Our dear Khaled and his lesson in Arabic and Muslim theology

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jul 5, 2008 at 07:33

For the readers: Ayat al-sayf or the sword verse is the infamous Q9:5 where it says: iqtoloo al-mushrikeen. Or kill the polytheists. But the Qur'an is really an opaque revelation so it does not tell us who are really those polytheists. The islamic tradition tells us that those polytheists must be the pagans of Mecca. Early exegesis (tafseer and see Qatada) tells us that those polytheists must be the Jews and Christians as Allah accuses both groups of shirk (polytheism) in Q9:30. So much for the claim that the Qur'an is a kitab mubeen

Now If we examine QQ2:106 we can read it as:

ma nansakh min ayatin (i3rab) aw nunsihaa naati bikhayran (i3rab) minha aw mithlaha

And here is a linear translation or tarjamat al-kilma

1. ma nansakh means (we) abrogate (this is what the word nasikh means and it is the foundation of the doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh or abrogation and I will return to this word later)

2. min ayatin: from the verses

3. aw nunsihaa means and forget

3. naati means we bring

4. bikhayran minha or with better than it

5. aw mithlaha means the like of it

So the aya says or tarjamat al-ma3na:

for whatever verse we abrogate or forget we bring a better (verse) or the like of it

Now notice that the foundation of the doctrine of abrogation is as follows: later revelations will abrogate earlier revealtion in the same subject matter which means if Allah says ( which he does) that drinking alcohol is good for you. Then he abrogates it later on then Muslims cannot drink alcohol any longer but as per Q2:106 "the alcohol is good for you" stays in the Qur'an but it would be "nunsihaa" or forget it or aborgate it

Now Q2:256 speaks of la ikrah fi al-deen or the no compulsion but it was revealed before ayat al-sayf or Q9:5 and the end result would be that Q9:5 abrogates Q2:256 but Q2:256 does not go any place except we are to forget (nannsiha) or forget about it. So much for the no compulsion verse and so much for the ignorance of Muslims about the poor Islamic theology

Then our dear Khaled quoted this verse to tell us that there is no place for abrogation period. But what he does not tell us: If so then he could drink alcohol too (if he does not already enjoy his little Yuhana mashi bil talj or Johnnie Walker on ice the favorite drink of the Saudis) So do you still drink alcohol our dear Kahled as your Allah says that it is good for you? or you do not drink alcohol because the "it is good for you" was abrogated? So which one is it?

Now our dear Khaled quoted this verse to support his poor assertion. Well let us examine it

>"The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. NOTHING SHALL ABROGATE HIS WORDS." 6:115

This is what this aya says in Arabic

wa tammatu kalimatu rabbika sidqan wa 3adlan la mubaddilan likalimatuhu

And here is the linear transaltion or tarjamat al-kilma

1. wa tammatu means and completed (perfected)

2. kalimatu or the word of

3. Rabbika means your God

4. sudqan means truth

5. wa adlan means and justice

6. lamubadilan means no change

7. likalimatuhu means for his word

Or and this is tarjamat al-ma3na

the word of your god is perfected/completed with truth and justice and no change (allowed) for his word

Your translation is bogus because:

1. You wrote: Nothing shall abrogate his words. Right? Now let us translate this back to Arabic:

La shay'a sa YANSAKHU kalamuhu

And here are the mistakes in your translation:

A. I do not see the word abrogate or naskh in the aya

B. The word in the Qur'an is: kalimatuhu which means his word and not your bogus his words

2. So where did you get this translation from? Remember what is plagiarism?

3. What our dear Khaled is not aware of is that abrogation as defined in Q2:106 means to forget about and it does not mean not to change his word as per Q6:115

4. This means that abrogated verse do not go any where but we forget about them

How come you did not know that?

You know what? You cannot be an Arab. You also quoted a verse from the Bible in another blog. Right? Well the Bible is corrupted (sic) any way so why do you quote a corrupted book ya ayuha al-falyasoof al-kabeer? But you know what? the only Muslims that quote the Bible and post poor translations of the Qur'an are Pakistanis. So you need to stick to Urdu

So are you maskeen min al-bakistan our dear Khaled the wannabe Arab?

---

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".