Revival of old Fabrications 1

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Nov 8, 2012 at 20:37

This is from a previous post. . .

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/192626

My answer then:

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/193023

- - - -

This was an absolute joke then and now. It full of mistakes, errors and lies.

- - - -

"he had no clue that it is a loan word from Syriac Bishm and the Syriac letter sheen becomes Arabic seen et voila we have bism and when nothing seems to work he tells us about this little funny tradition"

We went through this last time - repeatedly. And it became apparent you did not know what you were talking about. I repeatedly asked for sources and evidence. . . . you gave none.

I gave out dictionary links . . . you could not find this mysterious "Bisham"

When you did attempt an answer . . . you lied - you gave a syriac reference - but hid the part where it said "Islamic formula" - regarding Bismillam.

- - - -

There is NO mystery about this word at all. It is compound of two words . . . . The Arabic "Ba" and the word "Ism". Hence it means 'With the name of'. Ism is bonafide Semitic root.

- - - -

You could NOT translate Tabari - you attempted it with word by word - which led to errors

Hence you admitted:

"The syntax is a bit confused but you get the idea"

No dearie - one doesn't get the idea - given how you claimed the exact opposite. Now let us look at you translation.

- - - -

'then Jesus said that the letter B is baha' Allah and the letter seen sana'uhu and the meem his mamlaka or kingdom and I'm AFRAID (read this as al-Tabari believes that Bism is a mistake and what a disaster) it (bism) is a mistake from the speaker and he wanted to say B-S-M in the path of teaching the beginner from the children (or blame the Chidrens excuse) in the book (read this as the Qur'an) the letters of abgad (read this as the Arabic alphabet) and he made a mistake and he linked (the B-S-M) acronym and said BISM"

"because there is no meaning for this ta'weel (read this as reading or exegesis) if he recited bism allah al-rahman al-raheem which is what the reader recites from the book of Allah because it is not possible to understand it at from all the arabs and their grammarians if it remains like that."

This doesn't make much sense in English:

"in the path of teaching the beginner from the children (or blame the Chidrens excuse) in the book (read this as the Qur'an) the letters of abgad"

This line is meaningless. You could not translate it. A far better translation [revised from my previous]:

I am afraid that it is a mistake from the Muhadith (Hadith Collector) and he had intended [ب س م] as how alphabet is taught to the beginner youth at school. He made a mistake in that and connected it and then he said: بسم because there is no meaning for this interpretation when it will be recited بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم as a Qari (Quran Reciter) recites it from the book of Allah. This changes its meaning as it is understood by the Arab and its linguists, when his interpretation is applied on that [i.e. الله... بسم].

- - - -

THE MISTAKES:

Muhaddith refers to a Hadith Collecter. Speaker doesn't make sense here. This is a report which Tabari is examining.

"and he wanted to say" there is no word meaning "say" in the Arabic.

You have translated "" literally – which doesn't make sense at all. Check Hans Wehr – this expression means as, by way of.

The word "الكتّاب" is Kuttab – meaning a religious school Madrassah – not Kitab 'the book'. I had this wrong too originally.

تاويل means interpretation. From اول

استحالة means "change" and "impossible"

And there is no word meaning No - the word is the particle "Lam" and not La.

"it is not possible to understand it at from all the arabs and their grammarians if it remains like that."

This whole line you seem to have invented to suit your own meanings. Especially the underlined.

لِاسْتِحَالَةِ مَعْنَاهُ عَلَى الْمَفْهُوم بِهِ عِنْد جَمِيع الْعَرَب وَأَهْل لِسَانهَا , إِذَا حُمِلَ تَأْوِيله عَلَى ذَلِكَ

If you read this with "impossible" it is read as:

For impossibility of its meaning as understood by all Arabs and its linguists, when his interpretation is applied on that.

The word حمل is passive and here means "applicable"

- - - -

Now the lies and fabrications:

"1. The source of this tradition is no other than babbling Ibn Masud so if this tradition is big time fraud then we can only say that Ibn Masud or those that heard him saying it are liars right our dear Amin who lives among kuffar? so was Ibn Masud a big time liar? and if so why should we believe anything attibuted to him you tell me?"

Meaningles tattle - doesn't mean much or make sense.

- - -

"2. He is saying that the source of the tradition comes from no other than Muhammad the PUBH so if this tradition is a piece of fraud so he was a liar right our dear Amin who earned not one but three degrees in "ancient" Arabic?Oh I smell riots here!"

Note the repeated lie:

"who earned not one but three degrees in "ancient" "

And the fallacious logic:

"no other than Muhammad the PUBH so if this tradition is a piece of fraud so he was a liar"

As there is a chain of narrators. Anyone could have made a mistake etc.

- - -

"And how come Jesus the PUBH had no clue about the meaning of a perfect Syriac word Bishm that is?"

There is NO word in Syriac called Bishm.

- - -

"And how did they communicate as Abul Qasim spoke only Arabic and Jesus spoke Syriac? And how come Jesus the PUBH had no clue about the meaning of a perfect Syriac word Bishm that is? So who is the liar here? I do not think it is Jesus! It must be Abul Qasim! What a disater: Abul Qasim is a liar! More riots!"

This is virtually meaningless - and so it's logic. It goes back to this: In the court of a God - anything goes. There is no word "Bisham". For jesus to speak Arabic would HARDLY be a major miracle - given the amount associated with him.

- - -

"So what is bism our dear Amin al-tablighee? What a disaster Jesus the PUBH had no clue about a perfect Syriac word!"

Note another lie - "al-tablighee"??? There is no word as "Bishm" in Syriac - we went through this last time. He could NOT find it then.

- - -

"Let me help you: I read is as the teacher was saying that the word bism is not an Arabic word! Right?"

More meaningless rubbish . . . so what was an Arabic teacher doing there? What was Arabic itself doing?

- - -

"So is Bism really an acronym?

Alhamdullilah now we know what it means!

What a disaster!"

Again this doesn't mean anything either.

- - -

"Notice he does not tell us what the word means or why would no other than Abul Qasim is the source of this tradition and why was he saying that Jesus was saying that it is an acronym and what a disaster"

huh? Another easy lie . . . http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/192626

look at the large chunk here. Of course he tells you what Bismillah means.

- - -

So he is saying that it is Bism (read this as in the name of) because this is what it says in the basmala and what is recited by the Arabs then it must be bism! But again he lived with the Arabs and their poor logic for a long time! Circular reasoning if there is one

Where is this "circular" reasoning. . . what is it? Another eaasy and basless lie/claim. Where is he saying:

"So he is saying that it is Bism (read this as in the name of) because this is what it says in the basmala and what is recited by the Arabs then it must be bism!"

- - -

"So now we are told in this tradition that the word Bism is a mistake and it is really not a word that means in the name of but an acronym and that the mistake is because the boys that were writing the Qur'an made such mistake so is this right or wrong "

But we are NOT told any such thing . . . . else where is it? You claimed it - on back of a badly and mistake ridden translation . . . either wilfully - or out of sheer ignorance. Whatever the motivation. . . it is wrong.

The line reads:

"وَأَنْ يَكُون أَرَادَ : " ب س م " , عَلَى سَبِيل مَا يُعَلَّم الْمُبْتَدِئ مِنْ الصِّبْيَان فِي الْكِتَاب حُرُوف أَبِي جَاد ."

He intended Ba Sa Ma - as at school the alphabet is taught to kids.

Where is this saying Children copying something wrong?

- - -

"and why would al-Tabari include a bogus tradition unless he was really exposing the mistakes in the book of Allah and he is alerting us readers to the nature of the book of Allah and the many mistakes in it"

Becuse he EVALUATED and rejected it. Really? Al-Tabari the Muslim . . . what mistake . . . ? THat is simply in your head. This kind of nonsensical lies ust work here.

- - - -

"What a disaster and how many times did i say what a disaster? Too many times"

He he - and how many times have I exposed them ALL to be lies.

- - -

al-Tabari who was a cultured Persian who had no like for the Arabs or their imperialism and who was able to spot a mistake and in this case the word bism as in bism allah al-rahman al-raheem and he goes through the usual twists and turns trying to explain that this word is a mistake and it should have been b'ism and he had no clue that it is a loan word from Syriac Bishm and the Syriac letter sheen becomes Arabic seen et voila we have bism and when nothing seems to work he tells us about this little funny tradition

Oh dear . . . . a contradiction! Read the above and compare with this. 1st he was "twisting" and turning . . . at the end he was "exposing" lies. It is clear who the liar is.

Just like Istilaam. . . . easy lies.

---

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".