The Qur'an is an edited book and Maududi and Ahmad Deedat and the copy of an Tunisian Qur'an v. the Cairo Qur'an

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), May 15, 2014 at 07:47

Our dear Jilmax is making a fool of himself as you shall see

My dear sir,

Yes our dear Jilmax

Before you begin on a topic do your research properly

But I did our dear Jilmax and i told you what it says in your Islamic sources so I'm not telling you anything that you would not find in the Islamic literary sources written in Arabic a language that you cannot read or write or speak right our dear Jilmax the lost tablighee?

that was a controversy because no one had proper access to the cairo quran

What on earth are you talking about

Hint: The Cairo Qur'an was printed in 1923-1924 and the Tunisian Qur'an was printed in 1969. How come you did not know that our dear Jilmax?

So the officials had proven that there is no mistake like that.

What officials what are you talking about? You are ignorant but let me help you go and get a copy of the 1923-1924 Cairo Qur'an and a copy of the 1969 Tunisian Qur'an and check the word ملك in سورة الفاتحة and this is a very easy example for clueless tablighees like you

1. In the Cairo Qur'an it is مالك or the owner of

2. In the Tunisian Qur'an it is ملك or the king of

And i'm sure you agree with me that the owner of is not the king of right our dear Jilmax whose Hindu ancestors were brutalized by Islam? So which one is it the king of or the onwer of?

Do you know what this means? It means the following

1. That the Qur'an is an EDITED book and it was edited by mere human beings

2. It means that it is a corrupted book

3. It means that the Qur'an could not have been memorized as we are told because if this was true then there would have been only one reading of this word ملك

4. It means that the Qur'an was a text that must have pre-dated Muhammad and that by the time it was examined by the likes of al-Tabari 300 years after the death of Quthm ibn Abd Allat aka Muhammad no one was able to understand what it really says

5. So is it Maaliki or Maliki in Allah's little al-Lawh al-Mahfuz as it cannot be both

6. It means that the likes of the big time fraud Maududi as well as Ahmad Deedat were liars or ignorant when they claimed that we kuffar will never find any 2 Qurans that are different

And here is what al-Tabari tells us about this disaster if you can read Arabic which I doubt very much

http://www.quran-for-all.com/t-1-3-4.html

Now you tell me why the lies and ignorance?

Oh next if you wish i will provide you with a more difficult example from Surat Yusuf

I pity your likes but I have a question for you because I keep asking tablighees like you is it true that your Arab masters call your likes maskeen men el-hind and they make fun of the way your likes mangle the Arabic language?

---

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".