The good ole Sheikh needs to read the Qur'an with care part two

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jan 19, 2014 at 12:27

Again Sheikh Ra wrote this little gem

the Noble Quran of Mecca Surah 10: 47-49 declared that a Prophet shall be raised from and sent to all Nations as the Americas was not to be except

It seems that the good ole Sheikh is not aware that the Qur'an says that Muhammad was the seal of the prophets (the last messenger/prophet) in Surat al-Ahzab 40

Or Muhammad is:

رسول الله وخاتم النبين

Or Muhammad is the messenger of Allah and the ring (read this as the seal also read it as last and as usual only Allahu A3lam) of the prophets

And here is what al-Tabari says and it is clear that word خاتم or Khatem which puzzled the ulama and it was read as

1. وَلَكِنَّهُ رَسُول اللَّه وَخَاتَم النَّبِيِّينَ , الَّذِي خَتَمَ النُّبُوَّة فَطُبِعَ عَلَيْهَا

Or Muhammad is the one who sealed prophethood (read this as the last prophet) by printing on it (prophethood)

2. وَلَكِنْ رَسُول اللَّه وَخَاتَم النَّبِيِّينَ } : أَيْ آخِرهمْ

Or (Muhammad) was the last one (the last prophet)

3. The word Kahtem is also read as خَاتِم النَّبِيِّينَ With a kasra under the letter Ta which means the end of the prophets

4. The word Khatem is also read where a fatha is added to the letter Ta or { خَاتَم النَّبِيِّينَ } بِفَتْحِ التَّاء , بِمَعْنَى أَنَّهُ آخِر النَّبِيِّينَ

And in this case it would mean the LAST OF THE PROPHETS

And as usual the Ulama tell us in the Ahadith that Allah sent 120,000 propehts/messengers BEFORE Muhammad and non will be sent after him

So it seems to me either Allah is correct and that Muahmmad was indeed the last prophet/messenger and that Drew Ali ain't a prophet /messenger or that the claim by the good ole Sheikh that Drew Ali is a prophet is correct and both claims cannot be correct so who is right and who is wrong Ya Fadilat al-Sheikh? You? or Allah?

What a disaster

For the readers interested in literary criticism of the Qur'an the fact that in the 3rd century of islam when al-Tabari was writing the above exegesis and the fact that there was no agreement on how to read the word Khatem or what it really means I can conclude that

1. In the 3rd century the Quranic text was not an oral text and it was a written text which means that Muslims memorized the Qur'an after the death of Muhammad is a bogus claim

2. It also means that the Qur'an could not have been canonized before the 3rd century of Islam after all how can you have a canonized holy book when the Ulama still did not agree on what it really says which to me makes sense and more evidence that Wansbough was very correct in his conclusion that the Qur'an could not have been canonized before the 3rd century

---

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".