Michael: ܫܡܥ (Syro-Aramaic) שמע (Hebrew) اسمع (Arabic) Or To Hear

Submitted by dhimmi no more, Oct 5, 2018 at 18:10

Hi Micheal,

As far I understand the word Echad (Hebrew) or Khad (Syriac) in the Hear O Israel, it means one as in number one. I'm on solid ground in both Arabic and Syro-Aramaic. The Syrians as well as Christian Arabs read the Hebrew Echad as one. (Number) one

>I can see how, if these things were in a Syro-Arabic lectionary, they would have been taken unchanged into Muhammed's oral monologue.

That is my point. The Muslim Ulama tell us that Muhammad had a young Jew his name was Zayd Ibn Thabit They also tell us that Muhammad received "mukhatatat" (papyri? may be or a codex may be?) from Christians and Jews (this is not clear) and Muhammad instructed Zayd Ibn Thabit to learn Syriac (in one tradition) and to learn Hebrew (in another tradition) so he can translate these Mukhtatat

Then we are told that Ibn Thabit was able to master Hebrew and Syriac in 17 days! There must be some truth to mastering Syriac after all Jews at the time of Muhammad spoke Aramaic and Syriac is Middle Aramaic So all ibn Thabit had to do was to learn the Syriac ABGAD (Alphabet) and he would be able to read and understand such texts. Far fetched? May be. However, all the Biblical narratives as well as the names of the Prophets in the Qur'an are not from the Hebrew Bible but from the Syriac Bible The Peshitta

So were these mukhatatat a copy of the Peshitta? We will never know! You never get straight answers in Islam

As I explained to you all Muhammad did was to plagiarize The Syriac version of the Shma' (I'm using the consonants only) in Mark 12:29 et voila we have Surat al-Ikhlas

>One thing I would like to know, from this word study, is, since "echad" did not exclusively mean "bundle" or "uniting"

I wish any Hebrew speaker or student of the Hebrew Bible can answer this question. However, my understanding is that the word in all of the three Semitic languages Arabic Syriac and Hebrew means; One

Luxenberg stated that the Syriac word Samada (this word makes it to the Qur'an 112:2) means Bundle/Uniting) and he also states that the Hebrew word Samad means Bundle/Uniting (this I cannot confirm)

>is it reasonable for God to expect Jews to NOT reject any sort of "trinity"?

That is a question that you have to pose to a Jewish theologian. I don't study Christian theology either, but the Trinity Doctrine is a very sophisticated doctrine. You see Muhammad was a poor theologian His Allah is a not a spirit (Arabic al-Roh al-Qudus) and Allah is not the Logos (Jesus is the Logos or Kalimatu Allah in Islam) and the funny thing is the verse in the Qur'an that denies the Trinity is the same verse in the Qur'an that confirms the Trinity. Muslims tell us that Allah's 99 names are not really Aqaneem Allah (which would mean that we have 99 Allahs) but his names!

>I believe God did not expect this of them at all; and the Sh'ma is properly understood to mean that God is simply "one" -- not "three-in-one" nor anything of the sort.

Oh sure in its OT form. However, the Qur'an of all books shed light in Q112:1-2 on the Syrian fathers of the Church and their understanding of Allah the Bundle/Uniting or Allahu al-Samad. After all how could Allah fits in if he is not a Spirit and the Logos of Islam must be Jesus

I told you there are no simple answers

---

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".