The following is a video lecture made by Hamza Yusof on July 14th, 1997 and in coöperation with Alhambra Productions. The topic of the history of the Qur’an and its compilation, and forms as part of a “Foundations of Islam” series of lectures. Hamza Yusof gave a good historical background of the Qur’an, its history and how it was Revealed in stages to the Prophet Muhammad (P), its compilation after the passing of the Prophet (P) as well as demonstrating the textual integrity of the Qur’an, as opposed to the textual frailty of the Judeo-Christian text which stands on shaky ground. Also of interest is the Question & Answer session towards the end of this lecture which we hope our readers will find beneficial.
They certainly have no inkling about the development of a language, whether it is Arabic or otherwise ; grammar was not the machine that produced the Arabic language, rather it is simply a logical explanation to ways of Arabic speech. Due to their inherent stupidity, the Christians do not recognize the correct historicity of its chronological order : Arabs speak the language first, then explanatory rules are formulated later (after the advent of Islam). Consequently, grammar should agree with Arabic speech, not vice versa.
If you ask what is the best method of tafsir, the answer is that the best way is to explain the Qur’an through the Qur’an. For, what the Qur’an alludes to at one place is explained at the other, and what it says in brief on one occasion is elaborated upon at the other. But if this does not help you, you should turn to the Sunnah, because the Sunnah explains and elucidates the Qur’an. Imam Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi‘i has said : “All that the Prophet, peace be upon him, has said is what he has derived from the Qur’an.”
The Christian missionaries tend to make the general conclusion that the Qur’an cannot be a text of divine origin because of the unacceptable meanings included in it.Perhaps they are correct in this conclusion and we may be inclined to agree with them due to the following reasons.
Recently the world’s most maladroit missionaries have allowed an impromptu piece to be published in response to Shabbir Ally’s views on Surah al-Anbiyaa : 30. Personally I do believe that Shabbir’s interpretation is wrong, albeit he was not the first Muslim to proffer such a cosmological hypothesis on this particular Holy Ayaah. However I feel that a two-fold response is requisite.
This paper is intended to respond to atheistic criticism as proposed by Richard Carrier, in a rather large piece that is in my personal opinion and understanding, replete with errors and misunderstandings with regards to basic cosmological concepts, the Islamic viewpoint, as well as history. I also address a few polemics that were put forward by Freethought Mecca. Their article contains the particular objections that I shall address Insha’Allah, along with a spurious argument for Isaiah and then a few links to some other polemical sites ; needless to say at least for now these few objections are the only ones that are relevant to this particular paper.
Transcript of speech at Interfaith Dialogue 4, organised by MMU Melaka PART1 Bismillahir Rohmanir Rohim. In the name of Almighty God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.…
Recently we were introduced to a new, amusing polemic by the missionaries, namely with regard to the word “ahad(un)”. To achieve this end, the missionaries cite an online text from a Christian Arab polemicist who claims that the word does not mean “one”, but “one of”. Is it true what they claim ? We seek to answer this allegation in the following, insha’allah.
Introduction It has come to our attention that Avijit Roy, webmaster of the Mukto Mona website, wrote an article titled Does the Qur’an Have any…
In an article of his, Christoph Heger has ventured to uncover what he insinuated as the pre-Islamic ground layer of an originally Christian text…
It is known that the enemies of Islam, most especially the Christian missionaries, are unable to accept the reality of the Qur’an and its divine existence. Hence, they try to make excuses and their frequent clarion of despair is that the Qur’an was “plagiarised” from Judeo-Christian sources. This claim was repeated by Orientalists in the likes of Sale, Bell and Rodinson. Needless to mention, these rabble did not provide any proof for these accusations. Their claims, however, are happily picked up by the Christian missionaries who are still living in the past.
The verse of Isra’ in the Qur’an is clear not liable to hesitation or reluctance in saying that Allah had caused His servant to travel by night from Al-Masjid Al-Haram to Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa like you say ; I traveled by night from such and such place to such and such place. So, there is no room for hesitation and asking whether this was with body or spirit, or awake or during sleep. Also, it is inappropriate to disagree regarding the meaning of this night journey or regarding the word ‘Abd, i.e., servant, and whether it refers to the spirit, to the body or to both, as it has happened between those claiming bodily Isra and others claiming spiritual Isra.
Unfortunately for the missionary, an understanding can be reached if a little more thought can be put into their argument. The missionary has taken the understanding of these verses out of its intended context and is confusing Mary’s nature (since she is only human, and hence procreates) as a creation of the Almighty, with God Himself who is the Uncreated. Certainly, God Almighty could have taken a “wife” and have “children” or have “children” without any consort whatsoever (nau’zubillahi min zaalik).
Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi When Dr. Christoph Heger, an Orientalist scholar with unknown qualifications and disputed credentials, wrote his commentary on the opening verse of…
Nabeel Qureshi died at the age of 34 years old in 2017 from a “rare and deadly form of stomach cancer” on 16th of September 2017 with mixed reactions.
But the first of the four gospels, i.e., the Gospel according to Mark, apparently did not receive Paul’s memo. And this is a very important point as we keep in mind that each of the gospels were initially divorced from each other and were written in different localities for different audiences.
So which is the correct Gospel account concerning the choice of Jesus’ first apostles ? The following Bible contradiction was extracted from an unpublished thesis entitled Ibn Hazm On The Doctrine of Tahrif which cites Kitab al-Fasl fi al-Milal wa al-Ahwa’ wa al-Nihal and insha’allah this will be part of an ongoing series to reproduce extracts of Ibn Hazm’s criticisms of the Bible and Christianity.