TIRING REPEATS

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Jul 15, 2011 at 01:18

Our dear Amin who cannot make up his mind if he owns a Brand Agency or he earned a bogus master degree in Arabic so which one is it?

SO WHY HAVE YOU NEVER BEEN ABLE TO ANSWER WHENEVER I HAVE REPLIED IN ARABIC? SIPLE YOU CANNOT SPEAK THE LANGUAGE. WORK CAME AFTER EDUCATION LIKE MOST PEOPLE - THATS HOW IT NORMALLY WORKS.

What a scandal Allah cannot tell the difference between the nominative and the accusative and a kafir like me is fixing Allah's poor Arabic

>Dhimmi says:I just wanted to make it clear that the subject is the hadhan and they are sahiran so the hadhan (the two) that are al-sahiran (the magicians in the dual) are the subject.This is completely wrong at an ASTRONOMICAL LEVEL:

And what does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake and hadhan is supposed to be hadhayne you tell us !

THAT YOU FORCED THIS ERROR - THAT IS NOT A PARTCLE OF HARF MUSHABBAH BIL FEIL BUT AN - THAT IS WHY - I HAVE ANSWERED THIS 7 TIMES NAD COUNTING

>They said, "These two are nothing but magicians who want to drive you out of your land with their magic and do away with your most exemplary way.

So? and Allah made a mistake as hadhan should have been hadhayne and what a fadiha

- YOU JUST REPEAT THIS AD REPEAT - AND YOU BREAK AND ARGUMENT AND TAKE ITS BITS OUT - THEN SAY SO WHAT. THE WHOLE ARGUMENT AS YOU KNOW YOU FAIL TO ANSWER.

?That is the sentence even in English you can tell "they said" is the subject - i.e. the one doing the action (of speaking) and whatever is in the quote mark equates to the object of the verb - i.e. the thing being done.

What does this have to do with the fact that Allah had no clue that hadhan should be hadhayne you tell us ... ?

THIS HAS TO DO WITH YOU NOT KNOW ANY ARABIC AND BEING UNABLE TO JUDGE THE ERROR - AS YOU HAVE READ IT IN OTHERS WORK. YOU TRIED IN ARABIC BUT GOT IT WRONG - I HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED IT.

>Now the quote (i.e. the thing being said - the object of قالوا) is a comeplete sentence as well. A nominal sentences as opposed to the verbal sentence. If هذان these two is subject - then what is it subject of?

What does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake!

Yakhrabi ya lahwiti Allah made a mistake

NO DARLING - YOU MADE MISTAKES - THIS IS NOT EVEN ERROR - YOU JUST LIKE TO THINK SO IT SAITSFIES YOU LYING SELF - HOW CAN THE PARTICLE OF NEAGTION OF GENUS GIVE - MANSUB TO SOMETHING?

>There are other verbs after "these two are nothing but magicians" - but this cannot be subject for them as subect follows verb in Classical Arabic.

So? ... in hadhan (sic) la sahiran is a recension and Allah made a mistake

Ya kharbi Allah made a mistake in grammar

THIS ISNT RECENSION THE WORD COMES WRITTEN LIKE THAT AN ان WHERE IS ANNA - HOW DO YOU KNOW ITS ANNA - AND YOU HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO ANSWER THIS 7 TIMES ASKED PREVIOUSLY.

هذان these two - is موصوف and finally becomes مبتدا subject of nominal sentences.

And what does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake?

Ya kharabi ina hadhan lasahiran what a joke

THIS WAS COMPLETE ARGUMENT - WHY BREAK IT UP? THAT WAS SYNTACTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE VERSE - TO SHOW THERE IS NO ERROR - YOU BROKE IT UP - AS YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO ANSWER.

>ALSO: -This is what I posted.

More gobbledygook

AGAIN - A LITTLE FRAGMENT - HARDLY A GOBBLEDYGOOK.

قالوا verb and subject ان nafiah liljins negation (of genus) particle هذان demonstrative pronoun ل exceptive particle - the negative and exceptive particles imply restriction - this is very in common classical arabic to use particles like that - heaache to translate in english - especially formaing positive sentences and meaning with double negation.

ROTFL Pakistani/Arabic nafiah liljins of is this nafia lel jins?what jins? Well allah had three types of jins it is al-mukhanas like you?

But what does this have to do with the fact that hadhan should have been hadhayne? you tell us

Oh I'm waiting

- HA HA HA

THERE IS NO SUCH A THING AS PAKISTANI ARABIC - ANYWAYS MY FORFATHERS COME FROM INDIA. I STUDIED IN LONDON AND SAUDI

This i what he posted as an extract :>subject انSee here is why he has practiacally no knowledge of Arabic and resorted to lying:

In is not a subject but what does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake and it is supposed to be hadhayne you tell us

- AN IS NOT A SUBJECT - ITS PARTICLE OF NEGATION OF GENUS. SO WHY SHOULD IT BE هذين

For the readers notice that our dear Amin the wannabe arab is avoiding the real issue that hadhan should be hadhayne which means that Allah made a mistake and what a fadiha

WHY SHOULD HADHAYNE? IT WOULD ONLY BE THAT IF IT WAS MANSUB - WHICH IT IS NOT. READ THE PARTICLE AN - AND SEE IT ALL QURAN ONLINE.

In Arabic

Oh Arabic a langauge that you cannot speak read or write right?

SO WHAT HAVE I BEEN DOING - IN THREE POSTS NOW I HAVE GIVEN YOU SYNTACTICAL ANALYSIS OF SENTENCES. AN I HAVE SAID START CONVERSIN IN ARABIC - WHICH YOU HAVE DELIBRATELY AVOIDED. YET YOU SAY THIS. STRANGE REALLY STRANGE.

And tell your Arab mastere who is helping you

- SUCH AS WHO? ANOTHER LITTLE LIE OF YOURS?

ya kharabi wa ya lahwiti Allah saqat fi derassat al-nahw wa qawa3id al-lugha al-3arabiyya

قالوا - is a plural perfect verb of the form

So? and what does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake

EVERYTHING - WHY SPLIT A WHOLE ARGUMENT AND POINT TO A FRAGMENT? WHY ARE YOU UNABLE TO ANSWER - WHY CONTINUE WITH THE LIE THAT YOU KNOW ARABIC.

Oh I forgot Allah also made a very close mistake in surat al-nisa' 160

It seems that Allah has no clue about when to use the nominative v. accusative cases and what a scandal

In classical Arabic subject always follows the verb and cannot precede it - the subject can be visible like:"Ali Said" - قال علي - here the subject is mentioned.

So what? and what does this have to do with the fact that Allah made a mistake?

So you tell us is it hadhan or hadhayne?

EVERYTHING - THAT WAS THE SYNTACTIACAL ANALYSIS O THE VERSE. WHY BRING A FRAGMENT OUT OF PLACE AND ITS ORIGINAL POSITION AND THEN ASK HIS.

>If you say He Said - this in arabic is simply قال - the subject is said to be hidden pronoun مضمر .In the above - the quoted verse - قالوا is "they said" has no visible suject - ie the people saying. Here the suject is hidden - so it is the verb and subject together.

And?

THEN

ان nafiah liljins negation (of genus) particle.

Good luck with this one did you read al-Sayuti and di you undersatnd what I wrote in the grammatical efforts by your masters the Arabs to explain this mistake? al-Sayuti tried every thing and you mr wannabe arab and your Arab master are trying the impossible

It should be in hadhan la sahiran get over it

WHERE DID SUYUTI TRIED EVERYTHING AND WHERE DID YOU WRITE THE GRAMMATICAL EFFROTS - NOW THIS IS A TOTAL LIE. I HAV NOT COME ACROSS IT AT 15TH JULY.

IT WAS ME REFUTED YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT - AND WHY YOUR SUYUTI REFERENCE WAS SO WRONG.

--------------------------

See how he twisted the words to make out I had made a mistake - whilst unable to answer me.

Answer you about what? Even your islamic sources tell us that it is a mistake and what a joke

WHICH ONE - YOU NAMED ON SUYUTI - AND I PROVED HE DIDN'T SAY ANY SUCH THING. HA HA - WHAT ABOVIOUS AND CHILDISH LIE.

Second - he has not much knowledge of actual Arabic grammar or grammarians. I quoted him the books (references).

What references? I'm quoting al-Suyuti and and uthman and babbling 3Aisha

what a fadiha Allah flunked his Arabic

- ALREADY ANSWERED - SEE PREVIOUS POSTS

He has no knowledge that there are already books that give complete syntactical analysis of the Quran. Quoted a book at him - easily found on net.Quoted him books of Grammarians - n response other than calling it gobbelty gook. Wow!

Here again:

1. Itiqan by al-Suyuti pages 277-280

2. Majaz al-Qur'an pages 21-23

3. Ibn Qutayba Ta'weel 4-5 and 108

4. You can also read about this little mistake in kuffar references including Quranic studies pages 222 -223 and Goldziher's Rictungen 36

I HAV ALREADY ANSWERED - AND YOU PROVE MY ASSERTIONS THAT YOU GOT THIS NONSENSE FROM WESTERN SCHOLARS - WHO WERE DELIBRATELY SETTING OUT TO MAKE STUPID THINGS UP. YOUR QURANIC STUDIES I TAKE IT IS WANSBORUGH - THATS WHERE YOU GOT THIS NON-SENSE FROM.

I ALREADY SAID THIS BEFORE YOU DID - AND YOUR OTHER REFERENCE - I COULD NOT FIND THE BOOK ON INTERNET. NO SUCH WORK OF GOLDZHIER.

5. Oh I forgot Ali Dashti

And this is only a partial list

SO - WHERE IS THE FULLY - REFUTED THESE. AND ALI DASHTI - IS THE MOST IDIOTIC REFERENCE TO BRING UP.

>I will tell you where he got his knowledge and why he is so stuck. From Western so-called experts in Islam - who made up the same type of bullshit up. He has only read their works - refuses to reference what he says. And that is why comes up stuck - against someone who does know his suff. Difference between primary and secondar or tertiary tier of knowledge.

It is your sources that tell us that this is a mistake and what a fadiha - WHICH ONES?

WESTERN SOURCES ARE NON-MUSLIM AND OBVIOUSLY AS MADE UP AS YOU. SUYUTI - I ALREADY ANSWERED DOES NOT SAY THIS AT ALL.

NOT MY PROBLEM YOU CANNOT READ ARABIC. AND CHECK.

As far as resorting to lies ...... that is old really old thing Dhimmi - as we have gone through thish charade repeatedly - with me always winning.When he has no response - he just rambles!

For the readers notice that our dear Amin and his mastere the arab who is helping him never even got in the word hadhan

WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU LIES - BUT REPETITION OF YOUR BOGUS "MISTAKE"

---

---

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".