Reading Surat al-Ruum 1-4, Opaque Revelations and Real History!

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Nov 15, 2021 at 09:44

This is Surat al-Ruum 1-4 and most of the information here is from some of my old posts

1. الم

This is another cluster of letters that have no meaning. The author of the Qur'an tells us that it is كتاب مبين or Kitab Mubeen and why would the meaning of this cluster of letters be lost in the late 2nd and early 3rd century of Islam when al-Tabari wrote his tafsir? Only Allahu A'lam.

Shiekh al-Azhar calls these letters الكلام العاطل and here is what he wrote about these strange letters: http://elazhar.com/qadaiaux/5.asp

More? al-Tabari provided 14 different possibilities in-order to explain what these letters really mean with no luck (see Surat al-Baqara:1)

And here is my question again: Muhammad and his followers must have understood what these letters really mean! Why the meaning of these letters was lost when al-Tabari wrote his tafsir?

Surat al-Ruum:2. غلبت الروم

This is the Quranic rasm. The dots are added.

This is how al-Tabari reads the word غلبت after adding the missing short vowels:

1. غَلَبَتْ or (The Romans/Greeks) "WON" and in this case the reading of the verse would be: The Romans/Greeks WON (the war)

Or

2. غُلِبَتْ or (The Romans/Greeks) LOST (the war)

And this happens with a slight change in the short vowels

Remember that the original text of the Qur'an has no short vowels. The implications here are huge. If the Qur'an was an oral text -----> then became a written text (the Uthman Codex) al-Tabari should have been able to know if the word was Ghulibat (defeated) or Ghalabit (won the war).
The Quran must have been a written text with no provenance!

Here are other problems with this aya: The words for the Greeks in Arabic are اليونانيون او الاغريق and for sure not الرُّوْمُ (oh and how come the author had no clue about what a shadda or double consonant is all about?) so where does this word الرُّوْمُ come from? It is a loan word from Aramaic/Syriac ܪܘܡܚܐ and it means the Roman soldiers (also lance or spear) this word was Arabized as al-Ruum.

Surat al-Ruum:3. في ادنى الارض وهم من بعد غلبهم سيغلبون

This can be rendered as: In THE NEAR LAND (notice the Qur'an does not tell us what is this near land) and they (The Greeks) after their DEFEAT/WIN they will DEFEAT/WIN

Before we continue, any Pakistani or Indian Muslim who tells you that the word ادنى or Adna (It means Near) means Lowest, is either ignorant of the Arabic language or a blatant liar. It seems that some ignorant person from either India or Pakistan came across the Arabic word: دنيء or Dani' or "low life" and notice the similarities of the morphology to the word Adna et voila the crazy and fraudulent conclusion that the word Adna must mean Lowest and the Qur'an is really saying that the Persians were defeated in the lost land on earth and that is the area of the Dead Sea. If you recall the Persians lost the war in major battels in Upper Mesopotamia and if you check the link to the map of the battels of the war non of these battles took place in the area of the Dead Sea

Now, The Qur'an says: that the Greeks after losing/winning the war سيغلبون and this word can be read with ease as either سَيَغْلِبُونْ or They (the Greeks) will WIN but it can also be read with very slight change in short vowels that do not even exist in the rasm as سَيُغْلَبُونْ or They (the Greeks) will be Defeated which fits very nicely with what happened in 633 AD when they were defeated and the invading Arabs won

I must conclude that the author of the Qurna is saying:

1. The Greeks were defeated in the near land and after their their defeat they will win

OR:

2. The Greeks won in the near Land and after their winning they will be defeated.

What a disaster

So much for the claim that the Qur'an is a Kitab Mubeen

I will read Surat al-Ruum:4 in the next post

Again a reminder for the readers:

1. You will not find any mention of the Persians

2. You will not find any mention of the Arab invasions and the defeat of the Greeks starting in 633 AD

3. The Qur'an does not tell us what is Adna al-Ard or the near land but it for sure not the area of the Dead Sea as claimed by Tablighees from India and Pakistan.

And here is a reminder about the TimeLine of the war:

Again this is the timeline of the Persian/Greek war of 614/616 AD to 627 AD:

1. The initial part of the war from 614 AD to 622 AD the Persians invaded and occupied Mesopotamia, the Levant, Asia Minor, the Syrian desert including today's Israel/Palestine and Egypt. So the Persians won and the Greeks lost this part of the war

2. The Persians sustained major defeats in Upper Mesopotamia in 622 AD. So the Greeks won this part of the war

3. And it was down hill from that point on and the Persians were expelled from Egypt in 627 AD and that was the end of the war

4. The Arabs invaded the Middle East and both the Persian and Greek empires in the Middle East in 633 AD

So much for the claim that the Qur'an is a Kitab Mubeen

---

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".