2020-04-04T09:35:00-13:02
In our previous conversation…we reached descriptions of the book and its nature, but it was not sufficient (an old book on a tablet and containing two types of verses).
I think that we should know details about the essence of the book’s refutation, because perhaps it will bring us closer to an image and understanding of other things related to the book that we need in order to access the book.
In our previous conversation, we talked about the meaning of the word legends in the Holy Qur’an, and that language dictionaries talk about two meanings. The first is things arranged in one row, or hadiths that have no system, and we concluded that the word in the texts of the Qur’an literally means writings.
We believe that the dictionary definition of the word myths as hadiths that have no system is a definition that came after the Qur’an… due to a misunderstanding of the texts of the Qur’an, or a deliberate distortion… But if we assume that the definition of myth that was mentioned in the dictionaries is not indicative. A hadith that came about due to a misunderstanding of the Qur’anic text. This makes us reread the definition carefully.
The definition of the word myths… talks about hadiths that have no system, so they need interpretation to become clear. As for the other definition, it says that they are hadiths that resemble falsehood, so they are not false at all, but they resemble falsehood because they do not have a system, or perhaps because people do not know a system for them. They imagine that it is falsehood while in reality it is truth. In a modern sense, it is similar to falsehood because it has no system, and it needs a system in order to emerge from the suspicion of falsehood in order to see the truth.
This result is consistent with what Shahrour spoke about in his book about the Qur’an and about the interpretation of the noble verse {Or add to it and recite the Qur’an in a chanted manner. Indeed, We will cast upon you a heavy word}.
He believes that the word tarteel does not mean the prevailing meaning, which is elegance in reciting the Qur’an, based on the linguistic origin of the article (rtl), the arrangement of something, its arrangement and organization, because it is not consistent with the meaning of elegance and improvement in reciting the Qur’an mentioned in the verse {and reciting the Qur’an. Recitation} with the verse that follows it {Indeed, we will cast upon you a heavy saying}. There is no relationship at all between recitation and a heavy saying. Describing a saying as heavy means that there is difficulty in understanding its meanings. Accordingly, Shahrour believes that reciting the Qur’an means arranging and organizing the single topics mentioned in it. Different verses from the Qur’an in one format for easy understanding.
The previous result that Shahrour spoke about may be consistent with the fact that the Messenger Muhammad was responsible for transmitting the Qur’an and never interpreted it. There is no interpretation of the Qur’an by the Prophet, and there are even many stories in the Islamic heritage that talk about the Companions asking the Prophet about the meanings of some words in the Qur’an and also about The interpretation and intended meaning of some Qur’anic verses, and this solves a dilemma that was confusing. How is it possible that a people do not understand the meanings of a book even though it was revealed in their tongues?
But is it possible that texts were revealed in the language of a people who do not understand their meanings?!
If we thought to start from the approaches and theories of the West that many adopt regarding language, that language is an evolving entity that changes with time and from the background of Roman times, and we asked a question:
Does he mean by the preserved tablet, the preserved stone tablet on which the doctrine was written in ancient times, and from which its lines are copied onto the skins from one period of time to another, with a modern pronunciation that is compatible with the language that people have reached?!
This process… may lead to results that may agree with the definition of myth found in dictionaries, in that they are hadiths without order or resembling falsehood, and agree with Shahrour’s words (about the presence of roughness in meaning), and agree with the theory that language evolves. With time, people lose the original meanings of the oldest languages and their vocabulary. This is a reality that is present to us in the West’s translations of ancient languages found in the region’s inscriptions. The outputs of these translations are languages that no one speaks anymore, and in which there are conversations that are without order and appear invalid.
{It is He who has revealed to you the Book; some verses of it are decisive, they are the mother of the Book, and others are ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts there is deviation, they follow what is ambiguous in it, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none knows its interpretation except Allah. And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say, “We believe in it. It is all from our Allah.” And none remember except those of understanding.}
So, is the Qur’anic line… when he talks about the decisive verses and he calls them “Umm al-Kitab”, they are the verses that are fixed in the preserved tablet that we mentioned previously, and they are the fixed names that do not change. As for the verses that are described as allegorical, they are the names that change. Is its pronunciation consistent with the development of people’s language?
This previous Qur’anic text will lead us to a logical question about the meaning of interpretation:
If legends are hadiths that resemble falsehood because they are without a system and have a flawed meaning, can people well-grounded in knowledge interpret them or find a system to remove those hadiths found in the book from the suspicion of falsehood in order to see the truth?
The previous verse, as a Muslim understands it…….that it pertains to the issue of interpretation with Allah, but I find that the context of the verse may be connected to what comes after it…..so only Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge know the interpretation…because The specification of the word “established in knowledge” in the context of the verse came to confirm that point, the role of knowledge in the issue of interpretation.
Another verse confirms this
{But those among them who are well-grounded in knowledge, and the believers, believe in what was revealed to you and what was sent down before you, and those who perform prayer, and those who pay zakat, and believers in Allah and the Last Day – to them We will give a great reward.}
It talks about two types of people: those who are firmly rooted in knowledge and the believers. Both of them believe in what was revealed to the Messenger and what was revealed before… and it would have been sufficient to mention only the believers… but mentioning those who are firmly rooted in knowledge confirms that they realize the truth of the Book and their faith came. From their knowledge and awareness of the truth of the Book and that it is the word of Allah, but in a different language, and as for the believers, they believe that it is the word of Allah without, but without knowledge.
Our conclusion is confirmed by another verse in the Qur’an
{Do they wait for anything but its interpretation? On the Day when its interpretation comes, those who had forgotten it before will say: ‘The messengers of our Allah have come with the truth. Do we have any intercessors so that they can intercede for us? Or will we be sent back and do other than what we used to do? They have lost their souls, and what they were inventing has gone away from them.’
It speaks explicitly that the day of its interpretation will come, and there is another verse that confirms our conclusion that its interpretation will come, and the context of the verse confirms that those who are firmly rooted in knowledge are aware of its interpretation.
{And this Qur’an was not to be fabricated other than Allah, but to confirm what is before it and detail the Book in which there is no doubt from Allah, the All-Knowing. (37) Or do they say, “He fabricated it?” Say, “Then produce a surah like it, and call upon whomever you can besides Allah, if you are truthful.” (38) Rather, they lied about what they did not comprehend. With His knowledge, and when its interpretation came to them. Thus those before them lied, so see what was the end of the wrongdoers. (39)}
The verse speaks about the Qur’an being a confirmation of that book that is in its hands, and that the Qur’an is not a fabrication, but rather a new and correct linguistic interpretation of the book found in the Preserved Tablet. This Qur’an is not a fabrication, but a confirmation of what is in its hands and a detail of the book. As for the liars, they will say that it is a slander, and the Qur’an challenges everyone on this point that it is the best and correct pronunciation of the preserved tablet in today’s language, without any distortion.
These liars denied the Qur’an because they did not comprehend knowledge, that is, they were not well-established in knowledge. They do not realize this matter about the change of tongue and its relationship to the change in the language of the holy books so that people can understand them in their modern language, for it is all from Allah. The verse in its context says that at that time no one knew its interpretation, as the Prophet only transmitted his texts and did not understand the interpretation, and not everyone understood the interpretation, and when they accused him of his interpretation (that is, he did not accuse his interpretation). That is, the reason for the denial is that they are not firmly grounded in knowledge and have not been accused of interpreting it, and this was the case of the previous nations, with whom it happened, as is happening now with the Qur’an, so they rejected the previous books.
So what is the meaning of interpretation?
● The word appears frequently in the story of Youssef…and it means the interpretation that matches reality or the truth. He says that Youssef teaches the interpretation of visions, and once he describes Youssef as teaching the interpretation of hadiths.
So hadiths are a system like visions.
{And the one who bought him from Misr said to his wife: “Honorable is his resting place. Perhaps he will benefit us or we will adopt him as a son.” And thus We established Youssef in the land, and We will teach him how to interpret hadiths. Allah has control over his affairs, but most people do not know.)
From the story of Youssef, a vision comes to him and he interprets it correctly. Looking at the vision, we find it really like hadiths that have no system, but Youssef realizes the true interpretation. The vision in Youssef’s story needed someone who could find the system that would correctly interpret those hadiths.
Were the legends of the ancients that were mentioned by deniers meant to be hadiths like visions that require interpretation? Is the structure of myths like the structure of dreams?
● The word interpretation appears in Surat Al-Kahf, and it means extracting truth from falsehood, or revealing truth from falsehood, or revealing the truth of something that appears false, with the story of Musa and the righteous man to whom Allah gave knowledge, and in which Musa was ignorant of all the false things that he was doing. The righteous man used it, until the man ran out of patience with Musa’ objection to him, so he separated from him after explaining to him the truth behind every action he did.
{He said: This is a separation between me and you. I will inform you of the interpretation of what you could not be patient with.} [Al-Kahf: 78]
From the story of Musa, we find that they are the works of a system that resemble falsehood, but they have a real explanation and need someone who can create the system that will reveal the truth from falsehood. Are the legends of the ancients that came from the lips of deniers the hadiths that resemble falsehood but need someone to reveal the truth about them?
Now, if we stop for a moment… we will find that the stories of Youssef and Musa provide a definition similar to the definition that came in dictionaries for the word myths.
A hadith that resembles falsehood because it has no system, and it needs a system in order to emerge from the suspicion of falsehood in order to see the truth.
Yes…the meaning that we got from the Qur’an for the word interpretation matches the definition of myth in the dictionaries.
Now…the word “interpretation” around which the Qur’anic text spoke with the phrase “And none knows its interpretation except Allah” – does it mean interpreting the verses of the Book that talk about the past and the future in the correct manner in the same way as Youssef and the righteous man? Did those who disbelieve in the Qur’an when they called the Qur’an legends of the ancients mean It is like the hadiths of the ancients that talk about what happened and what will happen, that is, they talk about the past and the future. But they are hadiths that have no system and resemble falsehood.
Arriving at this conclusion may make us surrender to the definition that came in the dictionaries for the word mythology, but I believe that these definitions relate to other meanings and are attached to the word…. I still insist that the word mythology means writings… The meaning of interpretation may be the interpretation of texts that resemble falsehood and without order… for several reasons:
● Firstly, because the derivatives of the word “astirun” in the Qur’an (mustoor, yistrun) are very clear and it means writing, and in our tongue we always say the word yistaroun, which is always linked to the act of writing.
● Secondly, because we are faced with a truth according to the Western approach, which says that when texts are written in a certain language, after a long period of time, if we wanted to read them in our current language, it will turn into an unorganized speech and conversations resembling falsehood, because at that time our language will have reached a very advanced stage compared to the language of our ancestors, which These texts were written in it, because our language now carries new connotations for words, expressions, and expressions other than the old connotations that were in the language of our ancestors. This creates a distortion of the linguistic system, that is, conversations without a system become similar to falsehood even though they are true.
The following verse greatly increases the probability that the conclusion we have reached is correct
{And it is a revelation of Allah to the worlds (192) The Faithful Spirit has sent it down (193) to your heart so that you may be among the warners (194) in a clear Arabic tongue (195) And indeed, it is in the words of the ancients (196) Did they not have a sign that the scholars of the Children of Israel should have taught it (197) And if We had sent it down over some of the foreigners (198) and he recited it to them as long as they were not believers in it (199)} [Al-Shu’ara’: 192-199]
The verse speaks about the fact that the Book is from Allah, but in a clear Arabic language, that is, in a clear spoken language that people understand, and it is present in the hearts of the ancients. Note here that the Qur’an speaks explicitly that the Qur’an is present in the hearts of the ancients, and notice how the word “the firsts” agrees with the tongue of the deniers ( Legends of the Ancients) with the word “The Ancients” on the tongue of the Qur’an in describing itself (Zubur of the Ancients).
Those who criticize the Qur’an describe the Qur’an as the legends of the ancients, while the Qur’an describes itself as the books of the firsts. This means that the legends of the firsts mean the books of the firsts. That is, the Qur’an is the writings of the firsts. It is written in the books of the firsts, that is, copied from an ancient Psalms, but in a modern tongue, that is, a clear Arabic tongue that many people can understand. Those among the children of Israel who are well-grounded in knowledge realize this matter.
Our reliance on the Western approach… will make us reach a meaning consistent with the myths in dictionaries:
{And it is a revelation of Allah to the worlds (192) The Faithful Spirit has sent it down (193) to your heart so that you may be among the warners (194) in a clear Arabic tongue (195) And indeed, it is in the words of the ancients (196) Did they not have a sign that the scholars of the Children of Israel should have taught it (197) And if We had sent it down over some of the foreigners (198) and he recited it to them as long as they were not believers in it (199)} [Al-Shu’ara’: 192-199]
The Qur’an says, “If we revealed it,” and this indicates that the word speaks of the past, and that the non-Arabs mean a people in the past and not in the present. The word “Arabs” does not mean the peoples of the time of the Qur’an. The Qur’an does not describe other peoples as non-Arabs, because the Qur’an gives an example of that. Time, that if Allah had sent down the Qur’an in a modern Arabic language to the first non-Arabs whose language was not Arabic, they would not have believed in it, because they would not understand it, as their language was different from the language of today.
So we believe…according to the rules and theories of the Western approach, that the essence of the dispute over the Prophet Muhammad was over the operative part of an ancient book from the ancients found in a tablet.
The Qur’an wants it to be in a clear and clear Arabic language for people to understand, while there are those who insist on preserving the ancient pronunciation of the language. I believe that the matter is logical and will be met with violent opposition, atonement, and war. The sacred language in which a book is written that people believe in will, after a long time, become an ancient language. Difficult to understand…..and then there will be a linguistic separation between the modern spoken language and the ancient first language…..and then there will be a distortion of the original meanings intended in the Bible, due to the nature of the language that develops and changes. Accordingly, we can imagine the magnitude of the great conflict that will occur between the holiness of sacred texts written in an ancient, sacred language, that is, a sacred language that came from the gods as it is and should be as it is, and between those who want to reconvert it into the current intelligible language.
This result that we have reached, and by relying on dictionary definitions and on the rules and theories of the Western curriculum, may be confirmed by the text:
{Indeed, those who deny Our verses do not hide from Us. Is the one who is thrown into the Fire better or the one who comes safe on the Day of Resurrection? Do whatever you will. Indeed, He is Seeing of what you do. (40) Indeed, those who disbelieved in the Remembrance when it came to them, and indeed it is a Mighty Book. (41) Falsehood will not come to it from before it, nor from Behind it is a revelation from the Wise, the Praiseworthy (42) Nothing is said to you except what has been said to the messengers before you. Indeed, your Allah is the Possessor of forgiveness and the Possessor of painful punishment (43) And if We had made it a foreign-language Qur’an, they would have said, “If only its verses had been explained in detail, is it a non-Arab or an Arabic?” Say, “It is for those who believe a guidance and a cure.” And for those who do not believe, it is in their ears. (44) Indeed, We gave Musa the book, but they differed over it, and had it not been for a word that had preceded from Your Allah, it would have been decided between them, but they are in grave doubt concerning it. (45)} [Fussilat: 40-45]
Here we are faced with one topic discussing the previous verses…. The verses speak that what those who deny the Messenger say is the same as what was said about the messengers before him when they brought the Holy Books. And they go into more detail when the verses say that if the Qur’an had been revealed in the ancient language, which you believe is the sacred language, which has become unclear and incomprehensible, which the Qur’an describes as foreign, the deniers would have said in an interrogative form, had the verses of the Qur’an not been separated, that is, had it not been written in the ancient foreign language and next to it in the modern Arabic language. To clarify?! . So tell them that the Qur’an is a guidance and a cure, and as for those who do not believe in it, there is a plug in their ears that prevents them from hearing it, and it is upon them like blindness. The condition of those who disbelieve in the verses of Allah is similar to those who call from a far away place.
Note this expression of the fundamental issue that the Qur’an discusses. It describes the liars as having deafness in their ears and the Qur’an is like blindness, but it attaches the description to a sentence without the conjunction “waw” with the sentence (Those are calling from a far place), because it resembles the state of the liars and their relationship to the ancient texts in which they believe as a state. People are being called to them from a far away place, and it is natural that they will find it difficult to understand the call, because it is in a language that is too old for people to understand, while the Qur’an is like a call from a nearby place for those who believe in it. Because it is in a modern language that is close to people’s understanding, meaning that those who believe in it are as if they are being called from a nearby place.
The topic continues its context with the line that says that Musa came before you with the Book, but they disagreed about it and said the same thing they say now about the Qur’an.
We imagine the Prophet Musa coming to his people with a book in the language of his people, while his people were carrying an old book that was revealed a long time ago and the language became old. His situation would be like that of the Prophet Muhammad.
This conclusion is consistent with the line
{And We did not send any messenger except with the tongue of his people, that He might make it clear to them. So Allah sends astray whomsoever He wills, and guides whomsoever He wills. And He is the Mighty, the Wise.} [Ibrahim: 4]
The verse speaks of the fact that every prophet came with a book in the language of his people, to explain to them the verses of Allah in their modern language that they had arrived at, so that they could read it and understand it well, after the previous books had become in an ancient language that was difficult to understand and had distorted meanings.
And the probability of what we have reached increases
{For We only made it easy with your tongue so that you might give good news thereby to the righteous and warn thereby a stubborn people} [Maryam: 97]
{For We have only made it easy with your tongue so that they may remember} [Al-Dukhan: 58]
The verse is clear, as it says that the books came to facilitate the verses of Allah in the modern language after the language of the previous books became old, difficult to understand, and separated from the modern language of the people that they speak.
But this forces us to ask a question: Was this matter done in the past periodically… meaning, did the ancients have a specific system for rewriting the texts of the Bible? Are we facing an ancient book that has been circulated since ancient times and is being copied in its own language? Modern?
{And had it not been for a word that preceded from Your Allah, it would have been decided between them, and they are in doubt about it. (45)}
From the context of the general topic, it makes us understand that the previous sentence came after giving an example in the book of the Prophet Musa, peace be upon him. The verse clearly tells that the word preceded from Allah, meaning that we are faced with a single prior text or a sacred tradition in writing the sacred text, otherwise Allah would have decided among them. Their disagreement and suspicious doubt about the Qur’an.
It increases the probability of the result we have reached
{Say: Have you considered if it is from Allah and you disbelieve in it, and a witness from among the Children of Israel bears witness to the like of it and then believes, and you are arrogant? Indeed, Allah does not guide the people. Unjust (10) And those who disbelieve say to those who believe, “If it had been good, they would not have preceded us to it.” And when they are not guided by it, they will say, “This is an ancient deception.” 11) And before him was the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy. And this is a Book confirming the Arabic language, to warn those who do wrong and to bring good news to the doers of good. (12)} [Al-Ahqaf: 10] -12]
If the Qur’an was from Allah and you disbelieved in it, and at the same time a witness from the Children of Israel who were well-grounded in knowledge testified that it is like the Preserved Tablet and that it is from Allah, then he believed and you disbelieved (from the context of the topic it is understood that there is a sentence, so what is your position), that Allah does not He guides the wrongdoing people. From the context of the topic, we know that two groups were divided, an unbeliever and a believer, then the interpretation of the other verse would be, and those who disbelieved (the first group) said to those who believed (the second group), “If the matter in it had been good, these believers would not have preceded us to it” (the second group), and if These believers (the second group) were not guided by him, and they were all one group. These unbelievers (the first group) will say that this is an old lie.
Here is a note: The word “old ifk” is mentioned. It is supposed to be a big “ifk”. What is the relationship of time to the “fak”?! According to the method we are on now (the approach of the West)… So the verse talks about an ancient tradition that was followed in writing the Holy Bible, and it is done in this way. They now describe that tradition that was followed and known in the past when writing the Holy Bible as an ancient fiqh and not an old followed tradition. Accordingly, the context of the verse after it will be clear. They will say this is a fiqh, whereas before it, the Book of Musa was a guide and a mercy for them and was completed in the same way. The method is to change the previous holy book from its ancient pronunciation to the modern pronunciation in the language of the time of Musa. This is a book authenticating the Book of Musa, but in a modern Arabic language that is understandable to people.
It increases the probability of our interpretation
{And We gave them clear proofs of the matter. They did not differ except after knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves. Indeed, Your Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning what happened. And over it they differ (17) Then We placed you upon a law of the matter, so follow it and do not follow the inclinations of those who do not know (18)} [Al-Jathiya :17-18]
Interpretation of the previous verse: We made you follow a method of matters, so follow the method and do not follow the desires of those who have no knowledge.
This is further confirmed
{And when Musa’s anger remained silent, he took the Tablets. And in their copies was guidance and mercy for those who fear their Allah.} [Al-A’raf: 154]
This verse is consistent with the meaning of the previous verse {Before him was the Book of Musa as a guide and a mercy, and this is a book confirming an Arabic language to warn}, even in describing the Book of Musa as a guide and mercy, while this verse describes it as a guidance and mercy, but it clarifies the truth. Which we have reached More specifically, it says that Musa took the tablets (the Preserved Tablet) and made a copy of the tablets in the modern language of his people, which contained guidance, facilitation, and mercy for the believers.
This verse confirms this
{We do not abrogate any verse or cause it to be forgotten. We produce something better than it or something similar to it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?} [Al-Baqarah: 106]
The verse talks about the process of copying verses from the preserved tablet, and every verse in the preserved tablet is made a copy like it, but in the new language.
{And you will see every nation bowing down. Every nation will be called to its Book. Today you will be recompensed for what you used to do. (28) This is Our Book speaking upon you with the truth. ۚ Indeed, we were abrogating what you used to do (29)} [Al-Jathiya: 28-29]
The topic says that on the Day of Resurrection every nation will be called to its book, and on the Day of Resurrection the Book (the Preserved Tablet) will be presented to every nation, and you will be certain that every nation had a book abrogated from the Book (the Preserved Tablet), but with a different tongue. The word “reproduction” refers to the process of multiple copies.
So, the Qur’an rejects the accusation of changing Allah’s verses, for there is no change for Allah’s words and verses, and confirms that the matter is a process of copying (an exact copy) of the Book (the Preserved Tablet), but in a new language, due to the change in language of peoples over time.
—————————————–
I think that this result may be consistent with our previous belief that the word legends means writings, and because the word line in the Holy Qur’an does not appear in the plural form lines, but rather in the plural form of the plural legends, this will increase our belief, because the plural form of the plural is the form of exaggeration, and the form of exaggeration indicates The antiquity of writing and the abundance and antiquity is evidence that it will indeed be a heavy statement that needs to be arranged. The older the time, the greater the difficulty. It makes us understand more why the word “Legends of the Ancients” always appears in verses of the Qur’an. It is on the lips of lying people who describe the Qur’an as The writings of the ancients were not aware of their interpretation. The Qur’an was a preserved tablet that represented the people’s faith, and it used to transfer a line from an ancient language to the modern language that people have become in, with correct pronunciation but without understanding it because it needs a system to interpret and understand it.
I believe that the Qur’an emphasizes that the Qur’an is a written book, one of the writings of the ancients, and it came to clarify the original text of ancient writings. The Holy Qur’an itself never denies the word “myths” in describing itself, because the Qur’an is an inscribed book, that is, the writings of the ancients or the writings of the ancients, and it came to explain the original text of the ancient scrolls.
However…..this result, which may seem logical, requires physical evidence to confirm it. But what will the evidence look like? Do we need ancient stone tablets with the Holy Qur’an written on them in order to be sure that the word “myths” means the writings of the ancients?!
It is true that we have not yet discovered any stone tablet on which the Qur’an is written, but I believe that our discovery of a stone tablet contains some fragmentary verses (interrupted letters)… and we will talk about it in another article….. The matter removes doubt with certainty that the Qur’an is It was among the ancient texts written on stones, and there is no doubt about the certainty that the Qur’an is a new interpretation of ancient writings that were present on sacred tablets (the Preserved Tablet).
Now let us draw the story that happened with the Messenger and the disbelief’s denial (of the Qur’an) while the book was before him according to the Western approach.
[There was a large and important meeting in the past in Mecca… on whoever reads ancient, heavenly sacred tablets, and the Messenger Muhammad was able to copy those tablets and write them correctly, and he read them in the correct and correct manner that is consistent with the modern language of his people. And this work was inspired by Allah, while the Messenger’s people rejected the work of the Messenger Muhammad, and denied him, because they wanted it to be done in the old foreign language even if it was not understood… and they said about him that he came with an old alphabet. And they fought the Qur’an of the Prophet Muhammad. ]
Therefore, the fundamental controversial point in the story of Mecca… and the Qur’an places it as a fundamental controversial point, which is the language and the correct interpretation of the book.
The Qur’an rejects the ancient foreign language… which was the language of previous books that caused distortion in the meanings. It adopts the eloquent language, which means the modern spoken language of the current colloquial language that people speak in their daily lives. It confirms that the Qur’an was transferred from stone tablets. It is sacred (the Preserved Tablet) and that the language chosen to write the Qur’an is sound, as has been the custom known since ancient times. It also confirms that its interpretation is correct and that it is also from Allah.
This result that we have reached, which has made us draw a picture of the story that happened with the Messenger… will lead us to ask fundamental questions that require good research in order to find correct answers to them so that we can rely on our result and the story that we have arrived at that took place in Mecca:
● The first fundamental question… about the extent of the validity of the narrative of Islam that has reached us through the Prophet’s biography and its time, because through our consideration of the discourse of the Qur’an… we find that the root of the dispute over the Qur’an is not as it was portrayed by the Prophet’s biography, about a new religious idea that suddenly came to society. He does not know it. Rather, it is a dispute over reading an ancient religious book found on a tablet, and the imaginary narrative that we have drawn through the verses of the Qur’an indicates that we are in an environment that has a true religion and ancient writings, only a disagreement over the operative part of religious texts.
● The second fundamental question… is about the method of Western scholars in deciphering the inscriptions of ancient writings in the region and in reading them… Is it a correct and sound method, or is it wrong or intentionally forged? .
It is important to search for correct logical answers to these questions and conclusive evidence, so that this hypothetical narrative can be relied upon and given the status of truthfulness?
———————–
But the question is: Why did we draw a hypothetical narrative about the story of the people of Mecca denying the book in his hands, what is its importance, and on what basis will we draw it?!
We know the story of the people of Mecca denying the Qur’an, but the story of Mecca did not give us any story about their denial of the Book, so it must be drawn.
We will draw it relying on the speech of the Qur’an only, as he is the one who gives us information about the book and the dialogues of the infidels in their denial of the book, and then we will be able to draw a hypothetical story close to the truth that took place in Mecca.
As we said at the beginning of the topic… it is important to draw a hypothetical narrative around the story of the people of Mecca denying the second thing given to the Messenger?!
Why ?
Because when we draw the story that took place about the infidels denying the book in his hands, relying on the speech of the readers, then we will be able to imagine the shape of the book more and we will be able to know details within the story that will help us approach this book in order to reach it.
Therefore, we believe that we are now creating a story based on the discourse of the readers… because we will live within it and it will help us reach the book.
Based on our assumption of the previous story?!
We have come to understand the qualities and characteristics of the book, which is (an ancient book of the writings of the ancients on a tablet and composed of verses, and these verses are of two types, clear and similar)… and it is in an Arabic language.
But you are very surprised by this story… How is it possible that there was a purely Arab environment in Mecca… and there are disagreements over an old book that they inherited from the writings of the ancients, whether it is Arabic or non-Arab… And how is it possible that there was an environment with an eloquent language? Arabic and you want it non-Arab.
We built this story in this way… on the basis of the Qur’an’s speech, and relying on our belief in history in general and the history that talks about the story of the Messenger in Mecca, and on the basis of the Roman time that we are within.
Therefore, it is logical that the solution to this contradiction in this story that we assumed, which is consistent with the speech of the Qur’an and is consistent with the environment of Mecca that has reached us, will be based on the approach of Western sciences in language.
The West’s approach is based on the fact that the language develops… and the phonetic manifestations of the language’s vocabulary change with time… and the current language of any society becomes different from the ancient language spoken by their first ancestors who lived centuries ago in the language of the society. …So this ancient book…there is ancient language in it.
Therefore…the logical explanation…is that the Messenger’s people in Mecca wanted to preserve the ancient foreign language, the first original language of the book, which developed into the Arabic language that became prevalent at the time of his mission…and the Messenger… He wanted to make the book in Arabic, which had become the language of society, while the residents of Mecca wanted to preserve the first foreign language of their ancestors.
This result, which we have reached by relying on the Western approach, will make us ask a very important question:
What is the importance of this result that we have reached by relying on Western approaches, and the historical narrative that we imagined might have occurred in Mecca with the Messenger, so that we may realize new information about the book and be able to access it and approach it?!
I believe that we can know that book about which there is no doubt that was before him and they disbelieved in it, and encounter this book and find out its location, if we rely on an intelligent, indirect method of research.
how ?!
The story must be true…. But if we assume that this imaginary story that we have woven is close to the truth, and that the Qur’an emerged from this imaginary story that we believe took place in Mecca, and in which the people of Mecca (the Messenger’s people) rejected the Arabic-language Qur’an. The hadith is for the book, and they disbelieved in the Prophet Muhammad’s Qur’an of the book. The essence of the disagreement is not religious, as they are of one religion. Rather, the essence of the disagreement is over the reading of the book. Accordingly, the infidels of Mecca must have another different reading of the book, and it will be a non-Arab reading in the ancient language, and it will remain to this day. .
Now the very important question…… Are there any Muslims who officially even today, and at the same time, possess a book in a different language than the Qur’an that exists among the majority of Muslims?
If we research the reality well and think and contemplate the reality in great depth in search of these Muslims who have a book that is different from the Quran and that confirms the logic of this story that we imagined had taken place in Mecca… it will lead us to discover something important and striking… …….. This discovery may make us re-understand the Qur’an’s speech and rewrite the story that took place in Mecca in a completely different way… and relying on a new and different approach.
{They sought temptation before and turned things around for you until the truth came and the command of Allah became apparent, and they hated it}
What is this important thing?!
.
.