which there is no mistake".

anybody in the gathering, if they agreed with him are also kafir. they should renew their iman and nikah.

Allah knows best.

 

the first thing is that this devbandi donkey has no clue of about the rasm - the inscription/writing - of the qur'an.


----
firstly, RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam did not command everything to be written down - and the entire mus'haf as we see in our time was not compiled in the form of a book in the time of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam; of course, many portions were written down, but there was no standardised method (see #3 for some more detail).

2. it is clear from the sahih hadith that sayyiduna abu bakr raDi'Allahu anhu resisted compilation in a book, because he did not wish to do something the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam did not explicitly command them to do. however, upon insistence of sayyiduna umar raDi'Allahu anhu and the tragic circumstances that he witnessed, he consented to have it compiled in ONE book.

3. there was no specific writing convention: words like قيمة * إنسن / قيامة إنسان ; are they written with doubled-alif on ya (qiyaamah) & seen (insaan) with an explicit alif added, or understood as in the rest of the vowels?

4. the qur'an was revealed in multiple qira'ah - and those sahabah who received the specific qira'ah wrote it down according to that qira'ah.

5. prominent saHabah had their own compilations according to their own notes. but there was no difference in the recited qur'an.

6. FACT: until the time of sayyiduna uthman raDi'Allahu anhu, which is 23 AH - the qur'an was mostly oral tradition, with personal copies.

7. sayyiduna uthman raDi'Allahu anhu, with the approval of prominent sahabah, including mawla ali karramAllahu wajhah standardised the script to accommodate multiple readings.

thus the script: ملك يوم الدين - can be recited as maaliki (مالك) or (ملك) maliki; accomodates both recitations.

the dunderhead, the blasted idiot does not know that these idiosyncrasies of the script, are due to the decisions made by sahabah two decades after the passing of the Messenger of Allah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

this devbandi's ignorance is at the level of those who splash cow-dung on their bodies and drink cow-urine and therefore assumes that the script was finalised in the Prophet's time! sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

---
now, about the example the jahil cited as a "mistake".

---
abu Hayyan al-andalusi is a famous mufassir and a towering grammarian; among his students in grammar are the likes of ibn hisham al-ansari, imam taqiyuddin al-subki and sirajuddin bulqini. in his tafsir of this aayah he notes:




===

majority recited it with the nun khafifah [i.e. without shaddah]* but it was written with an alif, anticipating how it would read when stopped; because if one stops at this word, it would be transformed with an alif, so much that it became the ending letter (rawiy). this is similar to the examples below.​

[aH: *it is also recited with shaddah as: la-nas'fa'anna]

...
[aH: the second example is apt for the jaahil devbandi]

bi-Hasbihi'l jahilu maa lam ya'lam / was transformed as: "maa lam ya'lamaa"

it is sufficient [wretchedness/great loss] for the ignoramus what he doesn't know.
[i.e., the lack of knowledge of the ignoramus is in itself an enormous misfortune]​

=====
the general rule of stopping in arabic is that it should be graceful and not blunt; letters are added or elided to make this happen.

ibn ashur in the tafsir of the same ayah says:

in the mus'Haf it is written with alif, in consideration of recitation in the case of stopping [waqf] - because the last letters of words are written in a manner that facilitates recitation in cases of stopping.
​

=====
only the devbandi donkey of the 15th century has the temerity to say that it is a grammar mistake. all those native arabs and towering grammarians didn't know - but this jahil knows better than all of them!

---