The Linguistic Miracle of the Quran |The Evidence Course | Session 5 / Part 2

[@jawaadshahid]

I don't know arabic but am amazed by the conciseness of even the english translation. The author clearly demonstrates that he knows me better than I know myself. I also recognise quran when its being read even without tajweed (the singing recitation) vs spoken arabic or hadith reports

[@michaelevans4110]

Ameen. Alhamdulillahi rabbi al'alameen

[@mrbayah9948]

May Allah reward you

[@HussainFahmy]

*_Learning the Arabic language is a huge window of opportunity for personal development._*

[@jenskarlsson9775]

Why do you believe that?

[@tejester2375]

​@@jenskarlsson9775 the Qur'an and numerous scholarly works were originally written in classical Arabic. While many brothers & sisters are doing a great job in translating these works in other languages so larger audiences can read it, you'll never get the full meaning from a translation. In addition, the Arabic language is eloquent both in speech and writing making it gratifying to learn.

[@fbng]

Mashallah, Br. Sharif does not miss.

[@tasneemsakifibnealam949]

Learned new stuff. JazakAllahu khairan.

[@TheThe7oaks]

Could u recommend any books on this subject

[@Abdullah21038]

Learn Arabic and then compare it to other literature

[@fanboy8026]

this one is an interesting argument

[@mohammedm.hesham8243]

Hi, I'm Accel.

[@FidelityInsights]

Salam, I m a Muslim and can someone help me with that: An atheist asked if Necessary Existence can't be any other way and Contingent existence can be any other way then the same logic can be applied to God that he is Merciful and not Wrathful. He could have been Wrathful since he could have been the other way since Contingent and possible existence and it can't be necessary

[@Oneummahgeneration]

The decision to be merciful as opposed to showing wrath is because of the will. This doesn’t change the attributes nor the essence of the creator. Rather the will is the exercise of the attributes of the creator. So Allah swt chose to create but didn’t have to create. But if Allah swt didn’t exercise their will to create that wouldn’t mean that Allah swt didn’t have the attribute to create as this would be a necessary attribute of the creator.

[@FidelityInsights]

@@Oneummahgeneration Thanks for explaining Brother

[@zafarparkar98]

Also the Prophet PBUH was never known for poetry or fluency before his Prophethood, so the excuse "Shakespeare or Mozart were great in their areas, does that mean their works are miraculous?" Doesn't work because they were known to be indulged in their fields prior to gaining prominence and their works have similar styles, unlike the case of the Prophet PBUH, wherein the Quran and Ahadith have totally different styles.

[@treehigh5156]

it could be that the works of all 3, shakespeare, mozart and mohammad are not miraculous.

[@quranchannel4622]

@@treehigh5156 it could be that the work of one of them, Shakespeare, Mozart, and Mohamed is miraculous.

[@treehigh5156]

@@quranchannel4622 of course, which is why those who believe that the work of mohammad is miraculous are muslims whereas those who don't are not. both groups justify the truth of their conclusions, as per their own arguments/beliefs.

[@Oneummahgeneration]

@@treehigh5156 who argues that the work of Shakespeare is miraculous? Secondly did you watch the video on the Islamic concept of miracles?

[@treehigh5156]

@@Oneummahgeneration nobody that i know of. many people also argue that the quran is not miraculous so not sure what this comment is trying to prove. no i have to watch it, though i am not very interested tbh but will try.

[@rickybaksh]

Could you do a steam with Shane the Sceptic? He was on the EA show. I think it would be a great conversation in Shaa Allah

[@abdellatifhmani8477]

Salaamou 3aleikoum

[@yunus-emrekaplan9642]

3alaykum salam khouya ldzairi/lmaghrebi

[@ronakram6690]

mashallah

[@dorarie3167]

The book alone cannot be evidence for its own claim of divinity. How is the book beyond human production? The Surah Challenge won’t be taken up because no Muslim will ever judge it fairly if there is a risk of it undermining Islam. Is there ample verifiable evidence of the miracles claimed within the Quran? This is not a linguistic point, but if the content undermines the book’s claims, it also weakens the impact of claiming the language is a ‘miracle’. Simply having a book full of rhetoric, or containing unusual or unique features does not point to divine provenance. It points to the manner in which the book was written by its authors. They were clearly skilled poets and writers. One can claim a book is a linguistic ‘miracle’ without ascribing to it a divine origin. Humans are wonderfully creative, and Mohammed and the many Sahaba may have been capable of creating such a book over a 22-25-year period. Poetry was, as you have asserted, an Arabian Peninsular art form, and information was typically transmitted orally, so it isn’t surprising to find both poetry and a focus on easy recitation. The book appears to be a product of what was available at the time, though it may represent a highwater mark of Arabic literature.

[@OriginalAndroidPhone]

1) If the evidence submitted was just a claim, then what you say would be valid (circular argument). But the assertion is based on its content 2) Of course we will not find evidence of virgin birth, moses splitting sea, etc. But we can find non-linguistic miracles within the text. For example: surah 44 verse 29 says "neither the sky shed tears over them nor the earth". This is a unique expression for pharoah..no where else in the Quran is anything like this said. So where is the miracle in this? When they uncovered ancient pyramid tombs 100-200 yrs ago from 3000 yrs ago, once they decoded heiroglyphics they learnt that the worshippers of pharoah would make hymns/funeral rites claiming the sky cried for pharoah, and the earth shook for him. Phenomenal put down. No way that is coincidence. 3) The Prophet was illiterate. The multitude of things the Prophet would need to know about starts to become silly. There was no google 1400 yrs ago. Also, the idea that the companions may have been part of it is absurd.

[@quranchannel4622]

I almost mistook you for a reasonable being. Pride and prejudice, on the other hand, were eroding your rationale. Muslims, by the way, agree with you that humans are incredibly inventive, but does that make humans the author of Quran? How can you go from a tremendously creative human being to the illiterate guy (Mohamed, Peace be upon him) producing the Quran? What was his little secret that enabled him to create a book like this without the necessary tools whatsoever? Don't tell me angel Gabriel helped because that would make you a Muslim; instead, try to persuade me by sharing a simple approach that he (Mohamed, peace be upon him) utilized to get all scientific statements correct without access to modern technology.

[@dorarie3167]

@@quranchannel4622 “How can you go from a tremendously creative human being to the illiterate guy (Mohamed, Peace be upon him) producing the Quran?” Mohammed was, unless I’m mistake, reasonably intelligent and a trader. He’d likely travelled quite extensively around the Arabian Peninsula in his forty years prior to receiving his ‘revelations’, so he was familiar with the Jews, Christians, pagans, Zoroastrians and so forth, and with Biblical stories, religious practices and beliefs. He was also part of an oral literary tradition and was exposed to poetry and recitation. And he wasn’t alone as he had 30-60 companions who also had knowledge and abilities. Thus, he didn’t compose the book on his own but had both time and assistance. “…a simple approach that he (Mohamed, peace be upon him) utilized to get all scientific statements correct without access to modern technology.” First of all, what is amazing about the ‘science’ in the Quran? Surah 41:9-11 says that God first created the earth, then placed mountains on it and “determined therein is [creatures’] sustenance”, finally turning his attention to the cosmos while it was still “smoke”. Science tells us the earth was created long after the heavenly bodies. The Quran also closely follows the Bible regarding a world-wide Flood, which is contrary to science, which says both that such a flood is impossible and that the geological evidence shows that it never happened. Some apologists claim that, unlike the Bible, the Quran does not actually say the flood covered the whole earth. This is not only an unusual reading of the surahs concerned with the Flood but also contrary to science - a local flood can never rise higher than the world’s oceans. Moreover, Surah 23.27 commands Noah to take on board the Ark two of each type of animal, which would be pointless unless the whole world would be under water. Surah 71:26 makes the extent of the flood quite clear: Surah 71:26 (Saheeh International Translation): And Noah said, “My Lord, do not leave upon the earth from among disbelievers an inhabitant. Surah 21:33 says that the celestial bodies float in orbit across the sky: And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all in an orbit are swimming. Similarly, Surah 36:38 says that the sun runs its course towards a stopping point, but we know it is the earth that moves and that there is no stopping, no stopping point: And the sun runs towards its stopping point. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing. Surah 18:86 says he followed the setting sun to see it set in a muddy or hot spring. Apart from the fact that the sun does not set in a spring, you could head towards the sun but never arrive where it ‘sets’: Until , when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people … Surah 54.1-3 even has the moon being split in two - not allegorically, but physically. Surah 86.6-7 shows that Muhammad misunderstood where semen is produced: Surah 86.6-7: He was created from a fluid, ejected, emerging from between the backbone and the ribs. Surah 23:10-14 says that a baby’s bones form before its muscles, which is a scientific error. (This whole section of surah’s was borrowed from another person’s response on Quora) Please show me scientists who have used the knowledge of the Quran in real-world applications. Which scientists refer to the Quran as anything but a sacred text with a bit of 7th Century knowledge and misunderstandings of the natural world in it?

[@dorarie3167]

@@OriginalAndroidPhone 1. "the assertion is vbased on its content." I hope not, because the Biblical and other stories are largely historical fiction, with little evidence of characters like Abraham, Moses, noah and Adam and Eve, or of supernatural beings like jinn, angels or Dajjal. Actually, there is not much real verifiable evidence beyond hearsay and claims. Even NASA denies the moon was ever split, and it would certainly shows geological signs of a split if it had been, as well as have been widely recorded in non-Muslim sources. Yasir Qadhi said, 'there are many holes in the standard narrative". Could he have been right? 2. This is a lame attempt to prove unknowable knowledge. How do we know Muhammed or his companions could not have known this? They had access to a lot of information from the Near East. This is even assuming the claim is true. One true thing in a book doesn't make the whole book true, or divine. 3. "...the idea that the companions may have been a part of it is absured." Why? Please explain your claim. And Muhammed needn't have been literate since he was part of an oral tradition which memorized enormous amounts of information including family histories and events. Thus, information was transmitted orally, which may also explain why recitation of the Quran is so important. He had ears, eyes and a mouth, I believe, but to hear some Muslims talk about him is to think he was an ignoramus just waiting to be filled by a god's revelations.

[@Oneummahgeneration]

Ok let me address some of your misgivings. Firstly the challenge doesn’t have to be taken up by Muslims only it can be taken up by any person who wants to undermine Islam’s claim to being a divinely authored book. Secondly many Muslim scholars have written books explaining the linguistic features of the Quran comparing it to the literary works of that time. They critique the Quran in a manner they critiqued the preislamic poetry. However in their literary criticism they demonstrate that the Quran employs a unique genre and a unique construct of the language that was never seen before nor since it’s revelation. They also demonstrate that the Quran cannot be weakened or improved upon unlike the best poetry and literary work of that time. So you can read Imam baqillanis works on this or Imam jurjani or Imam zamakhshari amongst many others. You said, “Simply having a book full of rhetoric, or containing unusual or unique features does not point to divine provenance.” I still don’t think you understand what the linguistic features and literary merit of the Quran is. Firstly “rhetoric” is termed balaagha in Arabic. It’s the ability not only to construct grammatically correct sentences but rather produce sentences that most appropriately convey an idea in a manner that is concise and with the full expression of its meaning. This Science is called ilmul balaagha and is subdivided into three further sciences. Ilmul ma’ana (science of meaning), Ilmul bayan ( science of expression, similes, metaphors, metonyms etc) and ilmul badee (science of embellishment). What the scholars of Arabic have done is laid out clear procedures as to when it is appropriate to employ the various rules of ilmul balaagha in order to produce the most concise speech that is full of meaning appropriate to the audience it is speaking to. So let’s give an example taken from the video which is from the sub science of ilmul ma’ana which is related to syntax. Ie the arrangement of words. In Arabic the declination of nouns explains to us how the noun is operating within a sentence and what verb it is related to amongst other functions. So in a verbal sentence like Zayd hit Amr the word order is essential in English but it’s not essential in Arabic. In English the word order tells us who the subject is and who is the object. However in Arabic this is identified by the case endings. So it would be zayd(un) dharaba amr(an). So long as the case endings remain the same the word order can be changed. Eg zaydun dharaba amran Dharaba zaydun Amran Amran dharaba zaydun Amran zaydun dharaba Zaydun Amran dharaba Dharaba Amran zaydun Each of these six sentences means zayd hit amr. However each of the sentences word ordering affects the overall meaning of zayd hit amr. Either it changes the emphasis or it provides exclusion to what’s being done or whom it’s being done to. This is different in English as I’d have to add more words to the original sentence whereas in Arabic I don’t have to. I just need to know how to correctly order the words in the sentence to correctly convey the intended meaning. Word ordering is just a small sub science within a sub science of ilmul balaagha. Now just looking at this one feature in the context of the Quran or Arabic poetry of the time we can either identify whether the most expressive form of the syntax used was employed by the verse or whether a better arrangement could be used. Eg in Surah Fatiha the verse iyyaka na’budu wa iyyaka nasta’een. You alone we worship and you alone we ask for help. Like the above “zayd hit amr” example the words in this verse could be arranged in many different ways without adding any extra words and yet it would effect the precision of the meaning while preserving the overall meaning of the verse. The problem is no other word ordering conveys the fullness of this particular word order. That’s because in this construct bringing the word “you” before the verb makes the “you” exclusionary. Meaning you and only you. Or you alone. So if your main idea you want to pass is pure monotheism you’d want to say you alone we worship. Rather than leaving it ambiguous with we worship you but not necessarily only you. So we can see with this example the change in the word order would lessen the pure monotheism that is being conveyed in just this one verse. The video explains this example in a bit of depth just to explain by way of example how in just one aspect amongst the various different rules of ilmul balaagha the Quran could be critiqued and judged. Ie could we look at the 6000 plus verses and identify at least one verse which could have a different word order to improve its meaning? Yet what we find is every verse has the most perfect use of the word ordering such that any other arrangement word render a lesser meaning for that verse. That is just in syntax we could also look at the way the Quran uses predication, emphasis, conjunction, shift to pronouns etc etc. So here what we see is that we have the rules by which we can critique the Quran and identify whether it could be improved upon or whether a particular verse falls short. As the video points out all of this is in addition to even looking at the words used for those verses. Ie we can even go through each verse and look at whether a better word could have been chosen to express greater meaning. Eg could we exchange rayb with shakk or dhann in the second verse of surah baqarah. So when looking at the Quran within the rules of ilmul balaagha we find that the Quran is perfect. What makes this quite astonishing is that the Quranic verses in many cases were responses to questions, criticisms and incidences levelled by enemies of Islam or even followers. So we find the prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would respond to each of these incidences or accusations with verses he claimed were perfect and beyond the Arabs ability to match anything like it YET once he recited these verses in response to various incidences there was no post edit of what was recited. Remember also the Arabs at that time were the very best in knowledge of Arabic language so any grammatical mistake or identifying a better construct of the verses would have been pointed out straight away. Finally the claim that there were a team of writers for these verses seems odd that these verses were being revealed to answer specific incidences or respond to accusations or questions. There wasn’t a committee of Arabs producing the verses but rather the prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) simply responding to a particular incidence or incidences. Further during the first 13 years the Muslims faced severe persecution, loss of livelihood, torture, boycott, imprisonment and even death. It seems odd they’d invent something that they had faked and yet suffer great difficulties including being tortured to death for something they had faked themselves. Furthermore we know they attempted to tempt the prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) with riches, women, power and position yet he refused at a time when he and his followers were suffering from great hardship. Again the claim that the prophet and the companions were just making it up makes no sense within this backdrop. This is similar to the claim of pharaoh as mentioned in the Quran that Moses had conspired with the magicians yet while the magicians were being tortured to death they didn’t recant on their belief in the inimitable miracle given to Moses (alayhi s salaam). Why face torture if you invented something for worldly gain? Anyways I could literally write pages on this subject but it’s already gotten too long.

[@abbasr.7422]

I was thinking about the perfect word order in the Qur'an. I was looking up some Quranic qira'at pre uthmanic. It seems that Ibn mas'ud had some words in revers order.... which was still part of the Qur'an. Therefore, the miracle argument of word order fails.

[@abd_allah183]

Were did you hear this brother? Just wondering

[@bustinjieber7521]

The Quran is based on interpretation as Allah even says only he knows the true interpretation. So to call this a miracle while many people can't agree on what certain words and contexts mean is pure cognitive bias.

[@michaelevans4110]

There is further depth of meaning, in The Qur'an, that only Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala knows (He is the All knowing and doesn't require us to become All Knowing to be saved from Hellfire) but Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala also says this is the guidance for those "conscious" of Him. So we know it's what we need to be guided to Him and paradise. Qur'an 112:1 قُلْ هُوَ اللّٰهُ اَحَدٌ  Qul huwa Allahu Ahad "Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One," There may be deeper meaning to the above verse but if the meaning provided is sufficient, according to Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala that's good enough for us. He is One - without pieces, parts or partners. There is discussion on various issues but non to do with how we are saved from Hellfire. That is settled. And don't play the amateur psychologist, you're not equipped for the part.

[@bustinjieber7521]

@@michaelevans4110 Dude even how you are saved from hellfire is disagreement about. Some say if you don't follow Hadith next to Quran you won't be saved while others say Hadith is corrupted you only need Quran to be saved. Just admit it. Islam is a mess and Muslims have no clue what it says. All you have are opinions from bias.

[@michaelevans4110]

@@bustinjieber7521 Dude, outright Hadith rejectors are a miniscule non Muslim sect that you can continue deluding yourself about. There is Consensus on how Muslims are saved and how disbelievers get punished in the grave, tortured on judgement day, then burned in hellfire. Enjoy lol

[@bustinjieber7521]

@@michaelevans4110 Dude!!!! Don't you see the irony here??? That is just your opinion. They believe they are Muslim because they follow what they believe they have to follow to be Muslim which you disagree about. And no there is no consensus about that. Muslims disagree also on that. You as a Muslim could even go to hellfire. So enjoy!!!

[@Chak_tak]

@@bustinjieber7521 In your display picture you shows that you Love Science, But we All know that science is based upon method of induction and thus have no certainty at all, And this is Also based upon empiricism which has many limitations and have higher chances to be proven wrong, So How can you love uncertainty? Better to follow the revelation of All knowing God which provides certainty and truth and not just fancy theory which are definitely going to be disproven In future

[@jenskarlsson9775]

All I hear is subjective opinions on beauty of language. Well I think the language in the Quran sounds really ugly. I like my own language much better.

[@Fareeh.]

let me explains what is the miracle of quran. The linguistic miracle of quran is in the linguistic innovations of quran which is one of the main reason why no one couldn't or could bring something like it. Each chapter of quran has more linguistic innovations then the number of words in it. For eg surah fatiha has 29 words but it has 58 new linguistic phenomenon, Surah ikhlas 15 words but 22 new phenomenon , surah nas 20 words but 33 new phenomenons etc. It contains new expressions, new constructions, new meaning to old words, newly formed words from existing roots, new use of particles , omition of certain things that would normally be used to speak yet made sense to arabs, new way of beginning and endings etc etc. Some may say what's so miraclous of bringing something new. Its not that quran contains instances of new linguistic phenomenon a miracle but rather the amount of innovations brought forth (which is more than the words) but yet it makes sense rather than sounding nonsense and gibberish to its native speakers. Its like a paradox of being Arabic and understandable yet not similar to normal Arabic and is unique and humanly incapable especially a man like prophet muhammad (pbuh) who never made any poetry before. Even in English let one of you say a paragraph of 20 words with 30 linguistic innovations, can you? If you say you can then bring something but as soon as you began to do it you will understand you can't. similarly in Arabic if you say it's possible then bring someone who can and its been 14 centuries since the challenge has been made and no one ever was successful because not possible and all those experts who tried stopped as soon as they tried because they could'nt. The challenge is to bring something like it but doesn't mean to plagerise Quranic surah rather bring something with same or more linguistic innovations than quran, high eloquence like quran, with best ordering and choosing of suitable words and also meaningful. Its conditions look simple but impossible to create.

[@jenskarlsson9775]

@@Fareeh. Hmmm. So if something is unique and we cant produce something like it, therefor it is from a God? If I found something else, for example a world record in a sport or a something else that cannot be replicated, are they/that thing also from a God?

[@jenskarlsson9775]

@Zakaria Boudich Makran What do you mean by that? What are the criteria and who decides if they are met?

[@jenskarlsson9775]

@Zakaria Boudich Makran If someone could show you similiar writings, would that change your mind?

[@jenskarlsson9775]

@Zakaria Boudich Makran Have you ever tried to take the opposite position? Maybe there are writings similiare? Maybe we can search together?